2. International Journal of Management (IJM), ISSN 0976 – 6502(Print), ISSN 0976 –
6510(Online), Volume 3, Issue 3, September- December (2012)
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
A substantial volume of literature both at the macro and micro levels can be seen on the
subject of tourism and its impacts. The literature survey helped to understand and appreciate
the earlier studies conducted in the field of tourism and it provided a broad framework of this
study. Douglas Pearce, with the help of cost benefit analysis, evaluated the economic
impacts of Tourism. He located employment generation as one of the major impacts of
Tourism development ,particularly at the regional and local level. Krishnan K.
Kamra(2001),(Economics of Tourism; Pricing impacts, Forecasting- Kanishka Publishers ,
NewDelhi) in his book finds that there is no economic activity at present that can generate so
much income, employment and foreign exchange . There are so many studies on the
economic impact of tourism industry and its benefit in the form of income and job
opportunities (expenditure by tourists, sale of raw materials and other inputs to the suppliers
of tourism) in the host region increases. These benefits are often referred to as primary or
direct benefits of tourism. A study of Hisma Badia in Jordan by Samawi(1999) showed that
75% of people in that area work in tourism. 95% of those who work in the industry are in
favour of tourism and 86% have a positive perception of it.
IMPORTANCE OF THE STUDY
This study is an attempt to evaluate the impact of tourism development in Perunadu village ,
Kerala.
1.The study access the impact on socio-economic development and shifting of people from
one to another profession in host region
2.Tourism is highly labour intensive with high rate of employment potential in micro and
macro level.
3.Tourism also helps promotion of traditional culture and preservation of heritage
4.Occupation has significant association with the area .
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
The study is empirical in nature and primary data was considered for analysis. The Data were
collected using interview schedule and open discussion with the respondents. The
respondents were selected by convenient sampling( non-probability sampling method
depending on availability .This interview schedule has been finalized after conducting a pilot
study of 50 respondents.
Sample size
Within the State, Perunadu village is identified for collecting data in such a way that 257
respondents were selected .At the first stage ,the respondents were divided into two
categories viz ,those who are continuing in tourism field more than 10 years and those who
changed their occupation to tourism related activities within 10 years.184 respondents hails
from the first category and 73 from the second category .
Data Collection and Tools
A structural interview schedule has been used for collecting responses from the persons .The
collected data was tabulated and frequency distribution tables were framed. Percentage
analysis, Chi- square tests & binomial test were used for the analysis.
52
3. International Journal of Management (IJM), ISSN 0976 – 6502(Print), ISSN 0976 –
6510(Online), Volume 3, Issue 3, September- December (2012)
ANALYSIS OF DATA
1. Awareness about the past and present occupation ( by assessing opinions from
respondents who changed their occupation to tourism related activities )
2. Comparing the average monthly income of respondents in impact & non-impact area
3. Comparing the household facilities of respondents in both area
3. Analise negative impacts of pilgrim tourism
Table I : Classification of respondents who shifted to tourism related work
No. of respondents who are No. of respondents who
Type of economic activity having experience in entered into tourism Total
tourism activities for more activities within ten years
than ten years
Restaurants, tea shop and 120(75%) 40(25%) 160 (100%)
accommodation
Transportation(Auto
rickshaw/Taxi) 37(74%) 13 (26%) 50 (100%)
petty Trading 27(57.5%) 20 (42.5%) 47 (100%)
Total 184(71.6%) 73(28.4%) 257 (100%)
Source; Primary Data
The above table shows that out of 257 respondents 73 (28.4%) have changed their
occupation to tourism related activities within 10 years period
53
4. International Journal of Management (IJM), ISSN 0976 – 6502(Print), ISSN 0976 –
6510(Online), Volume 3, Issue 3, September- December (2012)
Table II: Classification of respondents who have changed their occupation from
other areas to tourism business within ten years period
Type of economic Agriculture Retired employees Others Total
activity
Restaurants& tea 20(50%) 13(32.5%) 7(17.5%) 40 (100%)
shops
Transportation 13(100%)
11(84.6%) 1(7.7%) 1(7.7%)
(Auto rickshaw/Taxi
20 (100%)
Petty Trading 12(60%) 4(20%) 4 (20%)
73(100%)
Total 43(58.9%) 18(24.7%) 12(16.4%)
Source; Primary Data
Out of the 73 respondents, 43(58.9%) have changed their occupation from agricultural field,
18(24.7%) from retired employees
Table III : Classification of respondents on the basis of reasons of change
Type of More Profitable More Convenient Other reasons Total
economic
activity
Restaurants& 26(65%) 4(10%) 10(25%) 40(100%)
tea shops
Transportation 13(100)
10(76.9%) 1((7.7%) 2(15.4%)
(Auto
rickshaw/Taxi)
20(100)
Petty Trading 14(70%) 2(10%) 4(20%)
73(100)
Total 50(68.5%) 7(9.6%) 16(21.9%)
Source; Primary Data
Out of 13 respondents, 10 Nos (76.9%) opined that the transportation is profitable business
and out of 73 respondents, majority( 68.5%) reveals that all economic activities are
profitable.
