Saad Kahtani, Jianhong Xia and Bert Veenendaal, Measuring accessibility to tourist attractions, the Geospatial Science Research Symposium 2011, Melbourne
Measuring accessibility to tourist attractions S. J. H AL Kahtani, Social Department, Arts College, University of Ha'il, The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and Curtin University J. Xia, and B. Veenendaal Department of Spatial Sciences, Curtin University, Kent Street, Bentley, Western Australia 6102
[email protected],
[email protected] and
[email protected] Abstract Accessibility to tourist attractions is fundamental to the effective utilisation of tourist sources. This paper outlines methods developed to measure accessibility to tourist attractions. Accessibility indexes were developed as a quantitative measure of accessibility. The three accessibility indices developed are based on tourist attraction functionalities, attraction facilities, and the quality of road networks that provide access to them. The normalised weighted method was used to extract accessibility indexes from tourist attraction functionalities and facilities, and the quality of road networks. Factor analysis was used to reorganise the variables of facilities and functionalities into new accessibility factors. These provide a means of identifying and combining similar variables into new factors to facilitate the understanding of the nature of accessibility (or lack of it) to the attractions. This study was applied in Ningaloo Coast Region, Western Australia. The results are used to assist decision makers to decide how to improve accessibility to tourist attractions.
Key words: accessibility, tourist attraction functionality, tourist attraction facilities, road network, factor analysis, normalised weighted method. Author biographies S. J. H AL Kahtani; Mr. Kahtani works at Social Department, Arts College, University of Ha'il, KSA. He is a PhD candidate in the Department of Spatial Sciences at Curtin University. He holds a Bachelor of Geography degree from King Saud University in KSA, and a Master of Human Geography from King Abdulaziz University in KSA. His main areas of research are geographic information systems and tourism studies. J. Xia; Dr. Xia joined the Department in October 2007 as a Lecturer in GIScience. She holds a Bachelor of Geography degree and a Master of Physical Geography from Liaoning Normal University in China, and a Doctor of Philosophy degree from RMIT University in Australia. Her main areas of research interest are geographic information systems, spatial analysis and modelling, sustainability of tourism, wayfinding and cognitive modelling, recreation management and artificial intelligence. B. Veenendaal; Dr. Veenendaal is Professor in Geographic Information Science and Head of the Department of Spatial Sciences at Curtin University. Bert has been involved in higher education teaching and researching in geographic information science for more than 25 years. He was instrumental in developing the highly successful teaching and research programs in Geographic Information Science at Curtin University. He initiated and implemented fully online and distance programs that have earned an excellent reputation nationally and internationally. Bert’s research interests lie in the areas of geographic information science, geospatial analysis and data handling, geospatial web mapping and services, collaborative and participatory GIS, and virtual/interactive e-learning.
Introduction Tourism activities play an important role in contributing to the social, political and economic health of modern society (Telfer 2009; Worthington & Dollery 2000). A tourist destination is pointless without tourists (Lew 1987) and tourists will not visit a destination that lacks attractions (Gunn 1988). Accessibility to tourist attractions is one of the important factors that influence tourist decision making on the choice of attractions to
visit (Boniface & Cooper 2001). Accessibility can be defined as the ease of reaching to tourist attractions by the availability and quality of travel modes, road networks, attractions facilities such as toilets and drinking water and attractions functionalities such as open hours and entrance fees. A number of methods have been used by researchers to study accessibility to different geographic places such as worksites, shops, and airports (Hägerstrand 1970; Hansen 1959; Kwan 1998; Miller 1991; Preston 2001; Preston & Raje 2007). In the field of tourism, accessibility to tourist attractions has not been thoroughly investigated, although it is usually considered one of the influential factors in the attractiveness of tourist destinations (Lew 1987; Reinius & Fredman 2007; Wang & Davidson 2010). Priskin (2001) used accessibility to natural-based attractions as one of the natural resource measurements that delineate the quality of attractions in the Central Coast region of Western Australia. Deng, King & Bauer (2002) used accessibility to the attractions as one of five factors in evaluating natural attractions in the state of Victoria. Prideaux (2002) discussed the use of tangential attractions to attract visitors to promote isolated attractions in Adelaide, South Australia, underscoring the significance of location and accessibility as basic factors attracting visitors to isolated sites. Hughes & Jones (2010) evaluated the management of remote attractions in the Gascoyne region of Western Australia, similarly concluding that accessibility is one of the factors that affect the perceived quality of an attraction. Despite the importance of studying accessibility to tourist attractions for decision-makers, planners, and managers of tourist attractions, this topic has not received attention from researchers in the field of tourism as a primary subject. Therefore, the objective of this paper is to develop a method to measure accessibility to tourist attractions at a regional scale. Measuring accessibility will provide decision-makers with a meaningful tool to develop plans for improving accessibility with the purpose to effectively attract more tourists to destinations.
