Shopping Tourism Development Through Top Five Products in Yogyakarta City, Indonesia
on
E-Journal of Tourism Vol.8. No.1. (2021): 14-22
Shopping Tourism Development Through Top Five Products in Yogyakarta City, Indonesia
Ani Wijayanti1*, Amelda Pramezwary1, Emmita Devi Hari Putri1, Atun Yulianto1, R. Jati Nurcahyo1, Erlangga Brahmanto1
1Universitas Bina Sarana Informatika, Indonesia 2Universitas Pelita Harapan, Indonesia
*Corresponding Author: [email protected]
DOI: https://doi.org/10.24922/eot.v8i1.67018
Article Info
Submitted
November 30th 2020
Accepted
March 18th 2021
Published
March 31th 2021
Abstract
Yogyakarta is a city tourism that has no natural tourism potential. Shopping tourism can become an alternative strategy to increase the expenditure and length of tourists stay in Yogyakarta. The research is a qualitative research. The research aims to examine shopping tourism products in Yogyakarta. The research attempts to identify top five products as the main magnetism of shopping tourism in Yogyakarta. Data analysis is conducted through reduction techniques. The research obtained top five culinary products, they are Gudeg, Bakpia, Bakmi Jawa, Kopi Joss, and Kipo, while the top five souvenir products are Batik, Silver, Dagadu, Wayang, and Miniature.
Keywords: superior products, shopping tourism, souvenirs, culinary, storytelling
INTRODUCTION
Developments in the tourism aspect are able to encourage a shift in the motivation of travels, leading to something that raises shopping tourism to increase in its visiting (Tömöri, 2010). Although tourists do not always buy products in every shopping area, it is able to provide pleasure for them, as well as creating a familiar atmosphere with the unique culture (Way and Robertson, 2013). Shopping tourism has social, cultural and economic impacts both for tourists and for the local community.
Shopping activities are generators on a trip, and provide a very significant source of income for the local community. In a trip, 30% of tourists activities are shopping,
as well as being the highest contributor to expenditure after accommodation because two-thirds of tourist expenditure is used for shopping (Turner and Reisinger, 2001). Shopping activities are the most tourist expenditure and become their main activity (Choi et al., 2008). It can extend tourist arrivals, and they usually stay four times longer than recreational tourists (Dimanche, 2003).
Shopping tourism is a very strategic alternative to develop the tourism aspect in Yogyakarta. One important aspect that must be considered in managing the shopping tourism is the demand of tourists who have different characteristics between foreign and local tourists. The local tourists prefer to buy souvenirs, which is 36%, while fo-
reign tourists demand the culinary (34%) (DIY shopping tourism analysis, 2016). Demand and expenditure is divided into two groups, they are basic expenditure and non-basic expenditure. Basic expenditure includes accommodation, food and drinks, and transportation. While non-basic expenditure consists of souvenirs, tour packages, entrance fees, local guides, attractions, and other tourism needs (analysis of DIY shopping tourism in 2016).
Based on research data from Bank Indonesia branch office DIY with a sample of 550 tourists in 2017, the average tourist expenditure of domestic tourists per day are 1.5 million and foreign tourists are 1.9 million. The biggest cost component is 42.45% used for transportation, second expenditure for accommodation is 33.40%, expenditure for visiting destinations is 11%, while culinary has the lowest percentage, which is 8.40%. Based on this research, it is known that the level of expenditure and length of tourists staying in Yogyakarta is still low. It is due to their perception related to Yogyakarta as a tourist destination having cheap prices, so they prepare a small budget. This is a consideration for Yogyakarta in designing tour packages to attract tourists who are willing to spend a lot of budget and stay longer.
One strategy that can be implemented in the development of shopping tourism is the strengthening of top five products as magnetism for tourists to do shopping. This research aims to study various shopping products to bring up five superior ones, both culinary and non-culinary. Previous studies deal more about tourist behavior related to shopping tourism satisfaction (Turner and Reisinger, 2001) and shopping tourism experiences (Lin and Lin, 2006). While research on products is limited on it’s uniqueness (Reisinger and Turner, 2002; Swanson and Horridge, 2006), while this research not only product uniqueness, but also mapping products that are capable of becoming
superior products of shopping tourism.
