Persian
Language
Geographical Research is Published in Persian Fulltext.
Volume 39, Issue 2 (2024)
GeoRes 2024, 39(2): 225-231 |
Back to browse issues page
Article Type:
Subject:
History
Received: 2024/05/20 | Accepted: 2024/07/3 | Published: 2024/07/28
Received: 2024/05/20 | Accepted: 2024/07/3 | Published: 2024/07/28
How to cite this article
Aghanasab A, Adibi Saadinejad F, Arbabi Sabzevari A. Good Governance Indicators of Tourism in the 22nd District of Tehran. GeoRes 2024; 39 (2) :225-231
URL: http://georesearch.ir/article-1-1616-en.html
URL: http://georesearch.ir/article-1-1616-en.html
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Rights and permissions
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
1- Department of Geography and Urban Planning, Islamshahr Branch, Islamic Azad University, Islamshahr, Iran
Full-Text (HTML) (14 Views)
Background
Since the 1980s, the concept of sustainable tourism has been discussed in the academic literature, with a primary focus on issues such as environmental impacts, community participation, and ecotourism. However, the topic of governance in tourism has been less explored and has only recently attracted attention as a key factor in sustainable development.
Previous Studies
Previous studies in the field of sustainable tourism have mainly focused on issues such as carbon dioxide emissions (Becken & Patterson, 2006), resource depletion and waste generation (Sierra-Huelsz & Kainer, 2018), and local community participation (Dupre et al., 2016). Additionally, research has explored ecotourism and mass tourism (Butcher, 2007; Scheyvens, 1999). In terms of governance, the emphasis has been on the shift from state-centered governance to network governance (Bramwell & Lane, 2011), the emergence of postmodern forms of governance (Hristov & Zehrer, 2015), and the impact of institutional structures on tourism development (Dos Anjos & Kennell, 2019). Studies have also examined the role of institutional quality in economic growth and development (Hall & Jones, 1999; Rodrik, 2004). The importance of political stability and its impact on tourism has been investigated in case studies such as Bosnia and Herzegovina, Lebanon, and Ireland (Causevic & Lynch, 2013; Issa & Altinay, 2006; O’Brien, 2012).
Aim(s)
The aim of this study was to design a conceptual model for promoting the tourism industry based on good governance, with a case study conducted in District 22 of Tehran.
Research Type
This study was applied in nature.
Research Society, Place and Time
The research population in this study consisted of two groups: first, experts and specialists in the fields of urban planning and tourism; second, the residents of District 22 of Tehran. This research was conducted as a case study in District 22 of Tehran, and it was carried out in the year 2023-2024.
Sampling Method and Number
This study employed two sampling methods: Purposive sampling was used to select 31 experts in the fields of urban planning and tourism in order to assess the content validity of the questionnaire. Simple random sampling was applied to select 383 residents of District 22 of Tehran, based on Cochran’s formula, taking into account statistical attrition and the margin of error.
Used Devices & Materials
For data collection in this study, documentary and library research, field studies, and a researcher-made questionnaire were used. The questionnaire included 48 items based on a four-point Likert scale (ranging from "very desirable" to "very undesirable"). After assessing its validity and reliability, 32 items were approved in the first stage, and 31 items in the second stage. Data analysis was conducted using SPSS version 27 and the Shannon entropy method.
Findings by Text
In this study, the effectiveness of various tourism governance indicators on urban governance in District 22 of Tehran was analyzed from the citizens’ perspective using multiple regression analysis. The results showed that the examined indicators had a significant impact on urban governance (Table 1). Among these, indicators such as decentralization (with a standardized coefficient of 0.615 and significance level of 0.038), security (0.714 and 0.033), and transparency (0.408 and 0.041) had the highest positive effects. Additionally, indicators of efficiency and effectiveness, justice, accountability, and strategic vision also had significant effects, though their impact levels varied. Conversely, participation and responsibility had a significant but negative effect on urban governance.
Table 1. Assessment of the effectiveness of tourism governance indicators at the level of district 22, Tehran, from the citizens’ perspective
After confirming the influence of the indicators, the Shannon entropy method was used to prioritize them in improving tourism governance. The results indicated that the components of “optimal communication between officials and stakeholders,” “establishment of virtual communication channels with the public,” “transparency in operations and public awareness of results and feedback,” “financial transparency and information regarding budget preparation and approval,” and “road and transportation security” were, respectively, the highest priorities from the citizens’ viewpoint for enhancing tourism in District 22 (Table 2).