Factors affecting accessibility to tourist attractions Tourism systems comprise two primary elements: an origin and a destination (Uysal 1998). The origin refers to the places where tourists commence their visits to tourist attractions and is represented in this study by accommodation locations near tourist destinations. Origins and destinations are interconnected by transportation networks. The origins and destinations involves supply-push and demand-pull factors (Sandro & Uysal 2006). The supply-push factor is represented by elements at destinations that attract tourists, such as services, infrastructure, communications, utilities, and activities (Kozak & Rimmington 1999). The demand-pull factor is represented by tourists who choose to visit destinations. The factors affecting the accessibility to attractions are related to these supply and demand factors.
Functionality and facility factors Tourism Western Australia (2006, 2008) and the Tourist Attraction Signposting Assessment Committee in New South Wales, Australia (TASAC 2008) have identified essential functionalities and facilities of attractions offered to visitors. These criteria can be used as a guide to identify factors affecting accessibility to attractions. In this study, 26 tourist attraction variables were identified; 12 measure the functionality of attractions and 14 measure the facilities of the attractions (see Table 1). These variables were aggregated to develop accessibility indexes, from which it is possible to determine their influence on the accessibility to tourist attractions (whether positive or negative).
Transport system factors Accessibility to an attraction is affected by transport systems (Khadaroo & Seetanah 2008). Road networks are part of the infrastructure used by tourists to reach an attraction. Consequently, the quality of the road networks positively or negatively affects access (Brabyn & Skelly 2002). In general, the geographic accessibility to any tourist destination can be influenced by availability of transport modes. The travel modes normally used by tourists to visit attractions within a destination are cars, buses, bicycling, walking, trains, trams, taxies, ferries, and motorbikes (Dickinson & Robbins 2007; Lew & McKercher 2006). The choice and quality of mode largely affects the furthest distance which tourists are prepared to go to reach an attraction. Hence, three aspects of a transportation system can be considered when considering accessibility to tourist attractions: the quality of the (road or otherwise) networks, the types of travel modes used and the distances to the attractions. Given the nature of the regional study area used for this research, the transportation network considered was constrained to roads only.
Table.1 Tourist attractions functionalities and facilities criteria Functional elements found at tourist
Facilities found at tourist attractions
attractions -
-
Staff numbers and their helpfulness Tourist attraction’s ability to cater for tour groups and individuals Car parking capacity Entrance fees The day on which attractions open The months in which attraction are closed The opening hours Clear and helpful directional road signs nearby attractions Clear opening hours sign displayed at the attraction entrance Availability of brochures about attraction at accommodations and tourist centres Availability of internet website for the attraction Necessity of pre-booking to visit the attraction
-
Car parking area accessible and adequate Tracks and paths accessible and adequate Signs to direct the visitors within attraction accessible and adequate BBQs, picnic area accessible and adequate Toilets accessible and adequate Rubbish bins accessible and adequate Places to sit accessible and adequate Shades accessible and adequate Gates accessible and adequate Water drinking facilities accessible and adequate Existence of accessible information centre within attraction Food outlets accessible and adequate Disabled facilities sufficient and accessible Public transportation accessible and adequate
Measuring accessibility to tourist attraction methods For this research, two methods were used to measure accessibility to tourist attractions. Firstly, the identified accessibility variables were aggregated using the normalised weighted method to develop individual accessibility indexes for facilities, functionalities and road networks. This gives a standard indication of accessibility levels which can be applied to compare different geographic regions within a study area. Then, in order to provide further measures of accessibility related to more detailed information within the regions, factor analysis was used to disaggregate these indexes into more detailed factor measures. These measures provide further explanation as to the factors influencing accessibility.
