Proposal Defense Presentation

2,149 views
1,988 views

Published on

Published in: Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
2,149
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
14
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
51
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Proposal Defense Presentation

  1. 1. Presenter: Jenny Yin-Chen Chen Advisors: Dr. Yen-Hsi Lee Dr. Tzong-Shyuan Chen December 24, 2009
  2. 2. Contents I. Introduction II. Literature Review III. Methodology IV. Suggestions
  3. 3. Introduction Research Background Lukang Statements of Problem Purposes of Research
  4. 4. Research Background <ul><li>Distinct benefits of historical tourism include the potential of a clean industry and a valuable source of income and employment . </li></ul><ul><li>(Orbasli, 2000) </li></ul>
  5. 5. Research Background <ul><li>Interpretation allows visitors to generate a better understanding of the history and significance of events, people, and objects with which the site is associated. </li></ul><ul><li>(Alderson & Low, 1996) </li></ul>
  6. 6. Research Background <ul><li>Interpretation is one of the key factors to a sustainable tourism . </li></ul><ul><li>(Harris, Griffin, & Williams, 2002) </li></ul>
  7. 7. Research Background <ul><li>Nearly 91% of the citizens traveled at least once domestically in 2007, and the average number of trips per person was 5.57 . </li></ul><ul><li>(R. O. C. Tourism Bureau, 2008) </li></ul>
  8. 8. Research Background <ul><li>The number of tourists who have visited historic sites in 2008 was only 5% of the total number of tourists who have visited the principal scenic spots in Taiwan. </li></ul><ul><li>(R. O. C. Tourism Bureau, 2009) </li></ul>
  9. 9. Research Background <ul><li>There are currently a total of 699 historic monuments and 767 historic buildings in Taiwan. </li></ul><ul><li>(Headquarters Administration of Cultural Heritage) </li></ul>
  10. 10. Lukang
  11. 11. Lukang
  12. 12. Lukang Primary historic heritage 1 Tertiary heritage sites 6 Valuable heritage sites 7 Designated Heritage Sites in Lukang
  13. 13. Lukang <ul><li>According to the survey of Visitors to the Principal Scenic Spots in Taiwan by Month, more than 481,063 tourists visited Lukang in 2008. </li></ul><ul><li>(R. O. C. Tourism Bureau, 2009) </li></ul>
  14. 14. Statements of Problem <ul><li>Only few of the past studies have examined the need for interpretative services and the value of these services to visitors in heritage sites . </li></ul>
  15. 15. Statements of Problem <ul><li>By probing the visiting patterns and the perceptions of the tourists, more could be considered to increase satisfaction of the tourists, and may further increase revisitation . </li></ul>
  16. 16. Purposes of Research <ul><li>to use the contingent valuation method (CVM) to elicit the willingness-to-pay (WTP) of the tourists for personal interpretative service in Lukang, and to analyze WTP determinants with the application of a double-hurdle model </li></ul>
  17. 17. Literature Review Interpretative Service Contingent Valuation Method Determinants of WTP Double-Hurdle Model
  18. 18. Definition of Interpretative Service <ul><li>Interpretation is an educational activity which aims to reveal meanings and relationships to people about the places they visit and the things they see, which in turn improves the quality of visitor experience. </li></ul><ul><li>(Tilden, 1977) </li></ul>
  19. 19. The Importance of Interpretative Service <ul><li>The goal of interpretation is to increase visitor awareness , promote learning , appreciation and understanding of places so that tourists develop empathy towards heritage, conservation, culture and landscape. </li></ul><ul><li>(Stewart, Hayward, & Devlin, 1998) </li></ul>
  20. 20. The Importance of Interpretative Service <ul><li>Interpretation services benefit both the heritage sites and tourists and draw public support by enhancing visitors’ experiences and educating visitors in appropriate behaviors to conserve the historical sites. </li></ul><ul><li>(Hall & McArthur, 1993) </li></ul>
  21. 21. Types of Interpretative Service <ul><li>guided walks </li></ul><ul><li>talks </li></ul><ul><li>presentations </li></ul><ul><li>drama </li></ul><ul><li>special events </li></ul><ul><li>activity programs </li></ul><ul><li>interpretative signs </li></ul><ul><li>interpretative brochures </li></ul><ul><li>exhibit center </li></ul><ul><li>audio guide </li></ul><ul><li>multi-media guide </li></ul><ul><li>interpretative trail </li></ul>Personal / Attended Non-personal / Unattended
  22. 22. Importance of Personal Interpretative Service diverse audience needs more interaction entertaining and memorable notice problems
  23. 23. Demand for Personal Interpretative Service <ul><li>(Maslow, 1970) </li></ul>
  24. 24. Contingent Valuation Method <ul><li>The contingent valuation method (CVM) is a standard approach to measuring economic values of non-market goods , such as recreation resources, wildlife, and environmental quality goods. </li></ul><ul><li>(Hanemann, 1994; Lee & Han, 2002) </li></ul>