Table 2. Ranking of tourism governance criteria
On the other hand, the lowest scores were assigned to components such as economic and financial security, equal access to infrastructure, and food and health security. The overall prioritization analysis using Shannon entropy showed that transparency, decentralization, and strategic vision criteria held higher priority compared to other criteria, although this does not imply that other indicators are unimportant.
These findings highlighted the key role of managerial, communicational, and transparency components in strengthening urban tourism governance in the studied district.
Main Comparisons to Similar Studies
Findings from the present study align with numerous previous studies emphasizing the pivotal role of governance indicators in sustainable tourism development. For example, transparency emerged as the most critical indicator, consistent with Aminian and Naghavi (2018) and Shams and Hashemi Bistouni (2019), who highlight the importance of clear information flow, budget transparency, and public awareness. Similarly, Aminian et al. (2017) stressed transparent bureaucracy as essential for accountability, public trust, and civic engagement. Community participation, though challenging, is crucial for equitable benefit distribution and local empowerment, echoing Asadbak et al. (2023) and Reindrawati (2023), who emphasize the role of NGOs, access to information, and institutional support in fostering local involvement. Decentralization was also prioritized, paralleling Barros and Dieke (2008) and Tosun and Timothy (2001), who argue that devolving power enhances tourism management efficiency. Furthermore, the emphasis on justice and efficiency reflects findings by Ziaee and Asadian Ardakani (2021) and Cvelbar et al. (2016), who associate equitable development and competitive destinations with good tourism governance.
Suggestions
It is recommended that other researchers examine additional urban areas, especially within the city of Tehran.
Conclusion
The effective indicators of good tourism governance at the level of District 22 in Tehran included justice, accountability, transparency, decentralization, efficiency, responsibility, justice, participation, and strategic vision, with the most important being transparency, decentralization, and strategic vision.
Acknowledgments: None reported by the authors.
Ethical Permission: None reported by the authors.
Conflict of Interest: This article is derived from the first author’s dissertation. There are no conflicts of interest regarding the writing and publication of this article.
Authors’ Contributions: Aghanasab A (First author), Main Researcher/Introduction Writer/Discussion Writer/Methodologist/Statistical Analyst (35%); Adibi Saadinejad F (Second author), Main Researcher/Introduction Writer/Discussion Writer/Methodologist/Statistical Analyst (35%); Arbabi Sabzevari A (Third author), Main Researcher/Introduction Writer/Discussion Writer/Methodologist/Statistical Analyst (30%).
Funding: None reported by the authors.
Since the 1980s, the concept of sustainable tourism has been discussed in the academic literature, with a primary focus on issues such as environmental impacts, community participation, and ecotourism. However, the topic of governance in tourism has been less explored and has only recently attracted attention as a key factor in sustainable development.
Previous Studies
Previous studies in the field of sustainable tourism have mainly focused on issues such as carbon dioxide emissions (Becken & Patterson, 2006), resource depletion and waste generation (Sierra-Huelsz & Kainer, 2018), and local community participation (Dupre et al., 2016). Additionally, research has explored ecotourism and mass tourism (Butcher, 2007; Scheyvens, 1999). In terms of governance, the emphasis has been on the shift from state-centered governance to network governance (Bramwell & Lane, 2011), the emergence of postmodern forms of governance (Hristov & Zehrer, 2015), and the impact of institutional structures on tourism development (Dos Anjos & Kennell, 2019). Studies have also examined the role of institutional quality in economic growth and development (Hall & Jones, 1999; Rodrik, 2004). The importance of political stability and its impact on tourism has been investigated in case studies such as Bosnia and Herzegovina, Lebanon, and Ireland (Causevic & Lynch, 2013; Issa & Altinay, 2006; O’Brien, 2012).
Aim(s)
The aim of this study was to design a conceptual model for promoting the tourism industry based on good governance, with a case study conducted in District 22 of Tehran.
Research Type
This study was applied in nature.
Research Society, Place and Time
The research population in this study consisted of two groups: first, experts and specialists in the fields of urban planning and tourism; second, the residents of District 22 of Tehran. This research was conducted as a case study in District 22 of Tehran, and it was carried out in the year 2023-2024.