Study area and data collection methods Study area The Ningaloo Coast region in Western Australia was selected as the study area (Figure 1). This region stretches 300 kilometres between Carnarvon and Exmouth. The region is semi-isolated, lying about 1,200 kilometres from Perth, the capital; and has 8,834 residents (Australian Bureau Statistics 2007) mostly living in the towns of Carnarvon, Coral Bay, and Exmouth (Smith et al. 2008). The climate of the Ningaloo Coast region is arid to semi-arid (Burbidge, McKenzie & Harvey 2000). The Ningaloo coastal region lies within the Carnarvon basin geological region (Payne, Curry & Spencer 1987) and is characterised by its sedimentary geological structure and a fringe coral reef system (Western Australian Planning Commission 2004) including minerals, costal dune systems, fauna and flora, and marine life. Various economic activities are practised, such as fishing, mining, horticulture, livestock and tourism (Jones et al. 2009). Tourism activities in the region are nature-based: wilderness outback adventures, whale watching, snorkelling and swimming among the coral reefs and dolphins (Jones et al. 2009). Tourism is the main source of income in the region (Jones et al. 2009; Western Australian Planning Commission 2004) and tourist attractions are varied ranging from camping stations such as the Quobba station to conservation parks. Most visitors are interested in urban attractions such as the One Mile Jetty in Carnarvon or the whale watching areas in Coral Bay. This region is divided into three zones: Carnarvon, Coral Bay, and Exmouth. This zoning was applied to match the Ningaloo Coast’s regional strategy extending from Carnarvon to Exmouth, to cope with the widely spaced
geographic locations of tourist accommodation deliberately distributed to preserve the area from damage by excessive visitors, and to ensure sustainable tourism (Western Australia Planning Commission 2004). The functionalities and facilities of tourist attractions, the condition of road networks, and the perceptions of tourists may vary from zone to zone. Studying the accessibility to tourist attractions provides a wealth of information on current accessibility factors in each zone, including the reasons for various levels of accessibility. This will help stakeholders to prioritise improvements needed within and among the zones to enhance accessibility and promote the tourism industry Figure 1. Map of the Ningaloo Coast region
Data collection methods A self-administered questionnaire was distributed throughout the study area at tourist attraction sites and accommodation facilities to target a wide range of tourists over a period of two months (peak tourist season in months of June to July 2009). The purpose of the case study was to collect data about tourists’ perception regarding attraction functionality and facilities, and the transportation modes used to travel to the destinations. Data collection was carried out among non-residential visitors to the attractions in the Ningaloo Coast region. A total of 500 questionnaires were distributed among the three study area zones, targeted at individual visitors 18 years old and above. A total of 302 useable questionnaires were retuned, 113 from Carnarvon, 71 from Coral Bay, and 118 from Exmouth. The total returned questionnaire response rate was 60.4%, well above the minimum acceptable completion rate of 50% population (Bryman & Bell 2007; Ray 2008). Across the regions, the response rates were 37.4%, 23.5%, and 39.1% from Carnarvon, Coral Bay and Exmouth, respectively.
Normalised weighted method The accessibility factors were measured based on the tourist’s satisfaction using the five-point Likert scale and then aggregated into three indexes: attraction functionality, attraction facility and road network indexes using normalised weighted methods according to the following steps: 1) Multiplying the frequencies (F) by each scale value ( five-point likert scale) to obtain the actual scores (AC) for each zone in the study area; 2) Multiplying the number total respondents by the maximum scale value (N) to obtain the maximum possible scores (S) for each zone; and 3) Dividing the actual scores for each zone by the maximum scores in each study area zone to obtain each zone index I. Measuring accessibility indices based on normalised weighted method can be expressed mathematically as shown in Equation 1:
5
I
F i i 1 5
i
F 5 i 1
i
(1)
where, i is the likert scale value corresponding to the responses on the questionnaire. Each final normalised item (functionalities, facilities, and quality of road networks) value is then rated in one of the following interval categories: a) 0.00–0.19 (very low access), b) 0.20–0.39 (low access), c) 0.40–0.59 (moderate access), d) 0.60– 079 (good access), and e) 0.80–1.00 (high access).
