Community Participation and Barriers in Rural Tourism: A Case Study in Kiulu, Sabah

Abstract

Abstract. The paper presents an investigation on local community participation and barriers in rural tourism. It identifies two sides of community participation in tourism as identified by Timothy [5], which are; the benefits point of view and from the decision making process perspective. It also identifies the communities' barriers in engaging in tourism and uses Tosun's [18] approach in examining the barriers. A total of eighty-three questionnaire forms were completed by respondents from seven villages in Kiulu, Sabah, Malaysia. Respondents involved in tourism were mainly engaged as river guides, homestay operators and Tagal participants. Their involvement in the decision making process were limited to attending meetings and giving ideas and opinions only. The main barriers to participate in tourism were related to their limited knowledge about tourism, lack of capital, unable to communicate well in English, lack of information about tourism development in Kiulu, and limited incentives or support from the government for tourism development. The findings have significant implication to community participation in tourism especially in rural settings. More efforts should be made to ensure many more communities participate in tourism so as to share the benefits of tourism.

Does Tibetan Household Livelihood Capital Enhance Tourism Participation Sustainability? Evidence from China’s Jiaju Tibetan Village

“…The result for the number of skilled members showed that a higher number was significantly and positively linked to the tourism participation level. One of the barriers to participate in tourism is the lack of capital and specific skills [ 72 ]. In Jiaju Tibetan Village, people with certain skills may have more access to start tourism businesses that meet tourists’ diverse demands.…”

Assessing Community Participation in A Rural Collaborative Placemaking: Case of Trucuk Sub-village, Bantul Regency, Indonesia

“…Collaborative planning, as indicated in many studies, is therefore often seen as a symbolic effort (tokenism) rather than a way to make positive environmental and social changes that are beneficial for the community's well-being (Arifa, 2019;Mak et al, 2017;Velnisa Paimin et al, 2014). Developing a cohesive vision corresponds to the different interests of the participants in planning.…”

Factors Influencing the Implementation of Tourism Culture: A Case Study

“…Various cases show the failure of the arrangement of Tourism Villages to be less able to attract domestic and foreign tourists because it is allegedly constrained by these factors (N. F. Velnisa et al, 2014;Purwaningsih & Mahagangga, 2018;Niken & Arida, 2021;Jena & Dwivedi, 2021). Tourist villages are less able to achieve the expected goals, absorb labour, increase regional income, and significantly improve the welfare of the surrounding community.…”

“…Internal barriers come from within the village itself in the form of tourism products that are not packaged in an attractive way, limited funds, management organizations that do not manage products properly, and so on. External constraints come from outside the village, for example, the role of the local government, which does not support the implementation of tourism in its area, construction of transportation facilities, lack of accommodation, and others (N. F. Velnisa et al, 2014;Purwaningsih & Mahagangga, 2018;Jena & Dwivedi, 2021;Ramli et al, 2022).…”