| dc.description.abstract | Worldwide, the competitiveness of the tourism industry is utilised to measure its performance
which is categorised as productivity, an encourager of economic growth, and economic
development (Webster & Ivanov, 2013:137; Rizzi & Graziano, 2017:11; Teixeira, 2018:6). Even
though competitiveness is a pressing matter, little research focuses on the measurement of
tourism destination competitiveness. Lopes, Muñoz and Alarcón–Urbistondo (2018:1) identify
problems with the measurement of regional tourism destination competitiveness in stating that
the majority of proposals made by organisations and found in research have been implemented
on a national level with very few focusing on a regional or local level. It is clear that the
development of a measurement instrument is needed on a regional and local level, which will
assist in the comparison between regions and as such, improve their competitiveness. In the
current study, the problem is addressed by developing a measurement instrument that assists in
the comparison between regions and as such, improves their tourism destination
competitiveness.
There exists the need for a regional (Baggio, 2018:1) and empirical measure of tourism
destination competitiveness to guide the identification of well–informed strategic
recommendations for relevant stakeholders. As the tourism industry is complex (Martín,
Mendoza & Román, 2017:940), various research methods were required to performed adequate
analysis. Therefore, in this study, a mix–method approach was followed by collecting primary
and secondary data, quantitative and qualitative data. To achieve the primary, theoretical and
empirical objectives the study was divided into four stages (methods) of execution, namely
Stage A (literature review), B (development and testing of a measurement instrument), C
(analysis of time–series econometrics) and D (SWOT analysis).
Stage A was a literature review of four concepts. The concepts of (i) tourism development and
(ii) competitiveness were explained by providing the definitions, types, advantages and
disadvantages and relating theories. The review of tourism development and competitiveness
concepts provided the groundwork for the discussion on (iii) the determinants and (iv) the
existing models of tourism destination competitiveness.
Stage B was the development and testing of the measurement instrument of tourism destination
competitiveness. For the development of the measurement instrument, seven phases were
followed. Phase 1, was the investigation of tourism destination competitiveness, which was
found in Stage A. Phase 2, was the identification of 21 relevant determinants to represent
tourism destination competitiveness into three dimensions. Phase 3 consisted of the pre–testing
of the measurement instrument by 31 subject and industry experts. These experts were
required to (i) ranking the priority, (ii) weigh the importance of each determinant and dimensions
in terms of tourism destination competitiveness and (iii) give any inputs through face validity and
content validity. The priority and weighing for the determinants and dimensions of the
measurements instrument were provided by industry and subject experts. These subject experts
were selected using purposive sampling, and this was based on their knowledge in the field of
economic development and tourism development and the tourism industry. Phase 4, made any
recommended changes by the subject and industry experts to ensure face validity and content
validity of the measurement instrument, resulting in 16 determinants within the three
dimensions. According to the importance weighting, the top five most important determinants in
the measurement instrument were (i) safety and security, (ii) accommodation facilities, (iii)
transportation facilities, (iv) food and drink facilities and (v) natural resources. In terms of the
dimensions, Resources are the most important, followed by infrastructure and then enabling
environment and authorities in achieving tourism destination competitiveness.
For the testing of the measurement instrument, an index value was developed for each
determinant and dimension through formula formulation by use of the importance weights
provided by subject and industry experts. Phase 5, calculated the index value of the
determinants and dimension through the use of the importance weighting values. The index
value calculation was required as the determinants and dimensions were weighted differently
and should be on the same scale to ensure accurate analysis.
Thereafter, Phase 6 was the development of the measurement instrument that encompasses
four sections. Section A demographics, Section B resources, Section C infrastructure and
Section D enabling environment and authorities. The following stage, Stage 7, was the pilot
study for the Sedibeng district municipality (sample 1). For this, the SPSS program was used to
conduct an EFA (exploratory factor analysis) and (ii) SmartPLS was used to perform a CFA
(confirmatory factor analysis). The purpose of these analyses‟ was to indicate validity and
reliability test results of the measurement instrument in the district municipalities. This process
was repeated for the Fezile Dabi district municipality (sample 2) to confirm the findings from
sample 1. The results indicated that in Sedibeng and Fezile Dabi district municipalities, the
measurement instrument is validated and reliable with Cronbach‟s Alpha above 0.7. The results
indicated that the measurement instrument is reliable and validated in both Sedibeng and Fezile
Dabi district municipality. The results from the measurement instrument developed could be
seen as accurate. The testing of the measurement instrument indicated that the tourism
performance percentage is 37.42% and & 36.86% for the Sedibeng and Fezile Dabi district
municipality, respectively. Indicating average performance, this could improve extensively.
