Identification of factors influencing tourism industry development with cultural approach and their prioritization with AHP method (case study: Iran country)
محورهای موضوعی : Geography and tourism planning, geography and urban planning, urban planning, architecture, geography and rural planning, political geography
Ali Khosravi Moghddam
1
(Ph.D. student, Firoozkooh Branch, Islamic Azad University, Firoozkooh ,Iran)
Abdullah Zandi Far
2
(Ph.D. student, Semnan Branch, Islamic Azad University, Semnan, Iran)
Fatemeh Barzegar Farsiani
3
(Student of payame Noor University, shahriar, Iran)
کلید واژه:
چکیده مقاله :
The purpose of this study is identify factors affecting the tourism industry in Iran and prioritize them by the AHP method.There are 4 main factors and 8 indicators that affect these factors. Of course, it should be pointed out that these factors may vary according to the culture and politics of different countries. The five main factors in terms of prioritization are as follows: 1. Policy and institutional factors, 2. Economic factor , 3. Organizational factor,4. Social and cultural factors. The main factor is Policy and institutional. Therefore, according to these studies, the main factor that managers and investors must understand government policies about the tourism industry before making any decisions in this industry and make their decisions based on them so that they will not fail in the future. But, the least value is about Social and cultural, but this does not mean that it should be ignored. Each of the above factors should be considered in its place, and the lack of attention to any of these may put the tourist industry in recession.This research can help you better decide on the development of the tourism industry and advancement in this industry and provide the basis for future research.
[1] Richard G. Creativity and tourism: The state of the art. Annals of Tourism Research 2011;38(4):1225-
1265.
[2] World Travel & Tourist Council. Travel & Tourism Economic Impact 2011.1st ed. London: WTTC Press; 2011.
[3] Saaty T. Decision aiding decision-making with the AHP: Why is the principla eigenvector necessary. European Journal of Operational
Research 2003;145: 85–91.
[4] Lee H., Kwak W. Han I. Developing a business performace evaluation system: an analytical hierarchical model. Engineering Economist
1995;40(4):343-357.
[5] World Tourism Organization. 1995. UNWTO Technical Manual: Collection of Tourism Expenditure Statiscitcs, p. 10.
[6] Kim H. The concept and strategy of creative tourism. Policy of Korean Tourism 2013;Summer:8-20.
[7] Pearce DG, Butler RW. Tourism research: Critiques and challenges. London: Routledge; 1993.
[8] Korea Tourism Organization. 2014. Categorizing Creative Tourism Industry and Analysis of Economic Effect.
[9] UNESCO. 2006. Towards Sustainable Strategies for Creative Tourism Discussion. New Mexico.
[10] Raymond, C. Creative Tourism New Zealand: The practical challenges of developing creative tourism. In: G. Richards & J. Wilson,
Tourism,creativity and development, London: Routledge. 2007, p. 145–157.
[11] Korea Tourism Organization. 2012. The Strategy for Promoting Creative Tourism in Korea.
[12] Lai WH, Vinh NQ. An application of AHP approach to investigate tourism promotional effectiveness. Tourism and Hospitality
Management 2013;19(1):1-22.
[13] Saaty TL. The analytic hierarchy process. New York McGraw-Hill; 1980.
[14] Marshall, A., (1920). Principles of Economics, eighth ed. MacMillan, London.
[15] Lerner, M., Haber, S., (2010). Performance factors of small tourism ventures: The interface of tourism, entrepreneurship and the environment. Journal of Business Venturing 16(1), 77–100.
[16] Johannisson, B., (1996). The dynamics of entrepreneurial networks. Frontiers of Entrepreneurship Research, 253-267.
[17] Koellinger, P., (2008). Why are some entrepreneurs more
