Content uploaded by Birendra KC
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Birendra KC on Sep 26, 2018
Content may be subject to copyright.
Content uploaded by Birendra KC
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Birendra KC on Sep 26, 2018
Content may be subject to copyright.
Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at
http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=rapt20
Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research
ISSN: 1094-1665 (Print) 1741-6507 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rapt20
Residents’ perspectives of a newly developed
ecotourism project: an assessment of
effectiveness through the lens of an
importance–performance analysis
Birendra KC, Ramesh Paudyal & Suman Shree Neupane
To cite this article: Birendra KC, Ramesh Paudyal & Suman Shree Neupane (2018) Residents’
perspectives of a newly developed ecotourism project: an assessment of effectiveness through
the lens of an importance–performance analysis, Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, 23:6,
560-572, DOI: 10.1080/10941665.2018.1467938
To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/10941665.2018.1467938
Published online: 07 May 2018.
Submit your article to this journal
Article views: 159
View related articles
View Crossmark data
Residents’perspectives of a newly developed ecotourism project: an
assessment of effectiveness through the lens of an importance–
performance analysis
Birendra KC
a
, Ramesh Paudyal
b
and Suman Shree Neupane
c
a
Department of Hospitality and Tourism Management, University of North Texas, Denton, TX, USA;
b
School of Forest Resources &
Conservation, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA;
c
Kathmandu Forestry College, Kathmandu, Nepal
ABSTRACT
Understanding the perceived importance and performance of various components of
ecotourism to residents living in the area it is undertaken is crucial to the overall
success of an ecotourism development project. This study examines residents’
perceptions of the importance and performance of ecotourism components (i.e.
environmental conservation, economic wellbeing, promotion of local arts and
culture, local participation, and fair share of resources), including overall ecotourism
development, at the Gaurishankar Conservation Area (GCA) –a recently
implemented ecotourism development project in Nepal. This study also examines
the effect of socio-demographic, economic, and psychological factors on a
perceived gap between the importance and the performance of ecotourism
components. Findings suggest that the ecotourism development project at the GCA
should concentrate on improving the economic wellbeing of residents, and on
overall ecotourism development. Findings also suggest that residents’inclusion in
benefit-sharing mechanisms was associated with a reduced perceived gap between
the importance and performance of ecotourism components. A comparison among
different geographical segments of residents indicated that the perceived gap
between importance and performance varies across different locations.
KEYWORDS
Ecotourism; importance–
performance analysis;
conservation area; resident
perception; benefit-sharing;
Nepal
Introduction
Over the years, international travel has increased
exponentially, growing from 25 million international
tourists in 1950 to 1.235 billion in 2016 (UNWTO,
2017). Tourism is the largest and fastest growing
industry in the world and constitutes 10% of the
global gross domestic product (GDP). Although
tourism can make positive economic contributions
to host communities, it also brings negative economic,
socio-cultural, and environmental impacts. Therefore,
understanding tourism phenomena and tourism prac-
tices is crucial in order to promote sustainable forms of
tourism and to ensure the success of tourism develop-
ment. Ecotourism is a form of sustainable tourism
which is a relatively small but growing component
of the international tourism product, stemming from
increasing dissatisfaction with mass tourism and con-
cerns around environmental sustainability (Conway &
Cawley, 2016). Ecotourism promotes sustainability,
fosters responsible travel by facilitating tourists’
understanding of and appreciation for natural and cul-
tural environments, and contributes to the wellbeing
of local people (Kong, 2014). Fennell (2001) identified
the key features of ecotourism, including the pro-
motion of biodiversity conservation, local culture,
and community wellbeing, as well as overall sustain-
able development with minimal impacts on local
ecosystems.
Ecotourism has been promoted as a smart tool for
economic development and conservation in many
countries, including Nepal –a nation rich in natural
biodiversity and culture. Protected areas (PAs) of
© 2018 Asia Pacific Tourism Association
CONTACT Birendra KC birendra.kc@unt.edu Department of Hospitality and Tourism Management, University of North Texas, 1155 Union
Circle #311100, Denton, TX 76203-5017, USA
ASIA PACIFIC JOURNAL OF TOURISM RESEARCH
2018, VOL. 23, NO. 6, 560–572
https://doi.org/10.1080/10941665.2018.1467938
Nepal cover 23.23% of the total land area, and the PAs
alone attract more than 50% of the total foreign tour-
ists to the country (Tiwari, Nepali, Paudel, & Upadhaya,
2017). Thus, tourist expenditures in Nepal are directly
attributable to the existence of the PAs. Travel and
tourism in Nepal constituted 7.5% of the nation’s
GDP in 2016 (equivalent to US$1.6 billion) and was
expected to increase by an additional 6.2% in 2017
(WTTC, 2017). The total direct and indirect contri-
bution of travel and tourism to employment includes
the creation of 945,000 jobs (6.4% of total employ-
ment) and this was expected to rise by an additional
5.4% in 2017 (WTTC, 2017). The PAs are established
to conserve biodiversity, protect ecosystems, maintain
ecological processes, and contribute to sustainable
development and poverty reduction (Neto, 2003;
Rogerson, 2006). However, PAs throughout the world
are not always financially self-sufficient and are
usually unable to meet conservation or development
objectives or both (Brown, Nora, & Beresford, 2005).
Undoubtedly, ecotourism is playing a crucial role in
the livelihoods of the local communities in and
around the PAs in Nepal (KC, Kandel, & Adhikari,
2013). However, the effective implementation of eco-
tourism projects and the perceived value of these eco-
tourism projects are still an under-researched topic.
Specifically, how residents perceive these ecotourism
development projects is mostly unexplored. Thus, sys-
tematic inquiry about ecotourism development from
the perspective of different stakeholders is important
to enhance economic, socio-cultural, and environ-
mental sustainability in the ecotourism development
process. For countries like Nepal, with more than
20% of the land area allocated to PAs, it is particularly
important to ensure that residents trust and show
support for ongoing ecotourism development efforts.
