THE FACTORS OF WORSHIP PLACES AS PROFITABLE AND SUSTAINABLE TOURISM OBJECT CASE STUDY TEMPLES IN BALI
on
Jaya Pramono, The Factors of .... 87
P-ISSN : 1978-2853
E-ISSN : 2302-8890
MATRIK: JURNAL MANAJEMEN, STRATEGI BISNIS DAN KEWIRAUSAHAAN
Homepage: https://ojs.unud.ac.id/index.php/jmbk/index
Vol. 13 No. 1, Februari 2019, 87-95
THE FACTORS OF WORSHIP PLACES AS PROFITABLE AND SUSTAINABLE
TOURISM OBJECT CASE STUDY TEMPLES IN BALI
Jaya Pramono
Hotel Management Diplome IV,
Faculty of Economics and Humanities,Universitas Dhyana Pura, Bali.
email: [email protected]
SINTA 2
DOI : https://doi.org/10.24843/MATRIK:JMBK.2019.v13.i01.p09
ABSTRACT
Research publications on management of places of worship (POW) as profitable and sustainable tourism objects are very rare in Indonesia. This research was inspired by the high number of tourists who visited the POW such as Pura Tanah Lot, Pura Ulundanu and Pura Uluwatu. These Pura (temples) are always in the top ten tourism objects in Bali, based on the number of tourists visiting. The high number of tourists visiting the POW have an impact on the welfare of the communities around the object, the environmental conditions, and the sustainability of the object. This article aims to determine the main factors which result in a profitable and sustainable POW. The respondents are the tourists who visit the POW of Tanah Lot Temple, Ulundanu Temple and Uluwatu Temple. This research used observations, interviews, questionnaires, and documentation to collect data and the descriptive statistics and factor analysis to analyze the data. The results of this research indicate that there are four (4) main factors that shape the success of the POW as profitable and sustainable tourism objects. The four main factors are: Factors of Amenities, which consist of: parking area, public market/shopping area for souvenirs, accommodation (hotel), restaurant, rest room/public toilet, ticket booth, ticket check point, information center and cleanliness of the POW. Factors of Attraction, which consist of: main attractions (uniqueness), panorama and natural beauty, cultural attractions, and traditional handicraft. Factors of Ancillary/tourism organization, which consists of: the organization of POW, professional tourism organization and money changer. The last factor is Factors of Accessibility which consists of: access to the POW, transportation traffic to the POW, location of POW, and the information of the POW as the tourism object. The recommendation from this research is if the POW want to be a profitable and sustainable tourism object, these four factors should be considered as strong recommendations to implement.
Keyword: profitable, sustainable, POW and tourism object.
FAKTOR-FAKTORTEMPAT SUCI SEBAGAI OBJEK PARIWISATA BERKELANJUTAN DAN MENGUNTUNGKAN (STUDI KASUS PADA PURA DI BALI)
ABSTRAK
Publikasi penelitian tentang pengelolaan tempat ibadah sebagai obyek wisata yang menguntungkan dan berkelanjutan masih jarang di Indonesia. Penelitian ini terinspirasi oleh tingginya jumlah wisatawan yang berkunjung ke objek wisata tempat Ibadah(OWI) seperti Pura Tanah Lot, Pura Ulundanu dan Pura Uluwatu, dimanajumlah pengunjungnya selalu masuk dalam sepuluh objek wisata tertinggi di Bali berdasarkan jumlah kunjungan wisatawannya. Tingginya jumlah kunjungan wisatawan ke OWIini berdampak pada kesejahteraan masyarakat, kondisi lingkungan dan keberlangsungan dari objek tersebut. Penelitian ini bertujuan menentukan faktor utama pembentuk keberhasilan OWIyang menguntungkan dan berkelanjutan. Responden adalah para wisatawan yang mengunjungi OWIpada Pura Tanah Lot, Pura Ulundanu dan pura Uluwatu. Instrumen yang digunakan adalah observasi, wawancara, kuesioner, dokumentasi, dan analisis data yang digunakan adalah analisis statistik deskriptif dan analisis faktor.Hasil penelitian ini menunjukkan bahwa ada empat (4) faktor utama yang membentuk keberhasilan OWIyang menguntungkan dan berkelanjutan. Empat faktor utama adalah faktor Faktor Amenities, yang terdiri dari indikator; area parkir, pasar umum/daerah perbelanjaan untuk souvenir, akomodasi (hotel), restoran, ruang istirahat/toilet umum, tempat pembelian tiket, tempat pemeriksaan tiket, pusat informasi, kebersihan obyek wisata dari OWI. Faktor Attraction yang terdiri dari indikator; atraksi utama (uniqness),
panorama dan keindahan alam, atraksi budaya, dan kerajinan tradisional. Faktor Ancillary/tourism organization yang terdiri dari indikator; obyek wisata organisasi OWI, organisasi pariwisata profesional, dan money changer. Faktor Accessibilitasyang terdiri dari; akses ke objek pariwisata OWI, lalu lintas transportasi ke obyek wisata dari OWI, lokasi obyek wisata dari OWI, dan informasi obyek wisata OWI. Rekomendasi dari penelitian ini adalah jika OWI yang ingin menjadi obyek wisata yang menguntungkan dan berkelanjutan keempat faktor harus dipertimbangkan sebagai rekomendasi utama untuk dilakukan.