54
5. International Journal of Management (IJM), ISSN 0976 – 6502(Print), ISSN 0976 –
6510(Online), Volume 3, Issue 3, September- December (2012)
Table IV : Classification of respondents on the basis of average monthly income in
various economic activities during pilgrimage season
Economic Area Less than Rs2000- Rs4001- Rs8001- Rs15001- Above Total
activity Rs2000 4000 8000 15000 25000 25000
Restaurants, tea A 10(8.5%) 40(34.2%) 67(57.3%) 117
shop and
accommodation B 2(5.6%) 14(38.9%) 6(16.7%) 4% 36
10(27.8%)
Transportation A 4(40%) 3(30%) 3(30%) 10
(Auto
rickshaw/Taxi) B 4(10.8%) 15(40.5%) 12(32.4% 4(10.8%) 2(5.4%) 37
Petty Trading A 2(6.5%) 3(9.7%) 7(22.5%) 11(3.55% 5(16.1%) 3(9.7%) 31
B 3(11.5% 10(38.5%) 2(7.7%) 11(42.3% 26
Total
5(1.9%) 19(7.4%) 34(13.2%) 62(24.1% 58(22.6% 79(30.7%) 257
Source; Primary Data Note; A- Impact Area, B-Non Impact Area
Above table shows that majority of respondents in impact area , ie 57.%& 30%
respectively working in hotel& transport field are earning more than Rs25000/ month
Value DF Asymp.
significance(2 sided)
Pearson ‘s chi-square 96.439a 5 .000
Likelihood ratio
105.331 5 .000
No: of valid cases
257
The chi-square value is significant at 5% level of significance (p=.000 < 0.05), so it may be
concluded that there is statistical dependence between impact &non impact area
55
6. International Journal of Management (IJM), ISSN 0976 – 6502(Print), ISSN 0976 –
6510(Online), Volume 3, Issue 3, September- December (2012)
By comparing the following facilities in region A&B by binomial test we can determine
the actual improvement in standard of living
a) Colour Television - 1 .Yes/ 2 .No
b) Computer/Internet - Yes / No
c) Water pump - Yes/ No
d) Land Phone - Yes / No
e) Mobile Phone - Yes/ No
f) Mattress - Yes/ No
g) Refrigerator - Yes/ No
h) Washing Machine - Yes/ No
i) Pressurcooker - Yes/ No
j) Mixie/grinder - Yes/No
k) Black and white t.v - Yes/No
l) VCP - Yes/No
m) Electric Iron - Yes/No
n) Fan - Yes/No
o) Two Wheeler /Four Wheeler - Yes/No
Table V : Binomial Test for assessing economic impact of pilgrim tourism
Category N Observed Test Prop Asymp.sig.(2Tailed)
Prop
a
Group1 1 190 .74 .50 .000a
Group 2 2 67 .26
Total 257 1.00
B
Group 1 2 141 .55 .50 .134a
Group 2 1 116 .45
Total 257 1.00
C
Group 1 1 190 .74 .50 .000a
Group 2 2 67 .26
Total 257 1.00
56
7. International Journal of Management (IJM), ISSN 0976 – 6502(Print), ISSN 0976 –
6510(Online), Volume 3, Issue 3, September- December (2012)
D
Group 1 2 36 .14 .50 .000a
Group 2 1 221 .86
Total 257 1.00
E
Group 1 1 242 .94 .50 .000a
Group 2 2 15 .06
Total 257 1.00
F
Group 1 2 8 .03 .50 .000a