Unequal distribution of benefits to local people and
the resulting failure to foster the social capital of locals
are among the greatest challenges to ecotourism pro-
jects (Coria & Calfucura, 2012). Often, ecotourism pro-
jects fail to deliver any direct financial benefits to
residents, raising a serious concern over inequitable dis-
tribution of benefits (Cobbinah, Amenuvor, Black, &
Peprah, 2017). Unequal distribution of economic
benefits among residents is persistent in ecotourism
(He et al., 2008). In some cases, unequal distribution of
benefits persists due to the geographical distribution
of local communities (Cobbinah et al., 2017; He et al.,
2008). Indeed, failure to address basic concerns among
residents such as issues of unemployment or low
income can directly hinder their intention to participate
in and attitude towards ecotourism (Adeleke, 2015).
Eshun and Tagoe-Darko (2015) noted marginalization
of local communities and the inability to incorporate
their local ecological knowledge into ecotourism pro-
jects as a major challenge. Continued dissatisfaction
with ecotourism due to unequal distribution of benefits,
marginalization, inequity, or inadequacy in addressing
unemployment issues can lead to the gradual degra-
dation of local natural and cultural resources, as well as
the loss of social capital. Various issues of dissatisfaction
with an ecotourism development project can reduce the
chances of the project’s success due to the failure to
garner residents’support for the ecotourism develop-
ment. It is even more important to consider the resi-
dents’perceptions regarding ecotourism development
projects when residents’daily livelihoods are reliant on
natural resources in the project’s working area. In this
case, socio-demographic, economic, and psychological
factors, as well as the geographical distribution of rural
communities, can influence residents’resource use pat-
terns or sharing of benefits, which significantly affects
how these residents perceive an ecotourism develop-
ment project. Evidently, there is an information gap
regarding how residents’perceptions of ecotourism
development are influenced by socio-demographic,
economic, and psychological factors, and how these
are in turn affected by the geographical distribution of
residents within the PA.
The purpose of this study is to understand residents’
perceptions of ecotourism development through an
importance–performance analysis (IPA) of various eco-
tourism components (i.e. environmental conservation,
economic wellbeing, promotion of local arts and
culture, local participation, and fair share of resources),
including overall ecotourism development, and to
examine the relationships of socio-demographic, econ-
omic, and psychological factors with a perceived gap
between importance and performance for each eco-
tourism component. In addition, this study also exam-
ines the effect of geographical distribution of residents
(i.e. locality factor) for the perceivedimportance and per-
formance of an ecotourism development project. IPA is
selected as a methodological tool due to its ability to
identify a perceived gap between the importance and
performance of each ecotourism component, as such
information offers practical implications related to
further improving the outcome of the ecotourism
project. Meanwhile, the effect of socio-demographic,
economic, and psychological factors, along with the
geographical distribution of residents, on a perceived
gap between importance and performance of
ASIA PACIFIC JOURNAL OF TOURISM RESEARCH 561
ecotourism components, offers both practical and
theoretical implications regarding ongoing ecotourism
efforts.
IPA and residents’perceptions of
ecotourism
Martilla and James (1977) initially introduced the appli-
cation of IPA, and since then professionals in many dis-
ciplines have utilized this methodological tool. IPA is a
simple but effective tool to identify areas that need
attention or improvement, thus offering important
managerial implications. It is a popular and widely
accepted technique to inform policy-makers regarding
where to use their resources for further management
and improvement of tourism destinations (Boley,
McGehee, & Tom Hammett, 2017). Due to a lack of criti-
cal statistical analysis, the IPA approach is considered
to compromise on reliability and validity (Lai & Hitch-
cock, 2015; Oh, 2001). Often, the placement of cross-
hairs in the IPA grid is done based on subjective assess-
ment, which can produce conflicting results (Azzopardi
& Nash, 2013; Oh, 2001; Sever, 2015). Therefore, careful
interpretation of the results by researchers is strongly
suggested. Nevertheless, the broad applicability of
IPA and ease of interpretation of the results support
its extensive use among researchers as well as man-
agers (Frauman & Banks, 2011). Surprisingly, studies
so far that have incorporated the IPA approach have
mostly focused on the demand perspective, as most
of these studies are more focused on the context of
tourists or visitor satisfaction (e.g. McGuiness, Rodger,
Pearce, Newsome, & Eagles, 2017; Wade & Eagles,
2003; Ziegler, Dearden, & Rollins, 2012). Very few
studies have used the IPA approach to examine resi-
dents’perceptions (e.g. Boley et al., 2017; Frauman &
Banks, 2011). Although the allocation of tourism
benefits to local communities and their support for
tourism remain at the crux of the concept of ecotour-
ism, there has been limited use of the IPA approach
in research focused on ecotourism development. Tour-
ists’perspectives of impacts (e.g. economic, socio-cul-
tural, and environmental) can have important
managerial implications (Moyle, Weiler, & Croy, 2013).
However, examining residents’perceptions can
better enhance our understanding of the short-term
and long-term positive and negative impacts of eco-
tourism. Tourists are the major drivers of tourism
phenomena in creating market demand, but solely
looking at the demand side creates imbalance by omit-
ting residents’perspectives. Residents are among the
most important stakeholders and are directly affected
by the short-term and long-term impacts of tourism
phenomena in destinations where they reside. There-
fore, residents’perspectives should be as equally
emphasized as tourists’perspectives.
Livelihood improvement and having a positive
impact on destination communities are major priorities
for ecotourism development. Local communities resid-
ing near or within the PAs are highly dependent on
natural resources (e.g. fuelwood and fodder). This
dependency creates an interconnected relationship
among environmental conservation, economic well-
being, and preservation of socio-cultural aspects of
tourism systems. To measure the success or failure of
ecotourism development projects, all components
should be examined collectively. As residents are a
major stakeholder in this scenario, considering their per-
ceived benefits or costs associated with an ecotourism
development project becomes a necessity. The out-
comes of ecotourism development projects can often
be expected to be contextual because of local govern-
ance processes. For example, Lai and Nepal (2006) con-
ducted a study in Taiwan to understand local
perspectives of ecotourism development. The study
revealed that residents held positive views towards the
measures necessary to achieve ecotourism, but their
intentions to engage in behaviors to support those
measures were not aligned with their positive views.