Kata kunci: menguntungkan,berkelanjutan, objek wisata tempat Ibadah (OWI)
INTRODUCTION
As a tourism destination, Bali is the main gate of tourism in Indonesia. Bali has a stable growth rate of tourism, and marked with the number of tourists continues to increase. Data released by the Bali Provincial Tourism Office showing that the number of foreign tourist arrivals from 2012 to 2016 has a positive trend (shown in the table 1.1), with an average growth of 22.09% per year. The
increase in the number of tourists coming to Bali is expected to be a driving force for increased investment in tourism, especially in the construction of hotels as a place to stay. The number of accommodation constructed since 2012-2016 is an average increase of 15.65% per year, that consisting of star hotels, tourist cottages, and provides as many as 78,638 rooms. (Bali Government Tourism Office, 2016).
Table 1. The Growth of Hotels, Rooms and Number of Foreign Tourists in Bali Province from 2012 to 2016
|
No |
Year |
Number of Hotels |
Trend % |
Number of Rooms |
Trend % |
Number of Tourists |
Trend % |
|
1. |
2012 |
2,212 |
- |
46,025 |
- |
2,892,019 |
- |
|
2. |
2013 |
2,572 |
16.27 |
44,401 |
-3.53 |
3,278,598 |
13.37 |
|
3. |
2014 |
3,039 |
18.16 |
61,025 |
37.44 |
3,766,638 |
14.89 |
|
4. |
2015 |
4,078 |
34.19 |
78,165 |
28.09 |
4,001,835 |
6.24 |
|
5. |
2016 |
4,883 |
19.74 |
78,638 |
0.61 |
4,927,937 |
23.14 |
|
Average |
22.09 |
15.65 |
14.41 |
Source: Bali Government Tourism Office. 2016
Tourism has excellent prospects in Bali. The government itself has plan Bali as the center of tourism development. Therefore, Bali have received many international recognitions from various international institutions such as:The Best Island in the World 2005 from TIME Magazine; The Best Exotic Destinations in 2008 from Luxury Travel Magazine, London, England; The Best Asian Travel Island in 2009 from CEI Asia Magazine; The Best Island Destination in Asia Pacific respectively in 2005, 2007 and 2011, and The Best Leisure DestinAsian in 2006 and 2008 from The Fifth Annual DestinAsian Readers’ Choice Awards.
Bali also has direct flight nationwide to various destinations in Indonesia and direct international flights to Bali and vice versa in sufficient quantities. Moreover, the Ngurah Rai International Airport is being developed now so that Bali is becoming the main gateand the center of tourism distribution in Indonesia.
In terms of tourismobjects, Bali has some tourism objects both in natural attractions and cultural attractions; Natural attractions, such as: Tanah Lot,
Uluwatu, Ulun Danu Beratan, Tirta Empul Tampaksiring, Penelokan Batur, Eka Karya Botanical Garden, Bali Safari and Marine Park, Goa Gajah, Bedugul, Taman Ayun, Tanjung Benoa, Kuta Beach, Sanur Beach, Nusa Dua. Whereas on cultural tourism objects, such as: Penglipuran Village and Tirta Empul. Therefore, as a destination of tourism,Bali has many exotic tourism objects,and reinvents for new attractions and objects, so it will directly influence foreign tourists to visiting Bali. Below are the top ten tourism objectsbased on the number of tourist visit year 2008 to 2012 in Bali, as shown in Table 2.