Factor analysis of the tourist attraction functionalities and facilities Although the zone indexes provide a means of comparison across the regions, they do not reveal the underlying variation or causes among attraction functionalities and facilities within the zones. To address this, these accessibility indexes were disaggregated into new functional and facilities factors. This was accomplished using factor analysis as a means of identifying a new set of variables (i.e., factors) that are independent and can be related to the original accessibility variables that influence accessibility to tourist attractions. This then provides a means of determining the types of functionalities and facilities that influence accessibility, which can then, of course, be used in making decisions regarding enhancing tourist accessibility. Figure 2 shows the factor analysis steps used to disaggregate the functionalities and facilities indexes. The analysis, using SPSS (Statistical Package for the Social Sciences) software package (SPSS Inc 2009), includes three main phases: exploratory factor analysis, factor extraction and factor rotation. The outcomes of this analysis were the reorganisation of tourist attractions functionalities and facilities variables into new independent groupings identifying the causal factors that are usable and understandable by stakeholders. Figure 2. The factor analysis steps used to disaggregate the functionalities and facilities factors Factor analysis
Stage 1: Exploratory factor analysis
KMO indicator > 0.60
P. vale of Bartlett’s test < 0.001
Stage 2: Extraction factor method
Principle components Eigenvalues >0
Decide Number of factors
Stage 3: Factor rotation
Oblique Technique
Tourist attractions functionalities and facilities items into new homogenous groups
Results Accessibility index
Figure 3 shows three calculated accessibility indexes for the three regions as well as for the whole study area. Although the three indexes for the regions are quite similar, they do have some differences. For example, Coral Bay has relatively higher index than the other regions. Overall, respondents were more satisfied with the road network relative to the functionality and facilitates at the attractions, with the facilities scoring the lowest. Nearly 50% respondents evaluated the facilities in the three regions as average. Around 50% of respondents thought that the attractions in the study area had efficient or very efficient functionalities.
Figure 3. Accessibility indexes
Factor analysis results Figure 4 shows the results of factor analysis of the functionality index for the study area. The functionality index was disaggregated into 2-4 factors for the three regions based on the nature of the data. For example, for Carnarvon the three new factors identified: informative, guide and management factors. Of these, the Informative factor relates to the fact that respondents had perceptions of relatively low access to brochures and the internet, and the necessity of pre-booking. Generally, around 50% of the respondents evaluated these factors as efficient or very efficient, except for Informative factors in Carnarvon and Exmouth. Only about 31% of respondents in Carnarvon evaluated this factor as efficient or very efficient and only 25% for Exmouth. Internet access is the major issue. In addition, pre-booking and availability of brochures were raised as concern, especially for Exmouth. For Coral Bay, internet and pre-booking access were also rated low and car park capacity was an issue as well. For Exmouth, only about 50% of respondents were satisfied with catering and opening signs displayed. Entry fees were relatively less satisfied by respondents in evaluation for the three regions. Exmouth was rated as having the poorest facilities. Figure 5 shows tourist perceptions on facility factors and variables in the Ningaloo study area. Three factors were identified for each region. The Service factor was rated as the lowest one for overall in the study area. In Carnarvon, three variables related to service were considered to impact negatively on the accessibility to attractions: public transportation, accessible food outlets and disabled facilities. Barbeque picnic areas, part of the constructional facilities factor, were rated negatively and so were water drinking facilities. In Coral Bay, about half of the tourists evaluated the utilisation facilities as low or very low, and 43% evaluated the service facilities in the same manner. Access to disabled facilities and public transportation also received negative scores, as did water-drinking facilities. In Exmouth, about half of the surveyed tourists evaluated the impact of the service facilities factor on the accessibility to attractions negatively. More than half rated public transportation facilities, water-drinking facilities and disabled facilities as low or very low (see Figure 5).
