دانشگاه مازندران

 آمار

تعداد نشریات30
تعداد شماره‌ها467
تعداد مقالات4,519
تعداد مشاهده مقاله7,144,857
تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله5,334,667
کروبی, مهدی, قادری, اسماعیل, سلطانی هوراند, امین, محمدیان محمودجیق, نسیم. (1395). بررسی و اولویت بندی محدودیت های گردشگران کره ای در ایران. پژوهشنامه مدیریت اجرایی, 5(19), 33-57. doi: 10.22080/jtpd.2017.1429
مهدی کروبی; اسماعیل قادری; امین سلطانی هوراند; نسیم محمدیان محمودجیق. "بررسی و اولویت بندی محدودیت های گردشگران کره ای در ایران". پژوهشنامه مدیریت اجرایی, 5, 19, 1395, 33-57. doi: 10.22080/jtpd.2017.1429
کروبی, مهدی, قادری, اسماعیل, سلطانی هوراند, امین, محمدیان محمودجیق, نسیم. (1395). 'بررسی و اولویت بندی محدودیت های گردشگران کره ای در ایران', پژوهشنامه مدیریت اجرایی, 5(19), pp. 33-57. doi: 10.22080/jtpd.2017.1429
کروبی, مهدی, قادری, اسماعیل, سلطانی هوراند, امین, محمدیان محمودجیق, نسیم. بررسی و اولویت بندی محدودیت های گردشگران کره ای در ایران. پژوهشنامه مدیریت اجرایی, 1395; 5(19): 33-57. doi: 10.22080/jtpd.2017.1429