Sampling Method and Number
This study employed two sampling methods: Purposive sampling was used to select 31 experts in the fields of urban planning and tourism in order to assess the content validity of the questionnaire. Simple random sampling was applied to select 383 residents of District 22 of Tehran, based on Cochran’s formula, taking into account statistical attrition and the margin of error.
Used Devices & Materials
For data collection in this study, documentary and library research, field studies, and a researcher-made questionnaire were used. The questionnaire included 48 items based on a four-point Likert scale (ranging from "very desirable" to "very undesirable"). After assessing its validity and reliability, 32 items were approved in the first stage, and 31 items in the second stage. Data analysis was conducted using SPSS version 27 and the Shannon entropy method.
Findings by Text
In this study, the effectiveness of various tourism governance indicators on urban governance in District 22 of Tehran was analyzed from the citizens’ perspective using multiple regression analysis. The results showed that the examined indicators had a significant impact on urban governance (Table 1). Among these, indicators such as decentralization (with a standardized coefficient of 0.615 and significance level of 0.038), security (0.714 and 0.033), and transparency (0.408 and 0.041) had the highest positive effects. Additionally, indicators of efficiency and effectiveness, justice, accountability, and strategic vision also had significant effects, though their impact levels varied. Conversely, participation and responsibility had a significant but negative effect on urban governance.
Table 1. Assessment of the effectiveness of tourism governance indicators at the level of district 22, Tehran, from the citizens’ perspective
After confirming the influence of the indicators, the Shannon entropy method was used to prioritize them in improving tourism governance. The results indicated that the components of “optimal communication between officials and stakeholders,” “establishment of virtual communication channels with the public,” “transparency in operations and public awareness of results and feedback,” “financial transparency and information regarding budget preparation and approval,” and “road and transportation security” were, respectively, the highest priorities from the citizens’ viewpoint for enhancing tourism in District 22 (Table 2).
Table 2. Ranking of tourism governance criteria
On the other hand, the lowest scores were assigned to components such as economic and financial security, equal access to infrastructure, and food and health security. The overall prioritization analysis using Shannon entropy showed that transparency, decentralization, and strategic vision criteria held higher priority compared to other criteria, although this does not imply that other indicators are unimportant.
These findings highlighted the key role of managerial, communicational, and transparency components in strengthening urban tourism governance in the studied district.
Main Comparisons to Similar Studies
Findings from the present study align with numerous previous studies emphasizing the pivotal role of governance indicators in sustainable tourism development. For example, transparency emerged as the most critical indicator, consistent with Aminian and Naghavi (2018) and Shams and Hashemi Bistouni (2019), who highlight the importance of clear information flow, budget transparency, and public awareness. Similarly, Aminian et al. (2017) stressed transparent bureaucracy as essential for accountability, public trust, and civic engagement. Community participation, though challenging, is crucial for equitable benefit distribution and local empowerment, echoing Asadbak et al. (2023) and Reindrawati (2023), who emphasize the role of NGOs, access to information, and institutional support in fostering local involvement. Decentralization was also prioritized, paralleling Barros and Dieke (2008) and Tosun and Timothy (2001), who argue that devolving power enhances tourism management efficiency. Furthermore, the emphasis on justice and efficiency reflects findings by Ziaee and Asadian Ardakani (2021) and Cvelbar et al. (2016), who associate equitable development and competitive destinations with good tourism governance.
Suggestions
It is recommended that other researchers examine additional urban areas, especially within the city of Tehran.
Conclusion
The effective indicators of good tourism governance at the level of District 22 in Tehran included justice, accountability, transparency, decentralization, efficiency, responsibility, justice, participation, and strategic vision, with the most important being transparency, decentralization, and strategic vision.
Acknowledgments: None reported by the authors.
Ethical Permission: None reported by the authors.
Conflict of Interest: This article is derived from the first author’s dissertation. There are no conflicts of interest regarding the writing and publication of this article.
Authors’ Contributions: Aghanasab A (First author), Main Researcher/Introduction Writer/Discussion Writer/Methodologist/Statistical Analyst (35%); Adibi Saadinejad F (Second author), Main Researcher/Introduction Writer/Discussion Writer/Methodologist/Statistical Analyst (35%); Arbabi Sabzevari A (Third author), Main Researcher/Introduction Writer/Discussion Writer/Methodologist/Statistical Analyst (30%).
Funding: None reported by the authors.