In general, Table 2 shows that the number of tourists visiting objects is varies.However, the pattern shows that the tourism objects Templeswhich is a place of worship, such as: Pura Tanah Lot, Pura Uluwatu, Pura Ulundanu Beratan, Pura Tirta Empul, and Pura Taman Ayun, are all listed as the top ten tourism objects, and the most visited by tourists in Bali every year, although the rankingwere changing every year.
Table 2. Top Ten Tourism Objects in Bali based on the Number of Tourist Visit Year
2008 to 2012
|
No |
Objects Name |
2008 |
2009 |
2010 |
2011 |
2012 |
|
1 |
Pura Tanah Lot |
1,438,356 |
1,789,735 |
2,142,913 |
2,312,252 |
3,092,434 |
|
2 |
Pura Uluwatu |
378,867 |
358,304 |
404,720 |
297,646 |
803,567 |
|
3 |
Pura Ulun Danu Beratan |
246,421 |
324,474 |
406,583 |
463,103 |
512,365 |
|
4 |
Tirta Empul Tampak Siring |
224,479 |
279,075 |
345,045 |
366,368 |
461,677 |
|
5 |
Penelokan Batur |
319,839 |
367,765 |
368,363 |
488,933 |
458,184 |
|
6 |
Kebun Raya Bedugul |
400,777 |
380,635 |
343,346 |
468,565 |
379,962 |
|
7 |
Bali Safari & Marine Park |
- |
- |
239,215 |
257,956 |
255,750 |
|
8 |
Goa Gajah |
117,966 |
151,241 |
186,771 |
192,669 |
252,741 |
|
9 |
Sangeh |
167,208 |
225,672 |
180,928 |
199,858 |
- |
|
10 |
Pura Taman Ayun |
173,632 |
212,318 |
- |
- |
230,894 |
Source: Bali Government Tourism Office, 2013.
In Indonesia, the issue of management of attraction and tourism object become populer, and some of them have become the main menu of every government district and city.The successful management of attraction and tourism object will be related to government revenue from taxes, both direct taxes from tourist spending in the tourist attraction, to taxes of hotels, restaurants and other businesses related. The facts that, there are currently many reports on unsuccessful process of managingtourism objects throughout Indonesia, at least it can be said that even though the object has been developed well but its success is still cannot be comparable with the objects and attractionsin Bali.
On the theoretical level, tourists will visit exotic places that are heavily influenced by how the positioning of attraction is formed (Correia & Crouch, 2004). This positioning involves on how management of attraction gained the confidence of consumers (Kartajaya, 2004). In addition there are other aspects thatwill influence the success of an attraction to be visited by tourists. This success must meet the following requirements; What to see, What to do, What to buy, When to arrived, and When to stay (Maryani, E., 1991). Meanwhile, there are four (4) criteria or conditions that must be owned by an area to become a tourist attraction, to the four requirements are: Attractions (attraction), accessibility (accessibility), facilities (amenities), Anciliary service/Tourist organization (Burkart & Medlik, 2007; Pendit, 2006).
In spite of the existingtheoretical framework and in order to bridging the problems faced by most districts and citiesin Indonesia related to tourism development, critical factors need to be difined, which will guidelines inhelpinggovernmentdistricts and cities to develop successfully tourism object, especially place of worship tourism objects in that
districts and cities, so that the tourism objectsor attractions can contribute to development in the districts and cities. This research tried to look at the factors of operational management of places of worship (POW) to be a profitable and sustainable tourism objectsin Bali from the perspective of tourists.
The results publication of tourism objects management research are easy to find and heve been done a lot. Generally, the studies ontourism objectshave been many and mainly on the development strategy and the impact of activities of tourist on destination, but the publication of research on the critical factors of management of places of worship (POW) arerarely done and still very little.
To clarify the definition of tourism object or often referred to as a tourist destination, by Indonesian Government is reffered to the Tourism Law no 10 of 2009. It is mentioned that the tourism destination, hereinafter referred Tourism Destinations is the “geographic region that are within one or more administrative area in which there is power tourist attraction, public facilities, tourism facilities, accessibility, and community are interrelated and complementary realization of tourism”.