بررسی و اولویت بندی محدودیت های گردشگران کره ای در ایران

برنامه ریزی و توسعه گردشگری
مقاله 2، دوره 5، شماره 19، اسفند 1395، صفحه 33-57    اصل مقاله (496.58 K)
نوع مقاله: علمی-پژوهشی
شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22080/jtpd.2017.1429
نویسندگان
مهدی کروبی1؛ اسماعیل قادری2؛ امین سلطانی هوراند* 3؛ نسیم محمدیان محمودجیق4
1دانشیار گروه مدیریت جهانگردی دانشگاه علامه طباطبائی
2استادیار گروه مدیریت جهانگردی دانشگاه علامه طباطبائی
3دانش آموخته کارشناسی ارشد مدیریت جهانگردی دانشگاه علامه طباطبائی
4دانشجوی دکتری مدیریت گردشگری دانشگاه علامه طباطبائی
تاریخ دریافت: 03 اسفند 1394،  تاریخ بازنگری: 30 بهمن 1395،  تاریخ پذیرش: 20 اسفند 1395 
چکیده
برای درک بهتر نیازهای اساسی گردشگران، جلب رضایت، مشارکت و عدم مشارکت آنان و این که چه مسایلی باعث عدم رغبت آنان به سفر به یک مقصد خاص می­ شود، نیاز است که ابتدا موانع و محدودیت­ های پیش روی آنان مرتفع شود. از اینرو برای ارائه محصول گردشگری مناسب ضروری است نیازهای گردشگران بدون محدودیت­ های اساسی مرتفع گردد. هدف از پژوهش حاضر، بررسی و اولویت بندی محدودیت­ های گردشگران کره­ ای در شهر تهران است. بدین منظور، مدل مفهومی پژوهش شامل چهار نوع محدودیت «درون فردی»، «میان فردی»، «ساختاری» و «محدودیت­های مقصد» توسعه یافت. گردشگران کره­ ای ورودی به ایران که در بهار 1393 در تهران حضور داشته­ اند، جامعه آماری را تشکیل می­ دهند. برای نمونه­ گیری، از میان روش­ های غیراحتمالی، روش دردسترس استفاده شد. برای انجام پژوهش، تعداد 351 پرسشنامه میان گردشگران کره­ ای در شهر تهران توزیع شد. داده­ ها با استفاده از روش­ های آزمون تی تک نمونه­ ای، مدل معادلات ساختاری و آزمون فریدمن، و همچنین با استفاده از نرم­ افزارهای SMARTPLS و SPSS مورد تجزیه و تحلیل قرار گرفت. با توجه به نتایج حاصله، در مجموع، به ترتیب محدودیت­ های مقصد و محدودیت­ های ساختاری مهمترین، و محدودیت­ های درون فردی کم اهمیت­ ترین متغیر بوده­ اند. محدودیت­ های میان فردی نیز از اهمیت متوسطی برخوردار بوده­ اند. از سوی دیگر، با توجه به نتایج آموزن فریدمن، از میان شاخص­ های پژوهش، «ویژگی­ های شخصی گردشگر»، «ادراک و آگاهی از ایران»، و «ضعف زیرساخت­ها و کمبود امکانات» به عنوان اصلی­ ترین محدودیت­ های جامعه آماری پژوهش شناسایی شدند.
کلیدواژه‌ها
محدودیت؛ صنعت گردشگری؛ گردشگران کره ای
عنوان مقاله [English]
Identification of Foreign Tourists’ Constraints in Iran
نویسندگان [English]
Mehdi Karroubi1؛ Esmaeil Ghaderi2؛ Amin Soltani Horand3؛ Nasim Mohammadian Mahmoudjigh4
1Associate Professor in Management, Allameh Tabataba’i University
2Assistant Professor in Management, Allameh Tabataba’i University
3MA Student at Allameh Tabataba’i University
4PhD. Student in Management, Allameh Tabataba’i University
چکیده [English]
Extended Abstract
Abstract
For better understanding the basic needs, satisfaction, participation and non-participation of tourists and what issues cause their willingness to travel to a specific destination, first, their travel barriers and constraints must be eradicated. Therefore, it is necessary to provide appropriate tourism products that will meet the basic needs of tourists without constraints. This research aims to identify the constraints of Korean tourists in Tehran. In order to achieve the aims of the research, the conceptual model was developed including variables named “intrapersonal”, “interpersonal”, “structural” constraints and “destination’s constraints”. Then 351 questionnaires were distributed among Korean tourists in Tehran. Data were analyzed using structural equation modeling and SMARTPLS. Totally, according to the results, destination’s constraints and structural constraints are respectively the most important variables, and intrapersonal constraints were the least important variable. Also, interpersonal constraints had moderate importance. Furthermore, with respect to the results of Friedman test, the personal characteristics of tourists, perceptions about Iran, and the lack of infrastructure and lack of facilities were identified as the main constraints of the research population.
 
Introduction
While travel motivations act as drivers of travelling to a destination, countries are struggling with travel constraints, which are considered as the challenges & filters for tourism flows & lead to demand reduction. For better understanding the basic needs of tourists, their participation & non-participation & also drivers of their unwillingness to travel to a specific destination, it is required to remove their facing barriers & constraints. It should be noted that the term “constraint” precedes “barrier”. In this paper, we deal with identification of travel constraints which usually don’t exist in other countries- even with a structure as similar as Iran. So, current research’s main objective is to recognize the travel constraints of foreign (Korean) tourists in Tehran.
 
Materials and Methods
All Korean tourists in Tehran are the survey’s population. To achieve the research objectives, the conceptual model was developed including variables named “intrapersonal”, “interpersonal”, “structural” constraints and “destination’s constraints”. Using 51 main questions in Likert Scale, the researchers examined the research’s model. Finally, 385 questionnaires were distributed among Korean tourists in Tehran & were completed by them. Then we applied structural equation modeling (SEM), SMARTPLS and Friedman test to estimate the proposed model and data analysis.
 