LITERATURE REVIEW
Shopping tourism and shopping activity have different meanings (Saayman and Saayman, 2012). Shopping tourism is a trip which the main motivation is to buy various products that are difficult to obtain outside the area of origin. While shopping activity is an expenditure for purchasing various products other than food, drinks, and daily necessities, both for self-consumption and for others. Shopping tourism has a wider scope than shopping activity. Shopping tourism includes all products that are interesting for tourists, including food and beverages that are not included in shopping activity. Traveling is always synonymous with shopping activities. Although travelers rarely mention shopping as the main reason, traveling is incomplete without shopping (Turner and Reisinger, 2001). The survey results of the American Travel Industry Association showed 63% of tourists doing shopping activities (Gentry, 2001), and they spend three to four times more than ordinary buyers (Rosenbaum and Spears, 2005).
Traveling provides a major influence in making decisions regarding purchases, including products to be purchased and the place of purchase itself (Swanson, 2004). The purchase decision affects the buying process and the method of payment. Tourists have three main considerations in making product purchases, 1) Brand. Trust in a brand encourages tourists to buy quality products from well-known manufacturers (LeHew and Wesley, 2007), 2) Product uniqueness. Tourists tend to hunt for unique products that are not found in their home (Reisinger and Turner, 2002). The product will become a special pride when returning to their home, and it is often used as souvenirs for relatives. 3) Impulsivity. Tourists do shopping because of their expe-
riences in traveling to several destinations. The urge to buy products comes after a visit that involves the emotions of them, so that they have a strong desire to have a product or to taste the culinary.
Shopping tourism provides business opportunities for local people and has an impact on improving welfare. Shopping tourism is able to be alternatively implemented to develop a tourist destination. Shopping tourism is enhanced through collaboration with event planners and tour leaders so that shopping activities become part of tourist trips. The cooperation becomes reciprocal and mutually beneficial. Tourists who carry out tourism activities at various events, such as festivals and exhibitions can be persuaded to continue the trip to the nearest shopping places, and vice versa tourists who do shopping can be invited to enjoy various events held. Beside the cross-stakeholder cooperation, shopping activities can also be increased through cooperation between traders who have different products. A restaurant as a culinary center provides space to display various souvenirs, while souvenir vendors provide restaurant coupons or display food that can be enjoyed at a nearby restaurant (Swanson, 2004). This can be done if each trader understands the differences in the products offered and is able to carry out a synergic and sustainable marketing process (Swanson, 2004).
Tourists always have an interest in local products, this is a reference for traders in their product development. Some important factors that are considered in managing shopping tourism are being able to define local products well, knowing market space, designing shops to accentuate their image, holding special events to attract tourists, friendly employees and knowledgeable human resources about the product.
Shopping tourism has become one of the types of tourism having high demand, according to the many thematic shopping
centers as tourist destinations that are visited. Shopping while traveling has a different feel from everyday shopping activities. Shopping tourism provides flexibility to explore shopping centers without the burden of daily routine, and is able to realize the desire to obtain goods that are not bought because of busyness. Tourists have the opportunity to explore shopping centers without having to be burdened with savings. Tourists who do shopping activities tend to have a stronger shopping experience compared to local buyers (Christiansen and Snepenger, 2002). Tourists who have satisfying experiences tend to re-visit and repurchase with relatively greater expenditure than before (Huang and Hsu, 2009). Well-managed tourist experiences have an economic impact on the local community (Wong and Law, 2003; Hsieh and Chang, 2006), as well as showing a good tourism image (Tosun et al., 2007).
The shopping experience is defined as the overall satisfaction and dissatisfaction of tourists with the products and services which they get (Tosun et al., 2007). Tourist shopping satisfaction is influenced by three aspects, including cost, shop presentation, and product display (Turner and Reisinger, 2001). The three elements determine the level of satisfaction and interest of tourists to decide for buying a product. Tourist experience becomes a reference in evaluating the quality of a product measured through price, service, shop facilities, shop atmosphere, shop appearance, store comfort, promotions, store reputation, and after sales service (Lin and Lin, 2006).