Keywords:
References
1. Aminian N, Seyyed Naghavi MA (2018). Presenting pattern of good governance of tourism in Iran. Tourism Management Studies. 13(42):72-102. [Persian] [Link]
2. Aminian N, Seyyed Naghavi MA, Jahaniyan M, Emami SM (2017). Assessing the indicators of good governance in development of urban tourism (case study: City of Tehran). 5(18):127-139. [Persian] [Link]
3. Asadbak M, Rezaei Manesh B, Sharifizadeh F (2023). Analyzing the dimensions of citizens' social participation in realizing good governance. Governance and Development Journal. 3(2):63-88. [Link]
4. Barros CP, Dieke PU (2008). Technical efficiency of African hotels. International Journal of Hospitality Management. 27(3):438-447. [Link] [DOI:10.1016/j.ijhm.2007.11.004]
5. Becken S, Patterson M (2006). Measuring national carbon dioxide emissions from tourism as a key step towards achieving sustainable tourism. Journal of Sustainable Tourism. 14(4):323-338. [Link] [DOI:10.2167/jost547.0]
6. Bramwell B, Lane B (2011). Critical research on the governance of tourism and sustainability. Journal of Sustainable Tourism. 19(4-5):411-421. [Link] [DOI:10.1080/09669582.2011.580586]
7. Brauer R, Dymitrow M, Tribe J (2019). The impact of tourism research. Annals of Tourism Research. 77:64-78. [Link] [DOI:10.1016/j.annals.2019.05.006]
8. Butcher J (2007). Ecotourism, NGOs and development: A critical analysis. London: Routledge. [Link] [DOI:10.4324/9780203962077]
9. Castelnovo W, Misuraca G, Savoldelli A (2016). Smart cities governance: The need for a holistic approach to assessing urban participatory policy making. Social Science Computer Review. 34(6):724-739. [Link] [DOI:10.1177/0894439315611103]
10. Causevic S, Lynch P (2013). Political (in) stability and its influence on tourism development. Tourism Management. 34(C):145-157. [Link] [DOI:10.1016/j.tourman.2012.04.006]
11. Chaperon S (2017). Tourism industry responses to public-private partnership arrangements for destination management organisations in small island economies: A case study of Jersey, Channel Islands. International Journal of Tourism Policy. 7(1):23-41. [Link] [DOI:10.1504/IJTP.2017.10003750]
12. Cvelbar LK, Dwyer L, Koman M, Mihalič T (2016). Drivers of destination competitiveness in tourism: A global investigation. Journal of Travel Research. 55(8):1041-1050. [Link] [DOI:10.1177/0047287515617299]
13. Dos Anjos FA, Kennell J (2019). Tourism, governance and sustainable development. Sustainability. 11(16):4257. [Link] [DOI:10.3390/su11164257]
14. Dupre K, Dai L, Xu B (2016). Climate change in Chinese rural village: Is the community aware? A case study in Cuandixia, using the photovoice method. International Journal of Tourism Cities. 2(4):281-293. [Link] [DOI:10.1108/IJTC-07-2016-0016]
15. Fombrun C, Shanley M (1990). What's in a name? Reputation building and corporate strategy. The Academy of Management Journal. 33(2):233-258. [Link] [DOI:10.5465/256324]
16. Halkier H, Müller DK, Goncharova NA, Kiriyanova L, Kolupanova IA, Yumatov KV, et al (2018). Destination development in Western Siberia: Tourism governance and evolutionary economic geography. Tourism Geographies. 21(2):261-283. [Link] [DOI:10.1080/14616688.2018.1490808]
17. Hall CM (2011). A typology of governance and its implications for tourism policy analysis. Journal of Sustainable Tourism. 19(4-5):437-457. [Link] [DOI:10.1080/09669582.2011.570346]
18. Hall RE, Jones CI (1999). Why do some countries produce so much more output per worker than others. The Quarterly Journal of Economics. 114(1):83-116. [Link] [DOI:10.3386/w6564]
19. Higgins-Desbiolles F (2018). Sustainable tourism: Sustaining tourism or something more?. Tourism Management Perspectives. 25:157-160. [Link] [DOI:10.1016/j.tmp.2017.11.017]
20. Hristov D, Zehrer A (2015). The destination paradigm continuum revisited: DMOs serving as leadership networks. Tourism Review. 70(2):116-131. [Link] [DOI:10.1108/TR-08-2014-0050]