Discussion and Results
Descriptive findings indicated that majority of the respondents were married & 30-40 years old men, educated, with middle & low income, who mainly were employed in private sector. Most of them traveled to Iran for the first time. Also, more than half of them were willing to visit Iran again.
According to SEM results, “destination’s constraints” and “structural constraints” were respectively the most important variables. On the other hand, “intrapersonal constraints” were the least important variable. Also, “interpersonal constraints” had moderate importance. Furthermore, with respect to the results of Friedman test, “the personal characteristics of tourists”, “perceptions about Iran” and “the poor infrastructure and lack of facilities” were identified as the main constraints of the research population.
 
Conclusions
The identified main constraints show that Iran have not still presented its real & proper image to Korean tourists. Most interesting issue is the fact that Korean tourists feel they are facing with constraints about some factors which common feeling is that Iran has been reached to international standards in them: From the perspective of the respondents, even items such as adequate security & safety on the streets & people’s behavior with tourists are among the negative factors. Iranians always are among the most hospitable people in the world. But still Iranian culture & international relationships are not positioned well. Thus, advertisements & marketing efforts of Iran should cover two fundamental aspects: first, they must offset the effects of negative propaganda of foreign media, then they must present its attractions & potentials. Attract favorable opinion of Iranians in abroad & using them as cultural ambassadors can also be helpful. Weakness of infrastructure have been always one of the most essential issues of Iran tourism industry. It is important that the government should locate at the frontline to improve this situation. Also, the quality of the hotel services doesn’t fit with international experiences and is too costly. Another issue is that Iran is among the countries considered unfamiliar with the English language.
Some other suggestions are:

Optimization of transportation performance
Supporting tourism private sector
Visa facilitation
Providing international banking systems
Encouraging travel agents
Training tour guides who are familiar with different foreign languages & cultures
Reforming bad image of security & safety in Iran
Improving the quality of tourism services & products
Cooperation & alignment of all organizations, &
Adequate, proper & comprehensive informing through mass media.

 
Keywords: Constraints, Tourism Industry, Korean Tourists.
 
References:

Crawford, D.W. and Godbey, G.C. (1987). Reconceptualizing barriers to family leisure, Leisure Sciences, 9:119-127.
Crawford, D.W. Jackson, E.L. and Godbey, G. (1991). A hierarchical model of leisure constraints, Leisure Sciences, 13(4): 309-320.
Jackson, E.L. (2005). Leisure constraints research: Overview of a developing theme in leisure studies, in E.L. Jackson (ed.), Constraints to Leisure. State College, PA: Venture Publishing.
Jackson, E.L. Crawford, D. and Godbey, G. (1993). Negotiation of leisure constraints, Leisure science, 15(1):163-179.
Tae, Y. (2007). Leisure Constraints: Multiple Hierarchy Stratification Perspectives, Unpublished Master thesis. Clemson University.
Zhang, W. (2009). The Motivations, Constraints and Decision-Making of Beijing Outbound Tourists, Ph.D. dissertation, University of Waikato, Hamilton, New Zealand.
کلیدواژه‌ها [English]
constraints, Tourism Industry, Korean Tourists
مراجع
  1. حیدری چپانه، رحیم (1387). مبانی برنامه­ریزی صنعت گردشگری، تهران: انتشارات سمت.
  2. خبرگزاری میراث آریا (روابط عمومی سازمان میراث فرهنگی، صنایع دستی و گردشگری) (17 فروردین 1395).  همایش تقسیم کار ملی و منطقه­ای، عنوان خبر: گردشگری یکی از اولویت‌های برنامه ششم است. برگرفته از:
http://www.chtn.ir/Default.aspx?tabid=84&articleType=ArticleView&articleId=108618