Group 2 1 249 .97
Total 257 1.00
G
Group 1 1 213 .83 .50 .000a
Group 2 2 44 .17
Total 257 1.00
H
Group 1 1 112 .44 .50 .046a
Group 2 2 45 .56
Total 257 1.00
I
Group 1 1 234 .91 .50 .000a
Group 2 2 23 .09
Total 257 1.00
J
Group 1 1 112 .82 .50 .000a
Group 2 2 45 .18
Total 257 1.00
K
Group 1 2 183 .71 .50 .000a
Group 2 1 74 .29
Total 257 1.00
L
Group 1 2 114 .44 .50 .081a
Group 2 1 143 .56
Total 257 1.00
M
Group 1 2 126 .49 .50 .803a
Group 2 1 131 .51
Total 257 1.00
N
Group 1 2 158 .61 .50 .000a
Group 2 1 91 .39
Total 257 1.00
o
Group1 1 190 .74 .50 .000a
Group 2 2 67 .26
Total 257 1.00
57
8. International Journal of Management (IJM), ISSN 0976 – 6502(Print), ISSN 0976 –
6510(Online), Volume 3, Issue 3, September- December (2012)
As the p-value pertaining Qn .Nos a,c,d,e,f,g,i,j,k,n&o is less than .05, the facilities like
colour T.V ,water pump, mobile phone,land phone,refrigerater,pressure cooker,mixie,B&W
T.V, fan and automobiles are statistically significant in impact area where as facilities like
computer/internet, washing machine, electric iron and VCP are not statistically significant in
impact area
Table VI : Chi-Square Tests for assessing significance of occupation in tourism impact area
present occupation
- A B C D E F Total
area A Count 1 22 93 14 12 14 2 158
% within .6% 13.9% 58.9% 8.9% 7.6% 8.9% 1.3% 100.0%
area
B Count 0 28 16 27 6 18 4 99
% within .0% 28.3% 16.2% 27.3% 6.1% 18.2% 4.0% 100.0%
area
Total Count 1 50 109 41 18 32 6 257
% within .4% 19.5% 42.4% 16.0% 7.0% 12.5% 2.3% 100.0%
area
As per above table majority of respondents (58.9%) are working tourism related activities in
impact area and majority in non-impact area are inl Busines/Agri; field .
Note; A-Business, B-Tourism related work,C- C-Agriculture ,D- Govt; job, E-,Pvt job, F-Others.
Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 52.632a 6 .000
Likelihood Ratio 56.034 6 .000
N of Valid Cases 257
58
9. International Journal of Management (IJM), ISSN 0976 – 6502(Print), ISSN 0976 –
6510(Online), Volume 3, Issue 3, September- December (2012)
Table VI : Chi-Square Tests for assessing significance of occupation in tourism impact area
present occupation
- A B C D E F Total
area A Count 1 22 93 14 12 14 2 158
% within .6% 13.9% 58.9% 8.9% 7.6% 8.9% 1.3% 100.0%
area
B Count 0 28 16 27 6 18 4 99
% within .0% 28.3% 16.2% 27.3% 6.1% 18.2% 4.0% 100.0%
area
Total Count 1 50 109 41 18 32 6 257
% within .4% 19.5% 42.4% 16.0% 7.0% 12.5% 2.3% 100.0%
area
As per above table majority of respondents (58.9%) are working tourism related activities in
impact area and majority in non-impact area are inl Busines/Agri; field .