Therefore, this study concluded that socio-political and
environmental conditions at the local level affect resi-
dents’intentions to engage in the ecotourism develop-
ment process.Since ecotourism requires both ecological
sensitivity and respect for local culture, collaboration
with residents and the incorporation of their opinions,
in conjunction with an appropriate governance struc-
ture, is crucial (Lee & Son, 2016). An inclusive approach
that involves residents in all aspects of the design,
implementation, and benefit-sharing mechanisms is
required.Feedback from residents should be considered
an adaptive process, as it facilitates making informed
decisions for future directions. Therefore, periodic
assessment of residents’perceived importance of and
satisfaction with the ecotourism development is critical
to ensure its success.
Study context
The Gaurishankar Conservation Area (GCA) is a
recently declared PA in Nepal that retains the signifi-
cant potential for ecotourism development due to its
rich natural and cultural biodiversity and unique
562 B. KC ET AL.
landscape. Despite the opposition of certain interest
groups, such as the Federation of Community Forestry
Users Nepal, the government of Nepal formally
declared the GCA project in 2010 and handed over
the management responsibility to a not-for-profit
organization –the National Trust for Nature Conserva-
tion (NTNC) –for 20 years. The NTNC, formally known
as the King Mahendra Trust for Nature Conservation,
was established in 1982 by the legislative law of
Nepal. Some of the key arguments of interest groups
against the establishment of the GCA and handing-
over to the NTNC were that it would undermine
locals’access to forests, dismantle long-established
community forestry institutions, place the control of
local resources into outsiders’hands, and jeopardize
local conservation goals (Paudel, Jana, & Khatiwada,
2013). However, the fame and success of the Anna-
purna Conservation Area Project led by the same
organization (NTNC) provided sufficient evidence for
the decision makers to declare and transfer the man-
agement authority to the NTNC. Integrated conserva-
tion and development through ecotourism has been
the key to the success of the Annapurna Conservation
Area Project (Paudel et al., 2013). The NTNC aims to
develop a sustainable ecotourism project to achieve
similar conservation goals in the GCA as well.
It has already been more than five years since the
NTNC started the conservation and ecotourism devel-
opment project in the GCA. However, there is limited
information regarding how residents have perceived
this conservation development project. Research has
been conducted to estimate the economic value of
ecotourism (Baral, Stern, & Bhattarai, 2008) and
examine residents’perceptions of conservation and
ecotourism (Karanth & Nepal, 2012; Mehta & Heinen,
2001; Mehta & Kellert, 1998) in other PAs in Nepal.
However, there is a lack of information about the
effectiveness of management policies in the GCA.
Since outcomes from ecotourism development pro-
jects can be contextual to a specific location, a sys-
tematic inquiry of residents’perceptions of the
ecotourism project in the GCA is important.
The GCA covers 2,179 square kilometers and
includes 22 Village Development Committees (VDCs)
across three districts: Dolakha, Ramechhap, and Sindhu-
palchok (Figure 1). According to the census of 2001, the
population of the study area is 56,364 in 11,582 house-
holds. Among the castes and ethnic groups in Nepal,
Tamang (25.84%), Sherpa (22.42%), and Chhetri
(18.36%) are dominant in this conservation area. The
GCA includes 16 major vegetation types and is a
home to 34 species of mammals, 16 species of fish,
Figure 1. Gaurishankar Conservation Area and Village Development Committees included in the study.
ASIA PACIFIC JOURNAL OF TOURISM RESEARCH 563
10 species of amphibians, 8 species of lizards, 14 species
of snakes, and 235 species of birds (NTNC, n.d.). Studies
have found that the GCA is a prime habitat for many
wildlife species, including the red panda (Thapa,
Thapa, & Poudel, 2014) and Himalayan musk deer
(Shrestha & Meng, 2014). For this reason, the GCA has
been an attractive destination for both domestic and
foreign tourists. As a result, there are many avenues to
explore towards conservation through sustainable eco-
tourism development in this conservation area.
Methodology
Study design and instrument
Data were collected through a household survey of
residents in February 2017. Among 22 VDCs within
the GCA (Figure 1), 12 accessible VDCs were selected
to conduct this study. All the selected VDCs were
either accessible by a public ground transportation
service (bus) or were within a few hours walking dis-
tance from the nearest bus stop. Information about
the total number of households in each selected VDC
was obtained from the GCA office. A stratified
random sampling technique was used to select house-
holds from each VDC. Specifically, a target sample size
was first determined as 160, and households, pro-
portional to the total number of households, were
selected randomly from each VDC. A researcher
approached selected households with the assistance
of a local guide. For each selected household, the
person identified as the head of the household (male
or female) was asked to take part in the study. If the
head of the household was not available, the eldest
available member of the household completed the
self-administered survey questionnaire. In occasional
cases, when the respondent was not educated
enough to read the questionnaire, the researcher nar-
rated the questions and answer choices to the respon-
dents and recorded the responses. A total of 162
households were approached, with all of them agree-
ing to participate in the study, thus resulting in a
100% response rate. The name of the VDCs and
number of responses collected from each VDC were:
Chuchure (19), Shyaama (10), Laaduk (22), Bulung
(10), Lamabagar (18), Orang and Khare (10), Kalinchok
(12), Listi (12), Marming (18), Phulpingkatti (10), and
Tatopaani (21).
The questionnaire included two sections. The first
section assessed residents’perceptions of the ecotour-
ism development project in the GCA. The second
section included questions related to resource use,
project participation, and demographics. The ques-
tionnaire was first developed in English and translated
into the Nepali language. All three authors, being
native to Nepal, had the advantage of being fluent
in both languages. To ensure the clarity of language
in the context of the study area, the questionnaire
was pilot tested with 10 residents, including a local
guide from the research team. Respondents took
about 20 minutes on average to complete the
survey questionnaire.
The major focus of this study was residents’per-
ceived importance and the performance of five com-
ponents of ecotourism: environmental conservation,
economic wellbeing, promotion of local arts and
culture, fair share of resources (i.e. equitable sharing),
and local participation. Along with these five com-
ponents of ecotourism, the questionnaire also included
an item on overall ecotourism development. In addition,
the research objective was to examine socio-demo-
graphic, economic, and psychological factors associated
with perceived gaps between the importance and per-
formance of these ecotourism components. Items
representing these various components of ecotourism
were adapted from relevant previous studies conducted
in similar contexts (KC, Rijal, & Sapkota, 2015;Lai&
Nepal, 2006; Nyaupane & Thapa, 2004). Perceived
importance was measured using a Likert type scale of
1 (not at all important) to 5 (very important). Likewise,
perceived performance was measured using a Likert
typescaleof1(verylow)to5(veryhigh).