Here are some of the results of previous studies, regarding the management of tourism object in Bali, there are studies to comparing of two tourism object, and found out that TanahLot Temple has a strength that is almost similar to the Tower of London in which of the element of uniqueness, but there is a difference of universality between them, where The Tower of London has a universality that can be accepted by the international community, while Tanah Lot not yet. Both of this tourism object visited by tourists in large numbers, so they have the threats to the mitigation or conservation efforts, and both
of these tourism objects have been commodified for public purposes, even Tanah Lot Temple management has caused conflict (Utama, 2014).
The other related research trying to examines the forms, processes, impacts and commodification meaning the sacred area of Uluwatu Temple. Results of the research found that there has been a change in the form of commodification Uluwatu sacred area for tourists and the distribution of sacred area experienced over ownership into a villa construction and tourism support facilities to be enjoyed by tourists and the community (Adhika, 2011).
According to providing opportunities for local residents to earn additional income the another studies found that through tourism activities, the tourism objectas a Tanah Lot, Beraban Village, Kediri, Tabanan, Province of Bali has provoked a response from the community in the aspect of economic, social and cultural. Pura Tanah Lot and the beauty of the natural environment become the main product of tourism. This tourism product in the beginning made based on social and cultural wisdom by residents of rural communities, and recently this product provide opportunities for local residents to earn additional income to meet the economic needs of the family (Badrika, 2000).
As noted on the results of previous studies, have not been able to describe the pattern or model of management of places of worship, which provides lucrative benefits for all the stakeholders, around the tourist attraction. There are certain requirements to places of worship become a tourist attraction, these things are: 1). What to see. In a tourist destination areas the objects and attractions should be different to those of other regions. In other words, the tourist destination should have a special appeal and cultural attractions that can be used to entertaintourists. 2). What to see include landscapes, activities, arts and tourist attractions. 3). What to do: at atourist destination there should beactivities based on local wisdom to attract and entertain tourists. Recreation facilities should be provided to attract tourists to feel welcome and stay longer on the site. 4). What to buy, related to shopping areas/ facilities offering local products, handicrafts as souvenirs. 5). When to arrived. Tourist destination must providedetail information on the facilities, includingthe accessibilites, like how to reach the site, the road signs, the vehicle use and how long to arrive to the place of the tourist destination. 6). When to
stay(Pendit, 2006). Tourist destination areas should provide accommodation to enable the tourists comfortably stay during a vacation. Good lodgings or accomodation such as the star hotels, non-star hotels and guest houses.
In tourism destination there are four (4) criteria or conditions that must be owned by asite to become a tourist destination, such as:1). Attractions. Tourist attractions as describedpreviously,related to what to be seen and enjoyed,including: dancing, singing, traditional folk arts, ceremonies, and others.2). Accessibility. Tourism activities depends on transportation and personal communication, the accessibility related to the distance and time consumed, and this is greatly affecting a person’s desire or decission to travel. The most important element of accessibility is transportation.Most of tourists will consider the mode of transportation, the frequencies of use, the speed and the distance.In addition, the accessibility orthe transportation includesthe infrastructure of roads, bridges, terminals, stations and airports. This infrastructure serves to connect one to the another place. The existence of transportation infrastructure will affect the rate of the transportation level itself. Good infrastructure conditions will made optimal transport rate. 3). Amenities (Facilities). Tourism facilities will not be separated with the hospitality accommodation for tourists. Tourism destination will never flourish without lodging. Tourist accommodation facilities are the major supporting component of the creation of tourists leisure that encourages touriststo visit a destination.Theaccommodation facilities relating to the development of tourism, including: Hotels, Restaurants, Water, Communications, Entertainment and Security. 4). Anciliary/Tourist organization. A tourist destination should have a tourism organization that consist of local and international professionals that aims to develop and promote the tourist attraction (Burkart & Medlik, 2007).
RESEARCH METHODS
These research is quantitative research and conducted in Bali, using disign survey, where respondents are 425 tourists who visited tourism object places of worship at Tanah Lot, Uluwatu, and Ulundanu Temple. The sampling technique used was purposive sampling. The instrument used was a questionnaire. The answers to the questionnaire using a scale of semantic differential (semantic differential scale), which is the range of 1 to 7. The
most positive responses (strongly agree) rated 7 and the most negative responses (strongly disagree) rated 1. Data analysis data used descriptive statistics
and factor analysis.Variables and indicators of operational management of the tourism object is as follows at Tabel 3.