Souvenirs are an important component of shopping tourism, being able to be tangible evidence of a travel experience that can be brought home (Wilkins, 2011; Dey and Sarma, 2012). Souvenirs have unique characteristics that give stories of the areas visited, and are distributed directly as a tourist attraction (Swanson, 2004). Souvenirs can be a reminder of several things,
including events, places, special moments, and people. considering the importance of souvenirs, a destination needs to focus on souvenir portability (Vasheghani-Faraha-ni, Esfandiar and Tajzadeh-Namin, 2014). Quality of the souvenirs can influence tourists to buy, forming their preferences, and providing satisfaction for them to take home. It becomes an inseparable part of the tourist experience (Swanson and Horridge, 2006).
METHODS
This research is a qualitative descriptive study using primary and secondary data. Primary data were obtained through direct observation in the city of Yogyakarta, focus group discussions, open questionnaires, and quotation tests. Respondents were selected by purposive sampling method, they were representatives of various stakeholders involved both directly and indirectly in tourism management in the city of Yogyakarta, including the Department of tourism, the Department of public works, the Department of transportation, the Department of Industry, Trade, and Agriculture, the Office of Communication, Informatics, and Certificates, the Indonesian Shopping Center Management Association Board, the Regional Development Planning Agency, the Tourism Promotion Board, the Hotel and Restaurant Association of Indonesia, the National Crafts Council, the Indonesian Tourists Association, the Association of Indonesian Handicraft Exporters and Producers, Bank Rakyat Indonesia, the Media, the tourism awareness group , and academics. The first Focus Group Discussion was held on May 9th, 2019 inviting representatives from each department by filling out the open questionnaire provided and conducting discussions to enrich information. Meanwhile, the quotation test was conducted on 30th September 2019 to verify the data. Data analysis techniques were carried
out through three stages, data reduction, data presentation, and data verification. Data reduction was done by selecting and simplifying data through sharpening data analysis, then presented in narrative form and containing thematic information. Data verification was done through stringed tests that invite various stakeholders to find further evidence that was able to strengthen the data, as a reference for drawing conclusions in determining the five leading products of shopping tourism. The novelty of this research is the mapping of top five of culinary and non-culinary products, which serve as a reinforcement of shopping tourism in the city of Yogyakarta.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Yogyakarta especially the city itself is a tourist destination that has urban characteristics, and has no natural tourist attraction. Yogyakarta relies on the potential of non-natural tourism, including culture, history, artificial, culinary, and shopping. Shopping tourism is one type of tourism that is very strategic to be developed in the city of Yogyakarta, because it is able to increase government and local community income. One of the shopping tourism development strategies that has been carried out by the Yogyakarta’s government is the establishment of shopping tourism centers as stipulated in the 2012-2015 RIPPARDA DIY, including Malioboro, Bakpia Pathuk Centers, Kotagede Silver Centers, Taman Sari Batik Centers, Prawirotaman Batik Centers, Baringharjo Markets, Yogyakarta Animal and Ornamental Plant Market (PASTY), and XT Square. The establishment of this shopping center is expected to increase expenditure and length of stay of tourists.
Yogyakarta is one of the districts in the Special Region of Yogyakarta that has the highest level of tourist expenditure compared to the other four districts, as pre-
sented in Table 1.
In Table 1, it is recorded that tourist expenditure in Yogyakarta has the highest percentage and increases every year, both domestic and foreign tourists. The increase in overall expenditure has not been maximal yet, because there are expenses that have decreased in several items of shopping products. The decline in these expenditures are shown in Table 2.
In the Table 2 listed item tourists purchase the impaired shopping, the tour guide, and local transportation. This decrease is partly due to advances in information technology that made it easy for tourists to access all information, so the need for tour guides and local transportation began
to decrease. While foreign tourist purchases declined on almost all items including; accommodation, food and drink, local transportation, performing arts / culture / recreation, shopping for health / beauty, clothing, and others. From Table 2 it can be said that the level of expenditure of foreign tourists has decreased on many items of purchase. This is a consideration in managing shopping tourism, in order to be able to increase the expenditure of foreign tourists who contribute to the country’s foreign exchange.