Data analysis
Data were analyzed using an IPA grid, multiple
regression models, and analysis of variance in the Stat-
istical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS). A data-cen-
tered approach was used for the IPA grid with
perceived performance on the x-axis and perceived
importance on the y-axis. A data-centered approach
uses the mean value from the IPA results to decide
the characteristics of each quadrant (Kong, 2014).
The upper-right quadrant (Keep Up the Good Work)
indicates high importance as well as high perform-
ance, suggesting that resource allocation should be
sustained to maintain advantages already being
achieved (Azzopardi & Nash, 2013; Ku & Mak, 2017).
The upper-left quadrant (Concentrate Here) indicates
high importance but low performance, suggesting
that increasing resources to make an improvement
should occur immediately. The bottom-left quadrant
564 B. KC ET AL.
(Low Priority) indicates low importance but also low
performance, suggesting no need for change in allo-
cation and use of resources. Finally, the bottom-right
quadrant (Possible Overkill) indicates low importance
but high performance, suggesting the need to
curtail resources and shift those resources where
improvement is required (Azzopardi & Nash, 2013;
Ku & Mak, 2017).
Results and discussion
Descriptive information
The demographic characteristics of the sample are
presented in Table 1. Most of the respondents were
male (67%) compared to female (33%). The average
size of the sample households was five members.
Brahmin/Chhetri was the dominant caste (33.3%).
About one-third of respondents had attained elemen-
tary education, such as primary school or informal
education (34.6%), whereas about a quarter of the
respondents were uneducated (21%). A relatively
high number of respondents were self-employed
(37%), followed by homemakers (30.9%) and full-
time employees (12.3%). To get a sense of their proxi-
mity to the GCA office, respondents were asked to
report the estimated walking time to the GCA office
from their house. On average, the sampled house-
holds were within 2.17 hours walking distance, but
more than half of the respondents (53.7%) had
never visited the GCA office. Similarly, more than a
quarter of the respondents (29%) reported that GCA
staff had never visited their home in the last five
years. Only 21% of the respondents reported that
they participated in any training provided by the
GCA project in last five years (Table 1). The types of
training sessions attended by residents included
tourism and hospitality management, planning and
management, conservation education, climate
change awareness, a forest fire control program, and
others (e.g. farming and cookery training).
Perceived importance–performance of
ecotourism components
Among all the components of the ecotourism
project, perceived importance scores were higher
than perceived performance scores. Economic well-
being was perceived to be the most important com-
ponent, with a mean score of 4.57, followed by
environmental conservation (4.47) (Table 2). In
Table 1. Socio-demographic profile of the respondents at the
Gaurishankar Conservation Area.
Socio-demographic Indicators Percentage
Gender
Male 67
Female 33
Caste
Brahmin/Chhetri 33.3
Tamang/Gurung 19.8
Sherpa 15.4
Dalit 6.2
Newar 16.7
Others (Includes Magar and Thakuri) 8.7
Education
Uneducated 21.0
Primary/Informal/Adult Education 34.6
Lower Secondary 10.5
Secondary/SLC 6.8
10 + 2/Intermediate 2.5
Bachelor’s degree 24.7
Employment status
Employed full-time 12.4
Self-employed 37.3
Retired 3.1
Student 5.0
Employed part-time 2.5
Temporarily unemployed 8.1
Homemaker 31.1
Others (e.g. Labor) 0.6
Visit GCA Office
Yes 46.3
No 53.7
GCA staff visited household
Yes 71
No 29
Participate in GCA trainings
Yes 21
No 79
Table 2. Gap analysis for perceived importance and performance of
ecotourism components at the Gaurishankar Conservation Area.
Statements
Mean (SD) Gap
analysis
(I–P)
Importance
(I)
Performance
(P)
Improvement in
economic wellbeing
of local people
4.57 (.76) 1.98 (.91) 2.59 I>P
Environment
protection and
biodiversity
conservation
4.47 (.78) 2.93 (1.15) 1.54 I>P
Fair share of resources
(e.g. fuelwood and
fodder) to local
people
4.43 (.84) 2.54 (1.14) 1.89 I>P
Promotion of local arts
and culture
4.38 (.84) 1.74 (.85) 2.64 I>P
Local people’s
participation in
project planning and
management
4.31 (.81) 2.81 (1.09) 1.50 I>P
Overall ecotourism
development
4.62 (.79) 2.31 (1.20) 2.31 I>P
ASIA PACIFIC JOURNAL OF TOURISM RESEARCH 565
terms of performance, compared to other com-
ponents, environmental conservation performed the
highest (2.93), followed by local participation (2.81)
and the equitable sharing of resources (2.54). An
analysis of difference between importance and per-
formance suggests that there were significant gaps
between perceived importance and performance
for all the components measured, with positive
values indicating that importance is perceived to
be higher than performance. On average, respon-
dents reported the largest gap of importance–per-
formance in the promotion of local arts and
culture, with a mean difference of 2.64, and the smal-
lest gap in local participation, with a mean difference
of 1.50 (Table 2).
IPA grid
Keep up the good work
None of the components belonged to the “keep up
the good work”quadrant, indicating that GCA resi-
dents did not perceive any of the components as
being highly important while performing highly at
the same time. Findings suggest that there is room
for improvement to increase performance levels
among these components.
Concentrate here
Two components belonged to the “concentrate here”
quadrant: economic wellbeing and overall ecotourism
development (Figure 2). It indicates that these com-
ponents were rated as highly important, but perceived
performance by residents in these areas was signifi-
cantly low. Since overall ecotourism development
emphasizes economic, socio-cultural, and environ-
mental components, economic wellbeing may have
played a crucial role in determining the perceived
importance and performance of overall ecotourism
development, as the environmental or socio-cultural
components are in either the “low priority”or “poss-
ible overkill”quadrants.