Table 3. Variables and indicators of “places of worship” (POW)
|
No |
Code Indicators |
5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. |
X1 - Main attractions (uniqness) X2 - Panorama and natural beauty, X3 - Panorama natural beauty, X4 - Cultural attractions (Dance, Candi Bentar), X5 - Spot Photo Area, X6 - Activity in the attraction. X7 - The access to tourism objects, X8 - Tourist transport modes, X9 – The transportation traffic to tourism Object of POW, X10 - Location of tourism objects of POW, X11 - The information of POW tourism object. X12 – Parking area, X13 - Photographer, X14 - Traditional handicraft, X15 - Traditional food/Snacks, X16 - People's Market/shopping area for souvenirs, X17 - Accomodation (Hotels), X18 - Restaurant, X19 – Rest Room/Toilet, X20 - Money changer, X21 - Place of ticket purchases, X22 - Place of ticket controlling, X23 - The Information center, X24 - Cleanliness of tourism Object of POW. X25 - Tourism Object of POW Organization, X26 – Professional of local tourism organization |
Source: Adaptation from Bukrat and Medlik (2007); Pendit (2006), and Maryani (1991).
RESULT AND DISCUSSION
Early stage to perform factor analysis is to test validity and reliability. A valid questionnaire if the question in the questionnaire is able to express something measured by the questionnaire, and is reliable if it is able to show consistent results if measurements are taken again, on the same subject(Ghozali & Fuad, 2014). Through this test of 26 existing indicators, there were six indicators that should be eliminated because it was not valid and reliable. The six indicators are X2 - Things to natural supporters, X5 - Spot Photo Area, and X6 - Activity in the attraction, X8 - Tourist transport modes, X13 – Photographer, and X15 - Traditional food/Snacks. Furthermore, the process of factor analysis was only carried out by using 20 variables were valid and reliable.
The variables to be analyzed by factor analysis are variables that have passed the validity and reliability tests. The first stage of the factor analysis is to evaluating”feasibility of variables”. The test to evaluating the “feasibility of variables” is using the
Kaiser Meyer Olkin KMO and Bartlett’s test, and the anti-image matrix. KMO and Bartlett’s test was performed to test whether the variables involved correlated. KMO score ranging from 0 to 1. If the score of KMO> 0.5, then to do further analysis. Meanwhile, the significance resulting from Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity must be below 0.05(Santoso, 2001).In this research, the skor of KMO and Barlett’s test can be seen in Table 4.
Test results at tabel 4, showed that KMO and Bartletts Test score was 0.931, with a significant level of 0.000. Based on that test results, theKMO score alreadyabove 0.5, and the significant level already less than 0.05, therefore this model could be continued for further analysis.
The anti image matrix is a tool used to determine the magnitude of partial correlation between variables. A high or significant correlation value indicates that the two variables are closely related. Values referenced is MSA (Measure of Sampling Adequacy). MSA score range from 0 - 1, with the following conditions: If MSA = 1, variables can be
Table 4. KMO Measure of sampling Adequacy and Bartlett’s Score
|
Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling |
0,931 |
|
Adequacy. | |
|
Bartlett's Test of Sphericity Approx. Chi- |
5279,732 |
|
Square | |
|
Df |
190 |
|
Sig. |
0.000 |
Source: Data Analyzed
predicted without errors by other variables. If MSA> 0.5, variables can still be predicted and can be analyzed further, and if MSA <0.5, variables cannot be predicted and cannot be analyzed further, or excluded from other variables. Based on that test
results at table 5, thecorrelation score of the Antiimage correlation of each indicator is more than 0.5,therefore all of the indicators in this model could be continued for further analysis.