  25. 25. Contingent Valuation Method <ul><li>Elicitation techniques: </li></ul><ul><li>bidding game approach </li></ul><ul><li>payment card approach </li></ul><ul><li>dichotomous choice approach (DC) </li></ul><ul><li>open-ended elicitation technique </li></ul>
  26. 26. Determinants of WTP <ul><li>In travel expenditure studies, economic and socio-demographic variables were commonly analyzed. Others have incorporated travel-related variables, constraint factors, and life cycle stages. </li></ul><ul><li>(Dardis, Soberon-Ferrer, & Patro, 1994; Hong, Fan, Palmer, </li></ul><ul><li>& Bhargava, 2005; Jang, Bai, Hong, & O’Leary, 2004; </li></ul><ul><li>Jang & Ham, 2009; Weagley & Huh, 2004) </li></ul>
  27. 27. Double-Hurdle Model <ul><li>Analysis of open-ended bids: </li></ul><ul><li>Ordinary least square (OLS) regressions </li></ul><ul><li>Tobit analysis </li></ul><ul><li>Double-hurdle model </li></ul>
  28. 28. Double-Hurdle Model <ul><li>Many researchers went through the process of the model selection tests , and justified the double-hurdle model from their findings. </li></ul><ul><li>(Angulo, Gil, & Gracia, 2001; Aristei, Perali, & Pieroni, 2008; Gebremedhin & Swinton, 2003; Matshe & Young, 2004; </li></ul><ul><li>Saz-Salazar & Rausell-Koster , 2008) </li></ul>
  29. 29. Double-Hurdle Model <ul><li>Log likelihood statistics and Hosmer-Lemeshow statistics were used to confirm that the double-hurdle model was good fit , and the findings revealed differences in the variables influencing travel participation and travel expenditure. </li></ul><ul><li>(Jang &Ham, 2009) </li></ul>
  30. 30. Methodology Data Collection Instrument Estimation Methods Data Analysis
  31. 31. Data Collection <ul><li>Sampling size estimation formula </li></ul><ul><li>n = </li></ul><ul><li>n : sample size </li></ul><ul><li>Z : 95 % confidence interval ( Z α/2 = 1.96 ) </li></ul><ul><li>p : population proportion (½) </li></ul><ul><li>e : tolerated error (5%) </li></ul>e 2 Z α /2 2  p (1- p ) 385
  32. 32. Data Collection Participants tourists who have visited Lukang (on-site) Questionnaire 410 copies Time 5 minutes Sampling convenience sampling Elicitation approach open-ended
  33. 33. Instrument <ul><li>Questionnaire survey </li></ul>Part 4 Demographic Information Part 1 Cognition of Personal Interpretative Services Part 2 Lukang Traveling Experiences Part 3 Willingness-to-Pay for Personal Interpretative Service in Lukang
  34. 34. Estimation Methods <ul><li>Main reasons for zero responses: </li></ul><ul><li>the survey period is too short for participants to report any purchase ( infrequency of purchase ) </li></ul><ul><li>participants are not willing to pay due to personal preferences ( abstention ) </li></ul><ul><li>participants do not pay due to economic reasons ( corner solution ) </li></ul>
  35. 35. Estimation Methods ordinary least square (OLS) regression biased and inconsistent estimates of the parameters
  36. 36. Estimation Methods Double-hurdle model Cragg (1971) considers the possibility of zero outcomes in the second hurdle two stages of estimation two sets of variables Tobit model Tobin (1958) all zero observations are interpreted as corner solutions treats the decisions jointly same set of variables Heckman’s sample selection model Heckman (1979) there will be no zero observations in the second stage once the first stage selection is passed two stages of estimation two sets of variables
  37. 37. Data Analysis
  38. 38. Double-Hurdle Model <ul><li>1. The decision to pay for personal interpretative service ( D ): </li></ul><ul><li>D i * = Z i α + u i , u i ~ N (0,1) (1a) </li></ul><ul><li>D i = 1 if D i * > 0 </li></ul><ul><li>0 if D i * ≤ 0 (1b) </li></ul><ul><li> D* : latent selection variable </li></ul><ul><li> Z i : vector of explanatory variables </li></ul><ul><li> α : vector of parameters </li></ul><ul><li>u i : error term </li></ul>
  39. 39. Double-Hurdle Model <ul><li>2. The level of WTP value ( Y ): </li></ul><ul><li>Y i * = X i β + υ i , υ i ~ N (0, σ 2 ) (2a) </li></ul><ul><li>Y i = Y i * if D i = 1 and Y i * > 0 </li></ul><ul><li>0 otherwise (2b) </li></ul><ul><li>Y i : answer to the open-ended valuation question </li></ul><ul><li>X i : vector of explanatory variables </li></ul><ul><li>β : vector of parameters </li></ul><ul><li>υ i : error term </li></ul>
  40. 40. Double-Hurdle Model <ul><li>Log-likelihood function: </li></ul><ul><li>(3) </li></ul><ul><li>ϕ (∙): standard normal density function </li></ul><ul><li>Φ (∙): standard normal cumulative distribution function </li></ul><ul><li>φ (∙): density function </li></ul>
  41. 41. Suggestions <ul><li>modification of the topic </li></ul><ul><li>information of the current personal interpretative service in Lukang </li></ul><ul><li>addition of tables and map </li></ul><ul><li>more literature on CVM and double-hurdle, and on determinants of WTP </li></ul><ul><li>specific sites of the survey </li></ul>
  42. 42. <ul><li>Thank you for your attention! </li></ul>

×