Low priority
One component fell in the “low priority”quadrant:
promotion of local arts and culture (Figure 2), which
indicates that residents perceived it as relatively less
Figure 2. Importance–performance analysis of ecotourism components at the Gaurishankar Conservation Area.
Note: Biodiversity: Environment protection and biodiversity conservation. Wellbeing: Improvement in the economic wellbeing of local people. Culture: Promotion of
local arts and culture. Participation: Local people’s participation in project planning and management. Fairshare: Fair share of resources (e.g. fuelwood and fodder) to
local people. Ecotourism: Overall ecotourism development.
566 B. KC ET AL.
important while performing poorly as well. Since the
promotion of local arts and culture performed
lowest among all components, it also suggests that
changes are not required regarding the promotion
of local arts and culture. Although GCA residents
rated the promotion of local arts and culture relatively
lower than other components, it is still highly rated
(4.38) for importance on the scale of 1–5. One possi-
bility for the lower rating of this component may be
due to the high potential contribution of the GCA in
other components (e.g. environmental conservation
and economic wellbeing) compared to the promotion
of local arts and culture.
Possible overkill
Three components belonged to the “possible overkill”
quadrant: fair share of resources, environmental con-
servation, and local participation (Figure 2). Compared
to other components, these components were rated
highly for their performance while being perceived
as less important. GCA planners can distribute
resources to other areas that residents perceived to
be more important but not performing well (i.e.
items in the “concentrate here”quadrant).
Factors affecting perceived importance–
performance
This study examines the effect of socio-demographic,
economic, and psychological factors on a perceived
gap between the importance and performance of the
GCA ecotourism development project. Multiple linear
regression results are presented in Table 3. Findings
showed that the education level of residents was posi-
tively associated with a perceived gap between impor-
tance and performance for the equitable sharing of
resources (β= .175, p< .05) and local participation
(β= .222, p< .01). This finding suggests that residents
with a higher education were likely to perceive an
increased gap between importance and performance
for those components. Higher perceived importance
over performance of these components among edu-
cated respondents could be due to their ability to envi-
sion a successful ecotourism project. More specifically,
educated residents are more likely to be aware that,
while an ecotourism project should focus on environ-
mental conservation and economic and socio-cultural
development, it also should focus on equitable
sharing of resources among residents and their partici-
pation in the planning and management of the eco-
tourism project. Research from another PA in Nepal
has shown that the higher the education attainment
of any member of the household, the higher the prob-
ability that the household participates in conservation
and development projects (Parker & Thapa, 2011). Our
study adds to this finding that educated residents are
also likely to see gaps in ecotourism components
related to equitable distribution of resources and
local participation. Thus, seeking feedback from edu-
cated residents could be beneficial for the manage-
ment agency to identify specific gaps related to
benefit-sharing and residents’participation, thereby
Table 3. Factors affecting a perceived gap between importance and performance of ecotourism components at the Gaurishankar Conservation
Area.
Independent variables
Dependent variables and standardized βcoefficients
Environmental
conservation
Economic
wellbeing
Local arts and
culture
Fair share of
resources
Local
participation
Overall ecotourism
development
Age .131 .035 .003 .052 −.123 .028
Education −.028 −.020 .057 .175* .222** .002
Fuelwood and fodder
supply ratio
a
−.234** −.199** −.102 −.244** −.062 −.133
Training
b
−.042 −.153* −.138 −.144 −.098 −.099
Eco-jobs income
c
−.042 .005 .039 −.059 −.057 −.180*
NTFPs income
d
−.166* −.066 −.150 −.008 .020 .044
Feelings
e
.219** .183* .216** −.111 −.087 .322***
Satisfaction
f
−.186* −.320*** −.177* −.028 −.167 −.175*
R-square .201 .207 .119 .134 .127 .181
Note: ***p-value < .001, **p-value < .01, and *p-value < .05.
a
Fuelwood and fodder supply ratio indicates a ratio of amount of fuelwood and fodder obtained (annually) from conservation area forest to the
total annual demand.
b
Training: 1, if any member of household participated in any training offered by the conservation area project in the last five years, 0 otherwise.
c
Annual income made from ecotourism-related jobs within the conservation area.
d
Annual income made from NTFPs within the conservation area.
e
Respondents’feelings about tourists: 1 (very negative) –5 (very positive).
f
Respondents’satisfaction with the establishment of the conservation area project: 1 (very dissatisfied) –5 (very satisfied).
ASIA PACIFIC JOURNAL OF TOURISM RESEARCH 567
moving towards gaining support for the project. Cobbi-
nah et al. (2017) argued that often residents have huge
expectations from ecotourism development; therefore,
their participation in ecotourism development project
can be utilized as a mechanism to reduce disappoint-
ment. It is likely that residents’participation in an eco-
tourism development project increases their level of
awareness by allowing them to assess whether their
expectations are achievable or not, which can in turn
foster residents’support for ecotourism.
The fuelwood and fodder supply ratio was nega-
tively associated with a perceived gap between impor-
tance and performance for environmental conservation
(β=−.234, p< .01), economic wellbeing (β=−.199,
p< .01), and the equitable sharing of resources (β=
−.244, p< .01) (Table 3). This finding suggests that
meeting the demand of residents in the supply of fuel-
wood and fodder from the GCA is likely to diminish the
perceived gap between importance and performance
of the GCA ecotourism development project for these
components. Therefore, residents’reliance on the GCA
for forest-based resources must be considered in
order to achieve the effective implementation of an
ecotourism project, by incorporating residents’basic
needs for fuelwood and fodder. A previous study by
Parker and Thapa (2012) showed that fostering resi-
dents’participation in training programs (e.g. liveli-
hood, income generation, and resource management)
is beneficial in order to minimize dependency on park
resources. Residents’dependence on park resource
can also be minimized by promoting alternative
energy sources (e.g. solar and biogas) and providing a
subsidy on alternative energy schemes. For this study,
participation in training was negatively associated
with a perceived gap between importance and per-
formance for economic wellbeing (β=−.153, p< .05).