Table 5. Figures Anti Image Correlation Matrices
|
No |
Indicators name |
Code |
Anti Image Correlation |
|
1 |
Main attractions (uniqness), |
X1 |
0,912 |
|
2 |
Panorama and natural beauty, |
X3 |
0,867 |
|
3 |
Cultural attractions |
X4 |
0,915 |
|
4 |
The access to tourism Object of POW |
X7 |
0,952 |
|
5 |
The transportation traffic to tourism Object of POW |
X9 |
0,953 |
|
6 |
Location of tourism objects of POW |
X10 |
0,917 |
|
7 |
The information of POW tourism object |
X11 |
0,898 |
|
8 |
Parking area |
X12 |
0,965 |
|
9 |
Traditional handicraft. |
X14 |
0,915 |
|
10 |
People's Market/shopping area for souvenirs |
X16 |
0,952 |
|
11 |
Accomodation (Hotel) |
X17 |
0,911 |
|
12 |
Restaurants |
X18 |
0,931 |
|
13 |
Rest Room/Toilet |
X19 |
0,945 |
|
14 |
Money changer |
X20 |
0,927 |
|
15 |
Place of ticket purchases |
X21 |
0,948 |
|
16 |
Place of ticket inspection |
X22 |
0,938 |
|
17 |
The Information center |
X23 |
0,930 |
|
18 |
Cleanliness of tourism Object of POW |
X24 |
0,935 |
|
19 |
The tourism Object of POW organization, |
X25 |
0,909 |
|
20 |
The tourism organization of Professional |
X26 |
0,944 |
Source: Data Analyzed
The next process is the process of factoring, the factoring process is the extraction of a group of factors that have, until finally formed one or more factors. Many methods can be used to perform this
extraction process, and the method used for extraction in this research is principle component analysis.
Table 6. Communalities
|
Code |
Initial |
Extraction |
Code |
Initial |
Extraction |
|
X1 |
1,000 |
0,719 |
X17 |
1,000 |
0,774 |
|
X3 |
1,000 |
0,756 |
X18 |
1,000 |
0,731 |
|
X4 |
1,000 |
0,573 |
X19 |
1,000 |
0,680 |
|
X7 |
1,000 |
0,647 |
X20 |
1,000 |
0,681 |
|
X9 |
1,000 |
0,639 |
X21 |
1,000 |
0,668 |
|
X10 |
1,000 |
0,706 |
X22 |
1,000 |
0,657 |
|
X11 |
1,000 |
0,676 |
X23 |
1,000 |
0,581 |
|
X12 |
1,000 |
0,560 |
X24 |
1,000 |
0,745 |
|
X14 |
1,000 |
0,625 |
X25 |
1,000 |
0,743 |
|
X16 |
1,000 |
0,559 |
X26 |
1,000 |
0,735 |
Extraction Method:
Principal Component Analysis.
Source: Data Analyzed
Communalities is basically the total of variance (in percentage) of an initial indicator that can be explained by the factorsthat have been established, with the condition that the greater communalities score of an indicator, the more closely these indicator related to factorsthat have been established. For instance for the indicators, X1the communalitiesscore figure was 0.71 or 71% variance of X1 indicator can be explained by the factors that have been
established, as well as for the other indicators as shown in Table 6.
To determine the number of variabel that will that established in this analysis.It can be observe by the skor of Eigenvalues. The skor of Eigenvalues should range from 1 (one) toabove.The skor of percent of variancerange from 5% toabove, and the value of cumulative of varianceshould be greater than 50%. Eigenvalues value in this analysis are presented in Table 7.
Table 7. Total Variance Explained
|
Component |
Initial Eigenvalues | ||
|
Total |
% of Variance |
Cumulative % | |
|
1 |
9,323 |
46,613 |
46,613 |
|
2 |
1,924 |
9,621 |
56,234 |
|
3 |
1,228 |
6,139 |
62,373 |
|
4 |
0,978 |
4,888 |
67,261 |
Source: Data Analyzed
Total initial eigen value indicating the relative importance of each factor in the variance of the 20 indicators to be analyzed. Total score of eigen value for the 20 indicators is equal to the total score variance to 20 indicators. The composition of the eigen value is always sorted from large to small score.
In this analysis was established four (4) factors. All of thefour factors can be seen from the score of eigenvalue, these score ranging from a factor of 1 (one) down to a factor of 4 (four). The fourth is the last factors. This factor has eigenvalues around 1 (one). While the continued eigenvalues of others factors was smaller than one (1), therefore these factors are not used in further calculations.