Figure 4. Tourist perception on functionality factors
Figure 5. Tourist perception on facility factors and variables
Discussions and Conclusions Most previous research has developed accessibility measures from a transportation perspective. The research detailed in this paper establishes an accessibility measure more comprehensively. Accessibility is evaluated not only from a transportation or geographic proximity perspective but also from the perspective of available quality functions and facilities at tourist attractions. Therefore, it provides an insight for better tourist attractions management and decision-making. The accessibility evaluation criteria were selected based on the current literature and examples of standards developed in Australia. These criteria are general and representative for many tourist attractions. The normalised weighted method and factor analysis were used to develop indexes that were used to compare accessibility among different geographic regions as well as drill down to underlying causal factors within regions. The Ningaloo region is one of the fastest developing remote tourist destinations in Western Australia. The results of this research show that in general, the Ningaloo attractions have a shortage of facilities, in particular drinking water, disabled facilities, public transportation, food outlets and barbeque picnic areas. This is exacerbated by some functional variables, such as the need to pre-book to visit attractions, and high entrance fees. With such information, park managers or stakeholders can determine and prioritise which aspects of tourist attractions need attention for improvements: facilities, functionalities and road networks. The variation in accessibility to attractions in the different zones based on the road networks index can be attributed to two factors. The first is related to the types of roads and the second to the density of attractions in each zone. The surveyed tourists found the attractions served by sealed roads in Coral Bay and Exmouth positive. The fact that these attractions are located within a reasonable distance from accommodation in these zones adds to this perception. For example, the most distant attraction in the Exmouth zone is Yardi Creek, 75 kilometres from town and served by a sealed road. Meanwhile, tourists visiting attractions such as Gnaraloo in the Quobba area in the Carnarvon zone have to drive 165 kilometres from town, 75 kilometres of this on unsealed road. As a result, the quality of road networks has an influence on another accessibility factor, the transportation modes used to reach attractions. The methods developed for this research provide a means of measuring and evaluating accessibility to tourist attractions based on a range of functionalities, facilities and transport networks. Also, the indexes developed can be used by stakeholders to compare accessibility between geographic regions, as well as explore causal factors within regions. The methodology used for the Ningaloo case study region can be applied to different geographic regions and ranges of destinations. For example, this method can be used to evaluate the accessibility to park and ride transport facilities.
References Australian Bureau Statistics 2007, 2006 Census QuickStats viewed 10 -12 2008, . Boniface, BG & Cooper, CP 2001, Worldwide destinations: the geography of travel and tourism, 3 edn, Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford. Brabyn, L & Skelly, C 2002, 'Modeling population access to New Zealand public hospitals', International Journal of Health Geographics, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 1-3. Bryman, A & Bell, E 2007, Business research methods, Oxford University Press USA. Burbidge, AH, McKenzie, NL & Harvey, MS 2000, 'A biogeographic survey of the southern Carnarvon Basin, Western Australia: background and methods', in MSHNLM A.H. Burbidge (ed.), Biodiversity of the Southern Carnarvon Basin, Western Australian Museum, Perth, WA, Australia, pp. 1-12. Deng, J, King, B & Bauer, T 2002, 'Evaluating natural attractions for tourism', Annals of Tourism Research, vol. 29, no. 2, pp. 422-38. Dickinson, JE & Robbins, D 2007, 'Using the car in a fragile rural tourist destination: a social representations perspective', Journal of Transport Geography, vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 116-26. Gunn, C 1988, Vacationscape : designing tourist regions, 2 edn, Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York. Hägerstrand, T 1970, 'What About People In Regional Science? ', Papers of the Regional Science Association, vol. 24, pp. 7-21. Hansen, W 1959, 'How Accessibility Shapes Land Use', Journal of the American Institute of Planners vol. 25, pp. 73-6.
