Smart concept in rural tourism: a comparison between two phases (2016-2019)

Ballina, Francisco Javier De la Ballina

doi:10.1590/1806-9479.2021.234629

Acessibilidade / Reportar erro

Brasil

Revista de Economia e Sociologia Rural

Español English

Brasil

Español English

sumário « anterior atual seguinte »

Sumário

ARTICLE • Rev. Econ. Sociol. Rural 60 (1) • 2022 • https://doi.org/10.1590/1806-9479.2021.234629 copy

Smart concept in rural tourism: a comparison between two phases (2016-2019)

Conceito inteligente em turismo rural: uma comparação entre dois períodos (2016-2019)

Authorship SCIMAGO INSTITUTIONS RANKINGS

Abstract:

Smart Tourism is the main component of current destinations, however, there are severe difficulties for its application in small destinations. This problem is essential in the case of rural tourism. Taramundi is one of the most important rural destinations in Spain. There are two surveys about tourists conducted in 2016 and 2019. These surveys are about obtaining data on changes in the behavior of tourists in the dynamic field of mobile technologies. The results indicated the importance of the smartphone for rural tourism, the temporary growth in the use of its tourist utilities, and most importantly, the technological applications that improve the enjoyment stay. The rural tourist does not abandon the use of pre- and post-travel regarding Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs), but the interest in Tics during travel increases significantly. Specifically, the App of Destiny is the central element of smart rural tourism, seeing that it should focus on the increase of new technographic utilities for tourists. In the perspective of Gretzel (2018), the application of the concept of Smart Tourist Destination is impossible in rural areas. However, with a specialization approach, rural destinations must work towards the goal of “smartification.”

Keywords:
rural tourism; destinations; ICTs; Smart; App

Population and Sample Unit	Holidays Tourists
Area	Council of Taramundi (Spain)
Date of Work	• October 2016
Date of Work	• May 2019
Method of Information Collection	Personal survey carried out in tourist establishments
Sampling Procedure	Discretionary spending/ never a couple
Number of Surveys	536 (258 + 278)
Sampling Distribution	Proportional to the number of tourist places in the area (347):
	(2016) Occupation Rate = 19.20; Average Overnights = 2.93. N = 683 Tourists.
	(2019) Occupation Rate = 20.16; Average Overnights = 2.39. N = 883 Tourists.
Sampling Conditions	Z at 5%, P = Q = 0.5
Sample Error	+/- 4.91%

TOPICS	VARIABLES	SCALE
Technology and Travel	1) What I see on social networks influences my opinion about a rural tourist destination.	Likert
	2) Technologies help me to have a more satisfying experience as a rural tourist.	(1 to 5)
	3) Technologies are a fundamental experience as a rural tourist to rural places.
	4) Technologies are a useful tool in my travels to rural places.
	5) I trust what other tourists say about portals such as TripAdvisor or Booking about rural destination.
	6) I valued positively that rural destiny tries to innovate and use technologies to improve my experience as a rural tourist.
Tourist Experience	7) Has traveled with Smartphone	Nominal
	8) Has traveled with Tablet	(Yes/No)
	9) Has traveled with Notebook
	10) Has traveled with Wearables
	11) Has used to find general information about the destination	Likert
	12) For reservations activities	(1 to 5)
	13) Has used to seek opinions or criticisms about specific businesses
	14) Has used to seek opinions or criticisms about attractions and specific places
	15) Has used to take photos and videos
	16) Has used to consult maps or use GPS
	17) Has used to share experiences on social networks
	18) Has used to talk with family and friends
	19) Has used to pay
	20) Has used to use apps from the destination
	21) Has used to use Guides (Audio, Video…)
Sharing	22) You plan to share this rural experience through the internet (before/ during/ post).	Nominal
		(Yes/Not)
	23) On Facebook	Nominal
	24) On Twitter	(Yes/Not)
	25) On Instagram
	26) On YouTube
	27) On Snapchat
	28) On WhatsApp
	29) On TripAdvisor
	30) On Telegram
	31) On Booking
	32) On Pinterest
	33) On Flickr
	34) On Vine
Travel Characteristics	35) Motivation for this rural destination	3 Nominal;
	36) Type of rural accommodation	1 Ordinal;
	37) Reserve method for this rural trip	1 Numeric (in this order)
	38) Rural destination repetition
	39) Overnights in this rural destination
Phase	40) 2016 versus 2019	Ordinal
Phase	40) 2016 versus 2019	(First/ Second)