21. Islam MW, Ruhanen L, Ritchie BW (2018). Adaptive co-management: A novel approach to tourism destination governance?. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management. 37:97-106. [Link] [DOI:10.1016/j.jhtm.2017.10.009]
22. Issa IA, Altinay L (2006). Impacts of political instability on tourism planning and development: The case of Lebanon. Tourism Economics. 12(3):361-381. [Link] [DOI:10.5367/000000006778493664]
23. Jamal T, Camargo BA (2018). Tourism governance and policy: Whither justice?. Tourism Management Perspectives. 25:205-208. [Link] [DOI:10.1016/j.tmp.2017.11.009]
24. Nowak JJ, Petit S (2021). A reconsideration of tourism specialization in Europe. Tourism Economics. 27(8):1833-1838. [Link] [DOI:10.1177/1354816620937508]
25. O'Brien A (2012). Wasting a good crisis: Developmental failure and Irish tourism since 2008. Annals of Tourism Research. 39(2):1138-1155. [Link] [DOI:10.4324/9780203939116]
26. Pulido-Fernandez JI, Pulido-Fernandez MDLC (2018). Proposal for an indicators system of tourism governance at tourism destination level. Social Indicators Research. 137:695-743. [Link] [DOI:10.1007/s11205-017-1627-z]
27. Rastgari M, Bozorgmehr K, Ebrahimi Jamnani L, Haghzad A (2024). Presenting the model of establishing electronic tourism in the tourism development of the coastal cities of Mazandaran Province using the grounded theory. Geographical Research. 2024;39(1):25-36. [Persian] [Link]
28. Reindrawati DY (2023). Challenges of community participation in tourism planning in developing countries. Cogent Social Sciences. 9(1):2164240. [Link] [DOI:10.1080/23311886.2022.2164240]
29. Rezvani MR, Sabaghpour M, Shafia S (2018). The role of the key players in the governance of e-tourism in Iran. Tourism Management Studies. 12(40):41-82. [Persian] [Link]
30. Riensche M, Castillo A, García-Frapolli E, Moreno-Casasola P, Tello-Díaz C (2019). Private over public interests in regional tourism governance: A case study in Costalegre, Mexico. Sustainability. 11(6):1760. [Link] [DOI:10.3390/su11061760]
31. Ridderstaat J, Oduber M, Croes R, Nijkamp P (2014). Impacts of seasonal pattern of climate on recurrent fluctuations in tourism demand: Evidence from Aruba. Tourism management. 41:245-256. [Link] [DOI:10.1016/j.tourman.2013.09.005]
32. Rodrik D (2004). Industrial policy for the twenty-first century. Centre for Economic Policy Research. Rochester: SSRN. [Link] [DOI:10.2139/ssrn.617544]
33. Scheyvens R (1999). Ecotourism and the empowerment of local communities. Tourism Management. 20(2):245-149. [Link] [DOI:10.1016/S0261-5177(98)00069-7]
34. Schubert SF, Brida JG, Risso WA (2011). The impacts of international tourism demand on economic growth of small economies dependent on tourism. Tourism Management. 32(2):377-385. [Link] [DOI:10.1016/j.tourman.2010.03.007]
35. Shams M, Hashemi Bistouni M (2019). Prioritizing indicators of good urban governance from the perspective of citizens in Biston city. Quarterly Journal of Geography and Environmental Studies. 8(29):81-92. [Persian] [Link]
36. Sierra-Huelsz JA, Kainer KA (2018). Tourism consumption of biodiversity: A global exploration of forest product use in thatched tropical resort architecture. Geoforum. 94:1-11. [Link] [DOI:10.1016/j.geoforum.2018.06.004]
37. Tosun C, Timothy DJ (2001). Shortcomings in planning approaches to tourism development in developing countries: The case of Turkey. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management. 13(7):352-359. [Link] [DOI:10.1108/09596110110403910]
38. Weaver DB (2014). Asymmetrical dialectics of sustainable tourism: Toward enlightened mass tourism. Journal of Travel Research. 53(2):131-140. [Link] [DOI:10.1177/0047287513491335]
39. Ziaee M, Asadian Ardakani F (2021). A framework for leveling good governance factors in the sustainable development of tourism destinations (case study: Maybod City). Spatial Planning. 11(1):1-26. [Persian] [Link]