Hughes, M & Jones, R 2010, 'From productivism to multi-functionality in the Gascoyne–Murchison Rangelands of Western Australia', The Rangeland Journal, vol. 32, no. 2, pp. 175-85. Jones, T, Hughes, M, Wood, D, Lewis, A & Philippa, C 2009, Ningaloo Coast Region Visitor Statistics: Collected for the Ningaloo Destination Modelling Project, CRC for Sustainable Tourism, Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia. Khadaroo, J & Seetanah, B 2008, 'The role of transport infrastructure in international tourism development: A gravity model approach', Tourism Management, vol. 29, no. 5, pp. 831-40. Kozak, M & Rimmington, M 1999, 'Measuring tourist destination competitiveness: conceptual considerations and empirical findings', International Journal of Hospitality Management, vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 273-83. Kwan, M 1998, 'Space-time and integral measures of individual accessibility: a comparative analysis using a point-based framework', Geographical Analysis, vol. 30, pp. 273-89. Lew, A 1987, 'A framework of tourist attraction research', Annals of Tourism Research, vol. 14, no. 4, pp. 55375. Lew, A & McKercher, B 2006, 'Modeling Tourist Movements: A Local Destination Analysis', Annals of Tourism Research, vol. 33, no. 2, pp. 403-23. Miller, HJ 1991, 'Modelling accessibility using space-time prism concepts within geographical information systems', International Journal of Geographical Information Science, vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 287 - 301. Payne, AL, Curry, PJ & Spencer, GF 1987, 'An inventory and condition survey of rangelands in the Carnarvon Basin, Western Australia', in Technical Bulletin No. 73, Department of Agriculture, Perth, WA, Australia. Preston, J 2001, 'Integrating transport with socio-economic activity - a research agenda for the new millennium', Journal of Transport Geography, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 13-24. Preston, J & Raje, F 2007, 'Accessibility, mobility and transport-related social exclusion', Journal of transport Geography, vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 151-60. Prideaux, B 2002, 'Building visitor attractions in peripheral areas—Can uniqueness overcome isolation to produce viability?', International Journal of Tourism Research, vol. 4, no. 5, pp. 379-89. Ray, WJ 2008, Methods toward a science of behavior and experience, 9 edn, Wadsworth Pub Co, CA, USA. Reinius, SW & Fredman, P 2007, 'Protected areas as attractions', Annals of Tourism Research, vol. 34, no. 4, pp. 839-54. Sandro, F & Uysal, M 2006, 'Destination attractiveness based on supply and demand evaluation: an analytical framwork', Journal of Travel Research, vol. 44, pp. 418-30. Smith, AJ, Hughes, M, Wood, D & Glasson, J 2008, Inventory of Tourism Assets on Department of Environment and Conservation Rangeland Properties, Sustainable Tourism Pty Ltd, Australia. SPSS Inc 2009, PASW Statsitics 17, Rel. 17.0.3., SPSS Inc, Chicago. TASAC 2008, Tourist attraction signposting, viewed 8-2-10-2008 . Telfer, DJ 2009, 'Development Studies and Tourism', in T Jamal & M Robinson (eds), The SAGE Handbook of Tourism Studies, SAGE Publications Ltd, London. Tourism Western Australia 2006, What is a tourist attraction?Quick guide to a tourism business, viewed 8-102008 < http://www.tourism.wa.gov.au/publications%20library/growing%20your%20business/what%20is%20a %20tourist%20attraction%20v3%20211005%20(final).pdf>. ---- 2008, Tourist attractions sign: Natural tourist attractions assessment criteria, viewed 8-10-2008 < http://www.tourism.wa.gov.au/Publications%20Library/Tourist%20Attraction%20Road%20Sign%20C riteria%20-%20Natural%20Attraction.pdf >. Uysal, M 1998, 'The determinante of tourism demand: A theoretical perspective', in D Ioannides & K Debbage (eds), The economic geography of the tourist industry: A supply-side analysis, Routledge, New York, pp. 79-98. Wang, Y & Davidson, MCG 2010, 'Pre- and post-trip perceptions: an insight into Chinese package holiday market to Australia', Journal of Vacation Marketing, vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 111-23. Western Australian Planning Commission 2004, Ningaloo coast regional strategy Carnarvon to Exmouth, Western Australian Planning Commission, Perth. Worthington, AC & Dollery, BE 2000, 'Can Australian local government play a meaningful role in the development of social capital in disadvantaged rural communities?', Australian Journal of Social Issues, vol. 35, no. 4, pp. 349-61.