Predominantly, the trends of tourism in the Sedibeng and Fezile Dabi district municipality
indicated a possible upward trend in the future. However, the global COVID–19 pandemic,
could negatively influence these trends.
Stage C was the analysis of time–series econometrics with the use of panel data from 2001 to
2019 for the Sedibeng (57 observations) and Fezile Dabi (76 observations) district
municipalities. The purpose of the time–series analysis was to investigate the relationship
between tourism (dependent) and related variables,– social, political and economic
environments (independent). First, correlation analyses were done to indicate the linear relation
between tourism and related variables. The unit root test results (a mixture of stationarity)
indicated the use of an ARDL (autoregressive distributive lag) model for both the district
municipalities. The ARDL model indicated that in the long–run, there is a positive relationship
between tourism and the population density, GVA, HDI and the number of health facilities for
the Sedibeng district municipality. Negative long–run relationships exist between tourism and
criminality, tress index, unemployment and the exchange rate. For the Fezile Dabi district
municipality, in the long–run, a positive relationship exists between tourism and GVA, HDI, tress
index, exchange rate and the number of health facilities. On the contrary, negative relationships
were present between tourism, criminality, population density and unemployment. The
diagnostic tests indicated a stable model for the Sedibeng and district municipalities.
Stage D provided the SWOT (strengths, weaknesses, opportunity and threats) analysis for the
Sedibeng and Fezile Dabi district municipalities. The information for SWOT analyses was
gathered from industry experts within the district municipalities in the form of interviews. These
respondents were selected based on their knowledge of the district municipalities. Three
respondents in the Sedibeng district municipality and three respondents in the Fezile Dabi
district municipality participated in the interviews as respondents. The SWOT analysis indicated
that in the Sedibeng district municipality, the strengths are (i) strategic location, (ii) limited traffic
and strong business chamber. The weaknesses are (i) pollution of the Vaal River, (ii) ignorance
of tourism potential and (iii) poor tourism promotion. The opportunities are (i) available land for
development, (ii) connectivity to high–density areas and (iii) tourism routes available for
utilisation. The threat to tourism development in the Sedibeng district municipality was identified
as (i) COVID–19 disease, (ii) magnetic mine and (iii) criminality.
The SWOT analysis indicated that in the Fezile Dabi district municipality that the strengths are
(i) natural resources, scenic routes, (ii) UNESCO world heritage site and (iii) water sports
events. The weaknesses are (i) poor condition of infrastructure, (ii) criminality and (iii) high
business property rent. The opportunities that the Fezile Dabi district municipality should
capitalise on are (i) agro–processing,(ii) skills development opportunities and (iii) marketing. The
threats are (i) COVID–19 disease, (ii) inactive government participation and (iii) non–compliance
with legislation.
In order for a tourism destination to generally improve its competitiveness, ten determinants or
factors of success were identified as (i) proper accommodation facilities, (ii) essential services,
(iii) historic and cultural resources, (iv) food and drink facilities, (v) natural resources and
strategic location, (vi) local leadership and political stability, (vii) safety and security, (viii)
Transportation facilities (ix) technology, innovation and communication and (x)
entrepreneurship, the business community and workforce. To improve tourism performance, the
Sedibeng district municipality should consider the conservation of the natural environment,
incorporation of technology and safety and security measures. To improve tourism performance,
the Fezile Dabi district municipality should consider the promotion of water sports, incorporation
of technology and government participation.
As such, this study‟s contributions were (i) the development and validation of an empirical and
regional measurement instrument, (ii) the identification of tourism performance rating for the
Sedibeng and Fezile Dabi district municipalities, (ii) time–series statistical analysis for the
Sedibeng and Fezile Dabi district municipalities, (iii) SWOT analysis for the Sedibeng and Fezile
Dabi district municipalities and (iv) strategic recommendations for the Sedibeng and Fezile Dabi
district municipalities. The recommendations provided will set out to improve the level of tourism
destination competitiveness in the district municipalities of Sedibeng and Fezile Dabi district
municipality. The most relevant being the participation of the local community and local
government to drive tourism destination competitiveness. | en_US |