Cronbach’s Alpha Test		.798	Good
Tukey’s test	Intra elements	F = 11178.738	.000
Tukey’s test	Statistical waste	F = 242.945	.000
Hotelling Test		F = 1496.418	.000

	Mean		Standard deviation
	Statistical	Standard error	Standard deviation
Technologies are a useful tool in my travels to rural places (T1)	3.73	.054	.807
Technologies are a fundamental experience as a rural tourist to rural places (T2)	3.69	.057	.853
Technologies help me to have a more satisfying experience as a rural tourist (T3)	3.57	.055	.835
I appreciate that rural destiny tries to innovate and use technologies to improve my experience as a rural tourist (T4)	3.49	.055	.833
I trust what other tourists say about portals such as TripAdvisor or Booking about rural destination (T5)	3.07	.061	.912
What I see on social networks influences my opinion about a rural tourist destination (T6)	2.81	.085	1.287

Model		R	R quadratic	R quadratic adjusted
2		.944	.892	.891
Model				Standardized coefficients
Model				Beta	Sig.
2	Technologies help me to have a more satisfying experience as a rural tourist (T3)			.677	.000
2	Technologies are a fundamental experience as a rural tourist to rural places (T2)			.311	.000

	SURVEY Time	Mean	t	Sig. (bilateral)
Technologies help me to have a more satisfying experience as a rural tourist (T3)	Nov2016	3.04	-11.624	.000
	April2019	4.06	-11.635	.000
I appreciate that rural destiny tries to innovate and use technologies to improve my experience as a rural tourist (T4)	Nov2016	2.96	-11.341	.000
	April2019	3.97	-11.381	.000
I trust what other tourists say about portals such as TripAdvisor or Booking about rural destination (T5)	Nov2016	2.55	-9.728	.000
	April2019	3.54	-9.686	.000
Technologies are a fundamental experience as a rural tourist to rural places (T2)	Nov2016	3.29	-7.620	.000
	April2019	4.06	-7.575	.000
What I see on social networks influences my opinion about a rural tourist destination (T6)	Nov2016	2.41	-4.759	.000
	April2019	3.18	-4.753	.000
Technologies are a useful tool in my travels to rural places (T1)	Nov2016	3.72	-.083	.934
	April2019	3.75	-.083	.934

	NO		YES
I use any technological device when I travel	2.6		97.4
Use Smartphone	10.6		89.4
Use PC	70.9		29.1
Use Tablet	75.3		24.7
Use Others	90.3		9.7
Use Wearables (Smart watch. Google Glasses...)	91.6		8.4
Use a conventional mobile phone	93.0		7.0
*Phase*	Phase1	Phase2		Chi-Sig.
I use any technological device when I travel	=	=		ns
Use Smartphone	=	=		ns
Use PC	+	-		.004
Use Tablet	+	-		.003
Use Other	=	=		ns
Use Wearables (Smart watch. Google Glasses...)	-	+		.008
Use a conventional mobile phone	=	=		ns

I appreciate that rural destiny tries to innovate and use technologies to improve my experience as a rural tourist	No	Yes	t-Sig.
Use a conventional mobile phone	3.60	3.25	ns
Use Others	3.53	4	.011
Use PC	3.70	3.27	.000
Use Smartphone	3.04	3.64	.001
Use Tablet	3.64	3.36	.026
Use Wearables (Smart watch. Google Glasses...)	3.52	4.11	.003