This finding indicates that residents who participated
in training programs were more likely to perceive a
smaller gap between importance and performance for
the economic wellbeing component of ecotourism.
More frequent participation in training programs, such
as tourism management and hospitality, farming,
cookery, and NTFPs harvesting and processing,
perhaps allows residents to better prepare for improv-
ing their livelihood through alternative income-gener-
ating activities. Therefore, local participation in
training programs is important to foster residents’
support for ecotourism projects.
In terms of the income accrued from ecotourism-
related jobs in the GCA, there was a negative associ-
ation with a perceived gap between importance and
performance for overall ecotourism development
(β=−.180, p< .05), indicating that if residents are
engaged in ecotourism-related jobs, they are likely to
perceive less of a gap between importance and per-
formance. Ecotourism jobs were not statistically signifi-
cant for the importance–performance gaps for the rest
of the ecotourism components. However, although
they were statistically insignificant, there were nega-
tive associations of ecotourism-related jobs with per-
ceived gaps between importance and performance
for environmental conservation, equitable sharing of
resources, and local participation (Table 3). A previous
study by Adeleke (2015) found that unemployment
was resulting in the development of a poor attitude
towards an ecotourism development, suggesting
unwillingness to support the ecotourism development
project. Thus, improving job opportunities for residents
within the PA could be an effective strategy to garner
the support of local people in conservation and devel-
opment initiatives. Likewise, income from NTFPs was
statistically significant for a perceived gap between
importance and performance of environmental con-
servation (β=−.166, p< .05), indicating that residents
receiving income from NTFPs from the conservation
area are likely to perceive less of a gap between impor-
tance and performance for the environmental conser-
vation component of ecotourism. These findings
strongly suggest that it is necessary to create different
programs to support residents’income sources from
ecotourism development projects. Thus, the inclusion
of residents in benefit-sharing mechanisms, such as
provision of the basic needs of fuelwood and fodder,
engagement in ecotourism-related jobs, or income
generation activities from NTFPs, are likely to create a
more supportive attitude among residents for ecotour-
ism projects, which eventually could ensure the long-
term success of the project.
The results also showed that residents with positive
feelings about tourists coming to their area were more
likely to perceive higher gaps of importance and
performance in terms of environmental conservation
(β= .219, p< .01), economic wellbeing (β= .183,
p< .05), promotion of local arts and culture (β= .216,
p< .01), and overall ecotourism development
(β= .322, p< .001). On the other hand, residents who
were more satisfied with the establishment of the
GCA project were also more likely to perceive less of
a gap between importance and performance in
terms of environmental conservation (β=−.186,
p< .05), economic wellbeing (β=−.320, p< .001), pro-
motion of local arts and culture (β=−.177, p< .05),
568 B. KC ET AL.
and overall ecotourism development (β=−.175, p
< .05) (Table 3). These findings indicate that residents
who see more opportunities from the establishment
of a conservation area project and tourists coming
to their area also view ecotourism development pro-
jects more analytically. Perhaps residents retain high
expectations from ecotourism as a result of incoming
tourists (Cobbinah et al., 2017), therefore leading to an
increased perceived gap between the importance and
performance of various ecotourism components. As
discussed earlier, residents’participation in the eco-
tourism development project can be utilized to miti-
gate their overly high expectations from the project.
Locality effect on a perceived gap between
importance–performance
The outcomes from the GCA ecotourism development
project may not be uniformly distributed throughout
the GCA region. There are multiple possible contribut-
ing factors to this; for instance, the inability of GCA
staff to reach out to GCA residents, or the geographi-
cal distribution of residents in rural mountainous
region hindering their participation in the ecotourism
development project. Therefore, this study examined
the possibility of a locality effect on the perceived
importance and performance of overall ecotourism
components. One major reason for this analysis is
that if a locality effect exists, then different geographic
locations can be segmented to increase the successful
implementation of the ecotourism development
project. In total, 12 VDCs were included in the study,
but six localities were identified (based on their proxi-
mity) to examine the locality effect on perceived
importance and performance (Table 4). The findings
indicate that respondents residing in different
locations within the GCA perceived the effectiveness
of the ecotourism development project differently
(F(5,154) = 4.13, p= .002). This finding is consistent
with the existing literature. For instance, He et al.
(2008) found that the distribution of ecotourism-
related benefits was unequal among rural residents
of China based on their spatial distribution within
the conservation area. Likewise, in the context of eco-
tourism development in the conservation area of
Ghana, Cobbinah et al. (2017) found that the contri-
bution of ecotourism varied significantly based on
the geographical distribution of communities, due to
tourist flow patterns and ownership of tourism facili-
ties. Therefore, geographical distribution or the
locality factor should be considered while analyzing
the effectiveness of the ecotourism project, as resi-
dents’perceptions may vary by their geographical dis-
tribution due to the unequal distribution of benefits,
among other factors.
Conclusion, implications, and future
research
This study was conducted to enhance the understand-
ing of the residents’perceptions of the importance
and performance of a recently implemented ecotour-
ism development project in Nepal. Economic, socio-
cultural, and environmental components of ecotour-
ism were considered. The findings offer insightful
implications regarding the importance and perform-
ance of the ecotourism development project from
the residents’perspectives. Findings from IPA
suggest that residents perceived economic, socio-cul-
tural, and environmental components to be more
important than their performance for the GCA
project. This ecotourism development project has
many areas in which improvements can be made, as
none of the components fell into the “keep up the
good work”quadrant. For example, economic well-
being and overall ecotourism development were
placed in the “concentrate here”quadrant, whereas
the promotion of local arts and culture belonged to
the “low priority”quadrant. Equitable sharing of
resources, environmental conservation, and local par-
ticipation fell into the “possible overkill”quadrant.
These results indicate that the GCA ecotourism devel-
opment project should effectively allocate their
resources to balance economic, socio-cultural, and
environmental components in order to maximize the
outcome from the project while ensuring residents’
Table 4. Residents’perceived importance–performance gap of overall
ecotourism components by geographical location in the Gaurishankar
Conservation Area.