The quality of shopping tourism can be improved through the mapping of two groups of tourism products,it is culinary products and souvenir products. The map-
Table 1. Trends of Tourist Expenditures in 2016-2018
District |
Domestic Tourists (IDR) |
Foreign Tourists (U$) | ||||
2016 |
2017 |
2018 |
2016 |
2017 |
2018 | |
Yogyakarta City |
817,085 |
949,851 |
992,301 |
408.8 |
428.34 |
474.90 |
Sleman |
269,051 |
411,638 |
387,635 |
113.6 |
183.89 |
194.24 |
Bantul |
234,632 |
284,739 |
273,962 |
101.5 |
106.57 |
119.39 |
Gunung Kidul |
122,666 |
136,168 |
164,492 |
76.8 |
81.7 |
77.52 |
Kulon Progo |
103,764 |
106,967 |
92,085 |
20.3 |
27.73 |
24.95 |
Source: Government Tourism Office of Special Region of Yogyakarta (2016, 2017, 2018)
Table 2. Mean Expenditure per Year
Item Purchase |
Domestik |
Foreign | ||
2017 |
2018 |
2017 |
2018 | |
Accomodation |
354.969 |
564.623 |
245.39 |
111.65 |
Food and drinks |
171.626 |
381.270 |
86.21 |
46.41 |
Travel agency |
- |
12.015 |
472.44 |
286.70 |
Tour guide |
47.622 |
31.700 |
16.68 |
46.49 |
Local transportation |
68.136 |
36.043 |
31.33 |
22.25 |
Art/Culture/Recreation performances |
91.488 |
50.855 |
77.63 |
56.93 |
Shopping health/Beauty shopping other |
73.711 |
91.149 |
47.9 |
11.07 |
Handicraft products |
219.898 |
236.031 |
158.22 |
217.96 |
Culinary products |
- |
222.031 |
- |
41.61 |
Clothing |
97.268 |
263.672 |
106.93 |
44.43 |
Others |
- |
21.024 |
54.41 |
5.49 |
Source: Government Tourism Office of Special Region of Yogyakarta (2017, 2018)
ping of tourism products aims to obtain five superior products or top five that are able to become icons of each shopping center. The determination of the top five products also aims to facilitate marketing and market segmentation. Mapping of products to determine the top five is done by considering the data obtained from the FGD and secondary data. The top five is based on several criteria, they are; product quality, storytelling, price, packaging, flexibility, distinctivity, being able to become an icon, being able to be the theme of development, and raising the identity of a tourist destination. Based on the analysis of tourist expenditure in Yogyakarta in 2018, it is known that several items that can be used as superior products can be seen from the percentage of product purchases, as presented in Table 3.
In Table 3, it is noted that products which attract domestic and foreign tourists from three product groups, including; woven fabric and leather for handicraft pro-
ducts, Bakpia and Gudeg for culinary products, and Batik and T-shirts for clothing products. For culinary products, coffee is quite attractive to foreigners but less desirable by domestic tourists. Indonesia is very well-known as a producer of various types of quality coffee, so that it attracts foreigners to taste the various types of it.
Based on the results of the discussion at the FGD obtained data on popular culinary products in the city of Yogyakarta, including; Gudeg, Oseng-oseng mercon, Kopi Joss, Bakpia, Javanese Noodles, Kipo, Fried Chicken, Kotagede Karang Sate, and Yangko. Meanwhile, souvenir products consist of Perak Kotagede, Batik Sogan, Dagadu, Wayang Kulit Tamansa-ri. The product is used as an icon, namely Silver Kotagede. Based on this, the top five products for the culinary category are Gudeg, Bakpia, Joss Coffee, Java Noodles, and Yangko. The top five products for the souvenir categories are Batik, Silver, sha-
Table 3. Percentage of Tourism Product Purchase Items in 2018
No Item Purchase Proce |
nt) |
No |
Item Purchase |
Procentage(%) | |
age(% | |||||
WNI |
WNA |
WNI |
WNA | ||
Craft Products |
Culinary Products | ||||
1 Wood 22,2 |
9.7 |
11 |
Bakpia |
59.2 |
32.2 |
2 Bamboo 12,0 |
8.3 |
12 |
Gudeg |
24.1 |
25.2 |
3 Leather 19.7 |
15.3 |
13 |
Jadah Tempe |
3.5 |
0.7 |
4 Fabric Woven 17.9 |
20.8 |
14 |
Coffee |
4.2 |
24.0 |
5 Others (key chains, 19.7 temple miniatures, Angklung, sandals, hats) |
34.7 |
15 |
Others (Jogja scrummy, Wingko Babat, Soto, Brem, Wed-hang Uwuh, Geplak, Gethuk) |
2.7 |
6.8 |
Clothing Products |
16 |
Eel |
2.7 |
1.4 | |
6 Batik Fabric 24.9 7 Batik Clothes 39.2 8 Blangkon 3.6 9 T-Shirts 31.4 10 Others 1.0 |
36.1 31.0 1.9 21.5 9.5 |
17 |
Fried Chicken |
3.7 |
9.6 |
Source: Government Tourism Office of Special Region of Yogyakarta (2018)
dow puppets (Wayang), Dagadu T-shirts, and miniatures. The popular product data is used as the basis for determining top five products that meet the main criteria of uniqueness. The product chosen is unique, as an icon, and has an interesting story that is able to shape the experience of tourists (Reisinger and Turner, 2002; Swanson and Horridge, 2006). From the results of data analysis, obtained top five culinary products and souvenirs, which are presented in Table 4.