The next further step is to consider how the distribution of each of factor loading of the 20 indicators tothe four (4) factors that have been established. In the process of establishing of factors, it may happen that an indicator will be difficult to determine into one of four (4) factors that have been established.To overcome this difficulties, we perform a rotation process tothe factors so that through this rotation process can clarify the position of an indicator to the factors that have been established. The rotation process of this analysis was conducted using varimax method, this method is part of orthogonal.
The process of determining the indicators will be belong into a factor, will be determined by comparing the scores correlation between factor loading on each line. Interpretation performed by comparing the loading factor score (correlation) of
indicator to the factors that have been established. If the loading factor score of an indicator is less than 0.5, then this indicator not yet clear belong to one of the factors that have been established.
Component matrix rotation process results (rotated component matrix) showing the distribution of indicators. From the results of the process shows that the rotation of the loading factor for all the indicator above 0.5 and distribute into all the factors that have been established, thereforefrom the table 8, shows that the 20 indicators is reduced into four factors. Factor 1 (one) with the eigen value score is 9.323, consists of indicator: X12, X16, X17, X18, x19, X21, X22, x23, and X24. Factors 2 (two) with eigenvalues score is 1,924 consists of indicator: X1, X3, X4, and X14. Factor 3 (three) with eigenvalue score is 1,228 consists of indicator: X20, X25, and X26. Factor 4 with eigen value of 0.978 is close to 1, which consists of indicator: X7, X9, X10, and X11, as shown in Table 8.
The next process is the naming of factors that have been established. Theseprocess is subjective, since there are no written rules about this naming of factors, so the naming of factors usually taken from one of the indicators which have the highest loading factor score or to give a new name in accordance with the existing theory. The naming these factors in these research can be seen in Table 9. This name will represent a group of indicators that exist in these process.
Table 8. Matrix Faktor with Varimax Rotation Rotated Component Matrixa
Component
|
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 | |
|
X1 |
0,104 |
0,795 |
0,230 |
0,152 |
|
X3 |
0,095 |
0,830 |
0,237 |
0,047 |
|
X4 |
0,148 |
0,710 |
0,124 |
0,179 |
|
X7 |
0,307 |
0,151 |
0,222 |
0,693 |
|
X9 |
0,402 |
0,337 |
0,135 |
0,588 |
|
X10 |
0,316 |
0,204 |
0,075 |
0,747 |
|
X11 |
-0,024 |
0,214 |
0,453 |
0,651 |
|
X12 |
0,611 |
0,236 |
0,307 |
0,190 |
|
X14 |
0,205 |
0,709 I |
-0,081 |
0,273 |
|
X16 |
0,621 |
0,074 |
0,304 |
0,274 |
|
X17 |
0,842 |
0,130 |
0,134 |
0,175 |
|
X18 |
0,832 |
0,107 |
0,109 |
0,127 |
|
X19 |
0,549 |
0,191 |
0,495 |
0,311 |
|
X20 |
0,365 |
0,441 |
0,593 I |
0,021 |
|
X21 |
0,523 |
0,167 |
0,512 |
0,324 |
|
X22 |
0,503 |
0,057 |
0,456 |
0,439 |
|
X23 |
0,580 |
0,134 |
0,296 |
0,372 |
|
X24 |
0,810 |
0,220 |
0,157 |
0,127 |
|
X25 |
0,234 |
0,050 |
0,752 |
0,346 |
|
X26 |
0,352 |
0,348 |
0,687 |
0,135 |
Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.
Rotation Method: Varimax with Kaiser Normalization.a
a. Rotation converged in 6 iterations. Source: Data Analyzed
This research has indicated that there are four (4) main factors that shape the success of the POW as profitable and sustainablee tourism object. The four main factors are: the amenities, attraction, ancillary/tourism organization and the accessibility of POW.