  1. خانی، مریم (1389). موانع فرهنگی توسعه گردشگری ایران، پایان نامه کارشناسی ارشد چاپ نشده. دانشگاه علامه طباطبایی تهران.
  2. سلیمی، گیتا (1376). بررسی موانع فکری،اجتماعی،فرهنگی گسترش توریسم در ایران از دیدگاه جامعه شناسی، پایان نامه کارشناسی ارشد چاپ نشده. دانشگاه تهران.
  3. مرسلی، عزیز (1374). تخمین توابع عرضه و تقاضای توریسم خارجی در ایران، پایان نامه کارشناسی ارشد، دانشگاه تربیت مدرس تهران.
  4. معصومی، مسعود (1387). سابقه برنامه ریزی توسعه گردشگری در ایران، تهران: انتشارات سمیرا.
  5. ناصری، سید مسعود (1375). شناسایی موانع موثر توسعه توریسم در ایران و طراحی الگویی برای گسترش جذب توریست، پایان نامه کارشناسی ارشد چاپ نشده، دانشگاه تربیت مدرس تهران.
  6. نوبخت، محمدباقر و پیروز، الهام (1387). توسعه صنعت گردشگری در ایران: موانع و راهکارها (چاپ اول)، تهران: معاونت پژوهشی دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی.
  7. Backman, S.J. and Crompton, J.L. (1990). Differentiating between active and passive discontinuers of two leisure activities, Journal of Leisure Research, 22(3): 197-212.
  8. Blazey, M. (1987). The differences between participants and non-participants in a senior travel program, Journal of Travel Research, 26(1): 7-12.
  9. Buchanan, T. and Allen, L.R. (1985). Barriers to recreation participation in later life cycle stages, Therapeutic Recreation Journal, 19: 39-50.
  10. Carneiro, M.J. and Crompton, J.L. (2009). The influence of involvement, familiarity, and constraints on the search for information about destinations, Journal of Travel Research, 49: 451-470.
  11. Chen, C. and Wu, C. (2009). How motivations, constraints, and demographic factors predict seniors's overseas travel propensity, Asia Pacefic Management Review, 14(3): 301-312.
  12. Crawford, D.W., Jackson, E.L. and Godbey, G. (1991). A hierarchical model of leisure constraints, Leisure Sciences, 13(4): 309-320.
  13. Crawford, D.W. and Godbey, G.C. (1987). Reconceptualizing barriers to family leisure. Leisure Sciences, 9:119-127.
  14. Dellaert, B.G.C. Ettema, D.F. and Lindh, C. (1998). Multi-faceted tourist travel decisions: a constraint-based conceptual framework to describe tourists' sequential choices of travel components, Tourism Management, 19(4): 313-320.
  15. Gao, J. and Kerstetter, D.L. (2016). Using an intersectionality perspective to uncover older Chinese female's perceived travel constraints and negotiation strategies, Tourism Management, 57: 128-138.
  16. Goodale, T.L. and Witt, P.A. (1989). Recreation and non-participation and barriers to leisure, In E.L. Jackson & T.L. Burton (Eds.), Understanding Leisure and Recreation: Mapping the Past, Charting the Future, State College, PA: Venture Publishing, Inc.
  17. Henderson, K.A., Stalnaker, D. and Taylor, G. (1988). The relationship between barriers to recreation and gender-role personality traits for women, Journal of Leisure Research, 20: 69–80.
  18. Jackson, E.L. (1990). Variations in the desire to begin a leisure activity: Evidence of antecedent constraints?, Journal of Leisure Research, 22: 150–64.
  19. Jackson, E.L. (1991). Leisure constraints/ constrained leisure: Special issue introduction, Journal of Leisure Research. 23(4): 279–285.
  20. Jackson, E.L. (2005). Leisure constraints research: Overview of a developing theme in leisure studies, in E. L. Jackson (ed.), Constraints to Leisure. State College, PA: Venture Publishing.
  21. Jackson, E.L. (1988). Leisure constraints: a survey of past research, Leisure Science, 10(3): 8-27.
  22. Jackson, E.L. (1993). Recognizing patterns of leisure constraints: result from alternative analyses, Journal of Leisure Research, 15(1): 14-27.
  23. Jackson, E.L., Crawford, D. and Godbey, G. (1993). Negotiation of leisure constraints, Leisure Science, 15(1):163-179.
  24. Kattiyapornpong, U. and Miller, K.E. (2009). Socio-demographic constraints to travel behavior, International Journal of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality Research, 3(1): 81-94.