The government improves and maintains the existence of products by designing product innovation, improving product quality (Lin and Lin, 2006), training human resources, holding various events, such as workshops or exhibitions, promotions (Swanson, 2004), and creating shopping centers. The government supports the es-
tablishment of shopping centers, including: silver centers in Kotagede, Gudeg centers in Wijilan, Bakpia centers in Patuk, and Wayang kulit centers in Tamansari. The development of shopping centers receives full support from the government through RTRW (Regional Spatial Planning) regulation, so that it becomes a priority for regional governments in fulfilling facilities and infrastructure as well as marketing programs.
The experience of shopping tourism in Yogyakarta is built by reinforcing the storytelling of each product. The tourism manager cooperates with various stakeholders in designing thematic shopping destinations through collaboration with cultural tourism, including: Hindise as the Kotabaru icon, Chinatown designation for the Ketan-dan area, and Heritage City for Kota Gede.
Table 4. Top Five Culinary and Souvenir Products
Culinary Products Souvenir Products
Gudeg
Food intended for Mataram soldiers, comes from the word hangudek which is stirring, as one of the making of the food
Bakpia
One type of cake acculturated with Chinese culture. In its development Bakpia has a variety of flavors and shapes.
Kopi Joss
Beverage Coffee served hot charcoal that is lifted directly from the furnace.
Bakmi Jawa (Javanese Noodles)
Traditional food prepared traditionally using brazier, with fire from charcoal, which is cooked per serving.
Kipo
Kota gede special food made from glutinous rice flour which was originally a special food of the kings of Islamic Mataram.
Source: Reseacher (2019)
Batik
Batik comes from the word mbatik ((amba) large & (titik) dot), batik means combining dots into images / motifs
Perak (Silver)
Perak starts from Panembahan Senopati Mataram who orders the servants in the palace to make gold and silver jewelry.
Wayang (Shadow Puppet)
Souvenir in the form of puppet figures, traditional arts, made from materials, wood, leather, and silver.
Dagadu
The slogan of the Yogyakarta slang language, which means “Your eyes”. Dagadu products, including T-shirts, sandals and key chains.
Miniature
Three-dimensional objects that are imitations of tourist destinations that can be seen from all directions
CONCLUSION
Shopping tourism is an alternative tourism development strategy in the city of Yogyakarta. Shopping tourism is able to attract tourists by bringing up top five products as tourist destination icons that have unique characteristics, and have storytelling that is able to provide an experience. Five products that are superior in Yogyakarta are Gudeg, Bakpia, Kopi Joss, Bakmi Jawa, and Kipo as culinary products, while souvenir products are Batik, Silver, Puppet (Wayang), Dagadu, and Miniature. Government efforts in supporting the development of culinary tourism include HR training, holding various events, such as workshops or exhibitions, promotions, and creating thematic shopping centers.
Further research recommendations, focus more on story telling of top five products to improve tourist experience and strategies to collaborate on top five products with events to increase spending and length of stay of tourists.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This research can be completed properly by support and assistance of the Ministry of Tourism. the Authors would like to thank all the assistance provided by the Ministry of Tourism of the Republic of Indonesia.
REFERENCES
Choi, T.-M. et al. (2008) ‘Shopping behaviors of individual tourists from the Chinese Mainland to Hong Kong’, Tourism Management, 29(4), pp. 811– 820.
Christiansen, T. and Snepenger, D. J. (2002) ‘Is it the mood or the mall that encourages tourists to shop’, Journal of Shopping Center Research, 9(1),
pp. 7–26.