The final step in the factor analysis was to determine the accuracy of the model by testing the accuracy of the Model. The accuracy of the model can be seen from the amount of residuals generated in the factor analysis. Residual is the difference observed correlation and produced based on the
Table 9. Naming of Factors
|
No |
Factor Name |
Variabel |
Factor Loading |
|
X12 – Parking Area |
0,611 | ||
|
X16 - Publicmarket/shopping area for souvenirs |
0,621 | ||
|
X17 - Accomodation (Hotel) |
0,842 | ||
|
X18 - Restaurant |
0,832 | ||
|
1 |
Amenities |
X19 - Rest Room/public Toilet |
0,549 |
|
X21 - Place of ticket purchases |
0,523 | ||
|
X22 - Place of ticket inspection |
0,503 | ||
|
X23 –The Information center |
0,580 | ||
|
X24 -Cleanliness of tourism Object of POW |
0,810 | ||
|
X1 - Main attractions (uniqness) |
0,795 | ||
|
2 |
Attraction |
X3 - Panorama and natural beauty |
0,830 |
|
X4 - Cultural attractions |
0,710 | ||
|
X14 - Traditional handicraft |
0,709 | ||
|
4 |
Ancillary / Tourist Organization |
X20 - Money changer X25 - The tourism Object of POW organization |
0,593 0,752 |
|
X26 - The tourism organization of Professional |
0,687 | ||
|
X7 - The access to tourism Object of POW X9 - The transportation traffic to tourism Object of |
0,693 0,588 0,747 0,651 | ||
|
3 |
Accessibility |
POW | |
|
X10 - Location of tourism objects of POW X11 - The information of POW tourism object |
Source: Data Analyzed
results of the estimation matrix factor. The amount of residual in this research was 33.0% or as many as 63 residuals in absolute value > 5%. This means that the model has an accuracy of 67% on the error rate of 5%.
CONCLUSION
Results of this research is indicated that there are four (4) main factors that shape of successfully of the POW as profitable and sustainable tourism objects in Bali. The four main factors are: the factor of amenities, the factor of attraction, the factor of Ancillary/tourism organization, and the factors of accessibility.
The factors of Amenities which consist of 9 (nine) indicators, such as; parking area, public market/shopping area for souvenirs, accomodation (hotel), restaurant, rest room/public toilet, place of ticket purchases, place of ticket inspection, the information center, cleanliness of tourism object of POW. The factors of Attraction which consist of 4 (four) indicators, such as; main attractions (uniqness), panorama and natural beauty, cultural attractions, and traditional handicraft.The factors of Ancillary/tourism organization which consist of 3 (three) indicators, such as; the tourism object of POW organization, the tourism organization of professional, and money changer, and thefactors of Accessibility which consist 4 four indicators, such as; the access to tourism object of POW, the transportation traffic to tourism object of POW, location of tourism objects of POW, and the information of POW tourism object, and the accuracy of the model is 67% on the error rate of 5%.
REFERENCES
Adhika, I. M. (2011). Komodifikasi Kawasan Suci Pura Uluwatu Di Kuta Selatan, Kabupaten
Badung Dalam Era Globalisasi. Universitas Udayana.
Badrika, I. W. (2000). Kegiatan Pariwisata Di Pura Tanah Lot: Studi Kasus Tentang Peranan Desa Adat Beraban Dalam Mengelola Obyek Wisata Pura Tanah Lot. Retrieved from http://lontar.ui.ac.id/opac/ui/ detail.jsp?id=70946&lokasi=lokal.
Burkart, A. J., & Medlik, S. (2007). Tourism, Alih Bahasa Robert Siagian. Jakarta: Profesional Publishing.
Correia, A., & Crouch, G. I. (2004). A Study of Decision Processes: Algarve, Portugal. Algarve, Portugal. Faculty of Economic. University of Algarve & School of Business. La Trobe University.
Ghozali, I., & Fuad. (2014). Structural Equation Modeling. Teori, Konsep dan Aplikasi. Semarang: Badan Penerbit Universitas Diponegoro.
Kartajaya, H. (2004). Hermawan Kartajaya On Brand Seri 9 Elemen Marketing. Bandung: PT Mizan Pustaka.
Maryani, E., D. (1991). Objek dan Daya Tarik Wisata. Bandung. Retrieved from http:// file.upi.edu/Direktori/FPIPS/ Jur._Pend._Geografi/197210242001121-Bagja_Waluya/Geografi_Pariwisata/ Objek_Dan_Daya_Tarik_Wisata_(UTS).pdf
Pendit, N. (2006). Ilmu Pariwisata Sebuah Pengantar Perdana. Jakarta: Pradnya Paramita.
Santoso, S. (2001). Riset Pemasaran. Jakarta: PT Elex Media Komputindo Kelompok Gramedia.
Utama, I. G. B. R. (2014). Kontradiksi Pengelolaan Objek Wisata Berbasis Budaya Dan Warisannya. Denpasar. Bali.
Discussion and feedback