  25. Khan, S. (2011). Gendered leisure: Are women more constrained in travel constrained in travel for leisure? Tourismos, 6(1): 105-121.
  26. Kim, J. (2009). Three factors model and pyramid model of leisure constraints, Journal of Travel and Tourism Research, 20(4): 81-90.
  27. Lee, P.D. (2010). The influence of leisure constraints on preference for and participation in exhibitions in South Korea, Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Oklahoma State University.
  28. Korea Tourism Organization (2014). Visitor Arrivals, Korean Departures, Int'l Tourism Receipts & Expenditures. Retrieved from: http://kto.visitkorea.or.kr/eng/tourismStatics/keyFacts/visitorArrivals.kto
  29. McDonald, S. and Murphy, P.M. (2008). Utilizing and adopting leisure constraints model to enhance short-break vacations: case study of Melbourne, Australia, Journal of Vacation Marketing.14 (4): 317-30.
  30. McGuiggan, G. and Robyn, M. (2004). A model of vacation choice: an integration of personality and vacation choice with leisure constraints model, Journal of Travel Research, 46: 40-65.
  31. Nadirova, A. and Jackson, E.L. (2000). Alternative criterion variables against which to assess the impact of constraints to leisure, Journal of Leisure Research, 32: 396-405.
  32. Nyanpuane, G., Kathleen, P. and Andereck, L. (2008). Understanding travel constraints application extension of a leisure constraints model, Journal of Travel Research, 40: 43-56.
  33. Pennington, G.L. and Deborah, K.L. (20002). Testing a constraint model within the context of nature-based tourism, Journal of Travel Research, 40: 156-176.
  34. Raymore, L.A., Godbey, G., Crawford, D. and Voneye, A. (1993). Nature and process of leisure constraints: an empirical test, Leisure Science, 15(2): 12-22.
  35. Roehl, W.S. and Fesenmaier, D.R. (1992). Risk perceptions and pleasure travel: An exploratory analysis, Journal of Travel Research, 30(4): 17-26.
  36. Samandahl, D., Nancy, M. and Jekubovich, J. (1997). A critique of leisure constraints: comparative analyses and understandings, Journal of Leisure Research, 29(4): 9-23.
  37. Silva, O. and Correia, A. (2008). Facilitators and constraints in leisure travel participation: the case of the southeast of Portugal, International Journal of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality Research, 2(1): 25-43.
  38. Sonmez, S.F. and Graefe, A.R. (1998). Determining future travel behavior from past travel experience and perceptions of risk and safety, Journal of Travel Research, 37(2): 171-177.
  39. Tae, Y. (2007). Leisure Constraints: Multiple Hierarchy Stratification Perspectives, Unpublished Master thesis. Clemson University.
  40. Um, S. and Crompton, J.L. (1992). The roles of perceived inhibitors and facilitates in pleasure travel destination decisions, Journal of Travel Research, 30: 18-25.
  41. Walker, G.J. and Virden, R.J. (2005). Constraints on Outdoor Recreation, in Constraints to Leisure, ed. E. L. Jackson. State College, PA: Venture Publishing.
  42. Zhang, W. (2009). The Motivations, Constraints and Decision-making of Beijing Outbound Tourists, Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Waikato, Hamilton, New Zealand.
  43. Zhang, H., Zhang, J., Cheng, S., Lu, S. and Shi, C. (2012). Role of constraints in Chinese calligraphic landscape experience: An extension of a leisure constraints model, Tourism Management, 33: 1398-1407.
  44. WTTC (2016). Travel & Tourism ECONOMIC IMPACT 2016 IRAN, WTTC.
  45. World Bank (2015). International tourism, number of arrivals. Retrieved from: http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/ST.INT.ARVL
آمار
تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 1,927
تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 1,599


سامانه مدیریت نشریات علمی. قدرت گرفته از سیناوب