VDC category NMean SD F(df1, df2)
p-
value
Chuchure/Shyaama 29 2.00 1.08 4.13 (5, 154) .002
Kalinchok 12 2.17 0.64
Laaduk/Bulung 31 1.82 0.78
Lamabagar/Orang/
Khare
28 1.79 0.52
Phulpingkatti/
Marming/Listi
40 2.30 0.64
Tatopani 20 2.53 0.30
Note: A perceived gap refers to an average mean difference of impor-
tance and performance for all the ecotourism components (i.e.
environmental conservation, economic wellbeing, promotion of
local arts and culture, fair share of resources, local participation,
and overall ecotourism development).
ASIA PACIFIC JOURNAL OF TOURISM RESEARCH 569
long-term support. However, all the components were
rated more highly for importance than performance.
This suggests that consideration of how socio-demo-
graphic, economic, and psychological factors can
assist in reducing the gap between importance and
performance would be helpful (e.g. by increasing per-
formance for each ecotourism component).
The finding regarding a locality effect on the per-
ceived gap between importance and performance is
unique. It offers meaningful implications for the man-
agement agency around how to achieve sustainable
conservation and development goals in the GCA. The
unequal distribution of benefits due to the geographi-
cal distribution of residents can hinder the success of
an ecotourism development project. More than 50%
of the sampled households reported never having
visited the GCA office, and about 30% of the house-
holds reported a lack of visitation by GCA staff. The
lack of visitation by GCA staff or residents’inability to
visit the GCA office can create a barrier for communi-
cation. Therefore, the perceived unequal distribution
of benefits can also be attributed to lack of an outreach
program triggered by the geographical distribution of
residents. A perceived gap between importance and
performance was likely to be smaller among those
who participated in training programs offered by the
GCA ecotourism development project than among
those who did not. Removing this barrier or imple-
menting an outreach program may help to mitigate
this issue. The authors would encourage further
research to validate this finding in similar contexts.
Selected VDCs were included in this study, which
were either accessible by a public ground transpor-
tation service or were within few hours walking dis-
tance from a bus stop. Therefore, future studies could
encompass all of the VDCs or segment the VDCs
based on the accessibility factor or level of ecotourism
development to improve the assessment of the locality
effect. This study only examines the effect of the
locality factor on a perceived gap between importance
and performance for overall ecotourism components.
However, to reach a fully rational conclusion, future
research should focus on the objective assessment of
geographical segmentation and its effect on various
components of ecotourism.
Residents who participated in benefit-sharing mech-
anisms, such as participation in ecotourism-related jobs,
extraction of fuelwood and fodder from the GCA, and
generation of income from NTFPs, were less likely to
perceive a gap between the importance and perform-
ance of ecotourism components. This suggests that
residents’participation in benefit-sharing is a key in
order to garner their support for ecotourism projects.
Participation and interactionwith the ecotourism devel-
opment project by residents can vary because of several
context-specific factors. Therefore, the planning,
implementation, and evaluation of an ecotourism
project should not treat all the residents’sub-popu-
lations as a monolithic whole. Instead, participation in
benefit-sharing mechanisms and the locality factor
must be considered for each individual community.
Although visitor satisfaction is an important factor to
consider when evaluating the success of an ecotourism
project, developing social capital at the destination and
garnering local support for ecotourism development
are equally important. Thus, a long-term plan of all eco-
tourism projects should be to foster a positive attitude
for ecotourism development among residents, which
will eventually result inthe maximization of visitor satis-
faction. Our findings also suggest that policy-makers
and tourism planners involved with the ecotourism
project should adopt periodic assessment of impor-
tance–performance to improve a project’s outcome.
IPA can encourage policy-makers and tourism planners
to look at the project from both the supply and demand
perspectives. Since sustaining local livelihoods is at the
crux of the ecotourism development concept,residents’
economic wellbeing and their inclusion in the ecotour-
ism development process should be emphasized, along
with efforts to promote environmental conservation.
Focusing solely on environmental conservation while
ignoring the plight of residents can undermine the
long-term success of the ecotourism project.
Acknowledgement
Authors would like to thank Abhinandan Khatiwada, Rabin
Shrestha, and Dipendra Mehta for their assistance during the
field study. The comments from anonymous reviewers helped
to improve the manuscript; we appreciate their time and effort.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.
Funding
This work was supported by National Trust for Nature Conserva-
tion [grant number H 6660].
ORCID
Birendra KC http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7949-6672
570 B. KC ET AL.
References
Adeleke, B. O. (2015). Assessment of residents’attitude towards
ecotourism in KwaZulu-Natal protected areas. International
Journal of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality Research,9(3),
316–328.
Azzopardi, E., & Nash, R. (2013). A critical evaluation of impor-
tance-performance analysis. Tourism Management,35, 222–
233.
Baral, N., Stern, M. J., & Bhattarai, R. (2008). Contingent valuation
of ecotourism in Annapurna Conservation Area, Nepal:
Implications for sustainable park finance and local develop-
ment. Ecological Economics,66(2), 218–227.
Boley, B. B., McGehee, N. G., & Tom Hammett, A. L. (2017).
Importance-performance analysis (IPA) of sustainable
tourism initiatives: The resident perspective. Tourism
Management,58,66–77.
Brown, J., Nora, M., & Beresford, M. (2005). The protected land-
scape approach: Linking nature, culture and community.
Gland: IUCN.
Cobbinah, P. B., Amenuvor, D., Black, R., & Peprah, C. (2017).
Ecotourism in the Kakum Conservation Area, Ghana: Local
politics, practice and outcome. Journal of Outdoor Recreation
and Tourism,20,34–44.
Conway, T., & Cawley, M. (2016). Defining ecotourism: Evidence
of provider perspectives from an emerging area. Journal of
Ecotourism,15(2), 122–138.
Coria, J., & Calfucura, E. (2012). Ecotourism and the development
of indigenous communities: The good, the bad, and the ugly.
Ecological Economics,73,47–55.
Eshun, G., & Tagoe-Darko, E. (2015). Ecotourism development in
Ghana: A postcolonial analysis. Development Southern Africa,
32(3), 392–406.
Fennell, D. A. (2001). A content analysis of ecotourism definitions.
Current Issues in Tourism,4(5), 403–421.