	Mean			t-Test
	Total Study	Phase1	Phase2	Sig.
Destination Apps (U1)	3.76	3.12	4.32	.000
Consult Maps/GPS (U5)	3.48	2.96	4.12	.000
To Use Guides (Audio. Video...) (U7)	3.52	1.90	4.04	.000
Photo/ Videos (U9)	3.68	3.44	3.88	.050
To Family/Friends Communication (U3)	3.36	1.90	3.84	.000
Reserve Activities (U10)	2.84	2.32	3.16	.000
Seek Opinions about Tourist Services (U6)	2.96	3.16	2.76	Ns
Seek Resources Opinions (U2)	2.76	2.92	2.60	Ns
Seek General Information about Destination (U4)	3.00	3.60	2.48	.008
Share SSNN (U11)	2.24	2.28	2.24	Ns
Pay (via smartphone) (U8)	1.60	1.40	1.78	Ns

KMO and Bartlett test
Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin measurement of sampling adequacy							.835
Bartlett’s sphericity test		Approx. Chi-square					830.997
		lg					55
		Sig.					.000
components	Squared load extraction sum
components	eigenvalue		% variance			% accumulated
1	3.937		35.786			35.786
2	1.956		17.781			53.567
3	1.358		13.342			66.909
4	1.068		9.709			76.618
Structure Matrix
				component
				1	2			3	4
To Use Guides (Audio. Video...) (U7)				.918	.249			-.307	-.039
Consult Maps/GPS (U5)				.868	.248			-.245	-.018
Destination Apps (U1)				.857	.245			-.217	.067
Reserve Activities (U10)				.828	-.207			.319	-.131
To Family/Friends Communication (U3)				-.005	.902			-.026	.114
Photo/ Videos (U9)				.127	.833			-.332	.125
Pay (via smartphone) (U8)				.193	.751			-.227	-.251
Seek General Information about Destination (U4)				.103	.162			.912	-.168
Seek Opinions about Tourist Services (U6)				.095	.065			.878	-.058
Seek Resources Opinions (U2)				.219	.094			.757	-.247
Share SSNN (U11)				.092	.276			.190	.867

	Phase	Mean	t - Sig. (unilateral)	t - Sig. (bilateral)
FACTORIAL C1	Oct2016	3.2066	.04995	.001
FACTORIAL C1	May2019	3.4371	.04579	.001
FACTORIAL C2	Oct2016	2.7139	.03269	.000
FACTORIAL C2	May2019	2.8970	.03078	.000
FACTORIAL C3	Oct2016	2.6890	.02437	.000
FACTORIAL C3	May2019	3.0869	.02548	.000
FACTORIAL C4	Oct2016	3.6687	.05658	.864
FACTORIAL C4	May2019	3.6811	.04541	.864

Model		R		R square	R square ajusted
1		.931		.866	.865
2		.933		.870	.869
Model			Standarized coefficients			Sig.
Model			Beta			Sig.
1	(Constant)					.008
1	Construct C1		.931			.000
2	(Constant)					.000
	Construct C1		.914			.000
	Construct C3		.069			.006

I appreciate that rural destiny tries to innovate and use technologies to improve my experience as a rural tourist
	No	Yes	t-Sig.
Share before the travel	3.93	3.87	ns
Share during the travel	3.59	4.03	.007
Share post travel	3.87	3.88	ns

HYPOTHESIS		DECISION
H1	ICTs low interest to the rural tourist	Rejected
H1	ICTs low interest to the rural tourist	The interest in technological utilities grows high in rural tourists in 2019.
H2	Information ICTs before the rural trip	Rejected
		The most valued technological utilities correspond to the assistance provided to tourists at the destination itself.
		There has also been more significant use of social networks during the rural tourism trip.

Sociedade Brasileira de Economia e Sociologia Rural Av. W/3 Norte, Quadra 702 Ed. Brasília Rádio Center Salas 1049-1050, 70719 900 Brasília DF Brasil, - Brasília - DF - Brazil
E-mail: sober@sober.org.br

Acompanhe os números deste periódico no seu leitor de RSS