Note; A-Business, B-Tourism related work,C- C-Agriculture ,D- Govt; job, E-,Pvt job, F-Others.
Chi-Square Tests
Asymp. Sig. (2-
Value df sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 52.632a 6 .000
Likelihood Ratio 56.034 6 .000
N of Valid Cases 257
The Chi-square value is significant 5% below the significance(.005< .05) .So it may be
concluded that there is statistical dependence between area & occupation
59
10. International Journal of Management (IJM), ISSN 0976 – 6502(Print), ISSN 0976 –
6510(Online), Volume 3, Issue 3, September- December (2012)
Table VII: Opinions of respondents regarding negative impacts of tourism
Opinion about the respondents
Significan Decrease No opinion Increased Significantly
tly somewhat somewhat increased
decreased
Crimes 7 93 117(45.5%) 40
156(60.7%)
Alcoholism 4 97
60
Deforestation 89 108(42%)
25
Drug abuse 9 188(45.9%) 35
Pollution( Air, 7 31 92 127(49.4%)
water & Sound )
Children dropping 7 8 48 68 126(49%)
primary education
Out of 257 respondents majority of them opined that crime has increased somewhat
,alcoholism increased significantly, deforestation has increased somewhat , no opinion for
drug abuse , pollution has increased significantly and children dropping primary education
were increased significantly
FINDINGS
Table I-: Out of 257 respondents interviewed 73 nos(28.4%) of respondents entered in
to tourism related work within last 10 years.
Table II-: Out of 73 respondents interviewed 58.9 % of respondents were entered from
agriculture field to tourism related economic activities mainly hotel &tea shops
Table III-: Out of 73 respondents interviewed 68.5% of them opined that tourism
related work is more profitable. The major reason for change of occupation is profit motive.
Table IV-: The average monthly income has significant association with the area. The
average monthly income is very high in impact area in comparison with non-impact area
Table V-:, The facilities like colour T.V ,water pump, mobile phone
,landphone,refrigerater,pressure cooker,mixie,B&W T.V, ,fan&automobiles is statistically
significant in impact area and the facilities like computer/internet,washing machine,electric
60
11. International Journal of Management (IJM), ISSN 0976 – 6502(Print), ISSN 0976 –
6510(Online), Volume 3, Issue 3, September- December (2012)
iron&VCP,are not stastistically significant in impact area .Majority of house hold facilities
are higher in tourism potential area .
Table VI-: This table shows that occupation has significant association with the area where
the respondents residing .
Table VII ; Out of 257 respondents majority of them opined that crime&deforestation has
increased somewhat, alcoholism, pollution and children dropping primary education were
increased significantly.
SUGGESSTIONS
1. Suitable measures to control various negative factors which affect the host
community
2. Awareness classes and training programs should be conducted for attracting
more persons in tourism related work.
3. More care should be taken for providing primary education for children in this
locality.
CONCLUSION
The present study and its analysis helps the policy makers to think over the various aspects
and to resist the negative implications of different types of tourism development schemes and
to suggest where public intervention helps its development process. The majority of
respondents opined that the tourism business is profitable and satisfy able. Negative impacts
are increased and this is a very serious issue to be taken care of.
REFERENCES
1) Douglas Pearce,tourism research A 20-20 Vision , Goodfellow Publishers Limited
Woodeaton ,Oxford.
2) Krishan K.Kamra.2001,Economics of Tourism:Pricing,Impacts,Forecasting,Kanishka
Publishers, New Delhi.
3) Samawi, H. (1999) ‘Social, Economic and Environmental Impacts of Desert Tourism at
Hisma Badia in Jordan.’ Studies 26, (1) 175-195
4) P.O George (2006),”Prospects of Village tourism”, Kerala Calling Government of
Kerala Publications, Trivandrum
61