Frauman, E., & Banks, S. (2011). Gateway community resident per-
ceptions of tourism development: Incorporating importance-
performance analysis into a limits of acceptable change fra-
mework. Tourism Management,32(1), 128–140.
He, G., Chen, X., Liu, W., Bearer, S., Zhou, S., Cheng, L. Y., …Liu, J.
(2008). Distribution of economic benefits from ecotourism: A
case study of Wolong Nature Reserve for giant pandas in
China. Environmental Management,42(6), 1017–1025.
Karanth, K. K., & Nepal, S. K. (2012). Local residents perception of
benefits and losses from protected areas in India and Nepal.
Environmental Management,49(2), 372–386.
KC, B., Kandel, P., & Adhikari, S. (2013). Economic valuation of eco-
system services in protected areas: A case study from Nepal.
Banko Janakari,23(1), 42–50.
KC, A., Rijal, K., & Sapkota, R. P. (2015). Role of ecotourism in
environmental conservation and socioeconomic develop-
ment in Annapurna Conservation Area, Nepal. International
Journal of Sustainable Development & World Ecology,22(3),
251–258.
Kong, H. (2014). Are tour guides in China ready for ecotourism?
An importance–performance analysis of perceptions and per-
formances. Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research,19(1), 17–
34.
Ku, G. C. M., & Mak, A. H. N. (2017). Exploring the discrepancies in
perceived destination images from residents’and tourists’
perspectives: A revised importance–performance analysis
approach. Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research,22(11),
1124–1138.
Lai, I. K. W., & Hitchcock, M. (2015). Importance–performance
analysis in tourism: A framework for researchers. Tourism
Management,48,242–267.
Lai, P. H., & Nepal, S. K. (2006). Local perspectives of ecotourism
development in Tawushan Nature Reserve, Taiwan. Tourism
Management,27(6), 1117–1129.
Lee, J., & Son, Y. (2016). Stakeholder subjectives toward ecotour-
ism development using Q methodology: The case of Maha
ecotourism site in Pyeongchang, Korea. Asia Pacific Journal
of Tourism Research,21(8), 931–951.
Martilla, J., & James, J. (1977). Importance-performance analysis.
Journal of Marketing,41(1), 77–79.
McGuiness, V., Rodger, K., Pearce, J., Newsome, D., & Eagles, P. F. J.
(2017). Short-stop visitation in shark bay world heritage area:
An importance–performance analysis. Journal of Ecotourism,
16(1), 24–40.
Mehta, J. N., & Heinen, J. T. (2001). Does community-based con-
servation shape favorable attitudes among locals? An empiri-
cal study from Nepal. Environmental Management,28(2), 165–
177.
Mehta, J. N., & Kellert, S. R. (1998). Local attitudes toward commu-
nity-based conservation policy and programmes in Nepal: A
case study in the Makalu-Barun Conservation Area.
Environmental Conservation,25(4), 320–333.
Moyle, B. D., Weiler, B., & Croy, G. (2013). Visitors’perceptions of
tourism impacts: Bruny and Magnetic islands, Australia.
Journal of Travel Research,52(3), 392–406.
Neto, F. (2003). A new approach to sustainable tourism develop-
ment: Moving beyond environmental protection. Natural
Resources Forum,27(3), 212–222.
NTNC. (n.d.). Gaurishankar Conservation Area Project. Retrieved from
http://www.ntnc.org.np/project/gaurishankar-conservation-
area-project
Nyaupane, G. P., & Thapa, B. (2004). Evaluation of ecotourism: A
comparative assessment in the Annapurna Conservation
Area Project, Nepal. Journal of Ecotourism,3(1), 20–45.
Oh, H. (2001). Revisiting importance–performance analysis.
Tourism Management,22(6), 617–627.
Parker, P., & Thapa, B. (2011). Distribution of benefits based on
household participation roles in decentralized conservation
within Kanchenjunga Conservation Area Project,
Nepal. Environment, Development and Sustainability,13(5),
879–899.
Parker, P., & Thapa, B. (2012). Natural resource dependency and
decentralized conservation within Kanchenjunga Conservation
Area Project, Nepal. Environmental Management,49(2), 435–444.
Paudel, N. S., Jana, S., & Khatiwada, B. (2013). Contestation and
citizen-led negotiation around the establishment of protected
areas in Nepal Himalaya. Journal of Forest and Livelihood,10(1),
42–57.
Rogerson, C. M. (2006). Pro-poor local economic development in
South Africa: The role of pro-poor tourism. Local Environment,
11(1), 37–60.
Sever, I. (2015). Importance-performance analysis: A valid man-
agement tool? Tourism Management,48,43–53.
Shrestha, B. B., & Meng, X. (2014). Spring habitat preference,
association and threats of Himalayan musk deer (Moschus leu-
cogaster) in Gaurishankar Conservation Area, Nepal.
International Journal of Conservation Science,5(4), 535–546.
ASIA PACIFIC JOURNAL OF TOURISM RESEARCH 571
Thapa, A., Thapa, S., & Poudel, S. (2014). Gaurishankar
Conservation Area-A prime habitat for Red Panda (Ailurus
fulgens) in Central Nepal. The Initiation,5,43–49.
Tiwari, S., Nepali, S. C., Paudel, J., & Upadhaya, S. (2017).
Ecotourism in protected areas of Nepal: An application of indi-
vidual travel cost method. Research Journal of Agriculture and
Forestry Sciences,5(1), 1–6.
UNWTO. (2017). UNWTO tourism highlights. Retrieved from
https://www.e-unwto.org/doi/pdf/10.18111/9789284419029
Wade, D. J., & Eagles, P. F. J. (2003). The use of importance–per-
formance analysis and market segmentation for tourism
management in parks and protected areas: An application
to Tanzania’s national parks. Journal of Ecotourism,2(3),
196–212.
WTTC. (2017). Travel & tourism economic impact 2017
Nepal. Retrieved from https://www.wttc.org/-/media/files/
reports/economic-impact-research/countries-2017/nepal2017.
pdf
Ziegler, J., Dearden, P., & Rollins, R. (2012). But are tourists satis-
fied? Importance-performance analysis of the whale shark
tourism industry on Isla Holbox, Mexico. Tourism
Management,33(3), 692–701.
572 B. KC ET AL.