Dey, B. and Sarma, K. . (2012) ‘Influences on Souvenirs Buying Intentions of Tourists in Craft-Rich Regions, ASEAN.’, Journal on Hospitality and Tourism, 11, pp. 66–85.
Dimanche, F. (2003) ‘The Louisiana tax free shopping program for international visitors: a case study’, Journal of Travel Research, 41(3), pp. 311–314.
Gentry, C. R. (2001) ‘The Sport of Shopping’, China Store Age, 77(9).
Government Tourism Office of Special Region of Yogyakarta (2016) Report of Yogyakarta City Travelers Expenditure Analysis in 2016.
Government Tourism Office of Special Region of Yogyakarta (2017) Report of Yogyakarta City Travelers Expenditure Analysis in 2017. Available at: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1ksEI4 7rgC5iRPUzpEiGN94nPU8poLQUn/ view.
Government Tourism Office of Special Region of Yogyakarta (2018) Report of Yogyakarta City Travelers Expenditure Analysis in 2018. Available at: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1ksEI4 7rgC5iRPUzpEiGN94nPU8poLQUn/ view.
Hsieh, A.-T. and Chang, J. (2006) ‘Shopping and tourist night markets in Taiwan’, Tourism management, 27(1), pp. 138–145.
Huang, S. and Hsu, C. H. C. (2009) ‘Effects of travel motivation, past experience, perceived constraint, and attitude on revisit intention’, Journal of travel research, 48(1), pp. 29–44.
LeHew, M. L. A. and Wesley, S. C. (2007) ‘Tourist shoppers’ satisfaction with regional shopping mall experiences’, International Journal of Culture, Tour-
ism and Hospitality Research.
Lin, Y.-H. and Lin, K. Q. R. (2006) ‘Assessing mainland Chinese visitors’ satisfaction with shopping in Taiwan’, Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, 11(3), pp. 247–268.
Reisinger, Y. and Turner, L. W. (2002) ‘The determination of shopping satisfaction of Japanese tourists visiting Hawaii and the Gold Coast compared’, Journal of Travel Research, 41(2), pp. 167–176.
Rosenbaum, M. S. and Spears, D. L. (2005) ‘Who buys that? Who does what? Analysis of cross-cultural consumption behaviours among tourists in Hawaii’, Journal of Vacation Marketing, 11(3), pp. 235–247.
Saayman, M. and Saayman, A. (2012) ‘Shopping tourism or tourists shopping? A case study of South Africa’s African tourism market’, Tourism Economics, 18(6), pp. 1313–1329.
Swanson, K. K. (2004) ‘Tourists’ and retailers’ perceptions of souvenirs’, Journal of Vacation Marketing, 10(4), pp. 363–377.
Swanson, K. K. and Horridge, P. E. (2006) ‘Travel motivations as souvenir purchase indicators’, Tourism management, 27(4), pp. 671–683.
Tömöri, M. (2010) ‘Investigating shopping tourism along the borders of Hunga-ry—a theoretical perspective’, GeoJournal of Tourism and Geosites, 6(2), pp. 202–210.
Tosun, C. et al. (2007) ‘Tourist shopping experiences and satisfaction’, International Journal of Tourism Research, 9(2), pp. 87–102.
Turner, L. W. and Reisinger, Y. (2001) ‘Shopping satisfaction for domestic tourists’, Journal of Retailing and consumer services, 8(1), pp. 15–27.
Vasheghani-Farahani, F., Esfandiar, K. and Tajzadeh-Namin, A. (2014) ‘Effective factors on souvenir purchase: the case of foreign tourists’ viewpoint in Tehran city’.
Way, K. A. and Robertson, L. J. (2013) ‘Shopping and tourism patterns of attendees of the bikes, blues & BBQ festival’, Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management, 22, pp. 116–133.
Wilkins, H. (2011) ‘Souvenirs: What and why we buy’, Journal of Travel Research, 50(3), pp. 239–247.
Wong, J. and Law, R. (2003) ‘Difference in shopping satisfaction levels: A study of tourists in Hong Kong’, Tourism management, 24(4), pp. 401–410.
http://ojs.unud.ac.id/index.php/eot
22
e-ISSN 2407-392X. p-ISSN 2541-0857
Discussion and feedback