THE CONTRIBUTION OF COMMUNITY BASED TOURISM ACTIVITIES IN THE
SOCIO ECONOMIC WELL BEING OF RURAL POPULATION.
METHODOLOGY
3.1 Introduction
This chapter deals with the descriptions of methods that will be used to carry out the study. The
subsections includes research design, study location, target population, sampling procedures and
sample size, research instrumentation and their validity and reliability, methods of data collection
and data analysis.
3.2 Research Design
The study will adopt the descriptive survey research design to study the socio-economic effects
of illicit brew in Kenya. According to Lovell and Lawson (1971) descriptive research is
concerned with conditions that already exist, practices that are held, processes that are ongoing
and trends that are developing . Descriptive survey research design is most appropriate when the
purpose of study is to create a detailed description of an issue (Mugenda & Mugenda, 1999).
3.3 Location of the Study
This study will be carried out in Kitui County.
3.4 Target Population
The total population for this study will be 500 community members. The population will
constitute of community members, tour guides and government officials from this region.
3.5 Sampling Procedure and Sample Size
According to Kothari (1985), Mugenda and Mugenda (1999) and Peter (1996) in a descriptive
survey, a sample enables a researcher to gain information about the population. The community
members were selected; they could understand the questionnaire items and would give
appropriate responses. Gay (1992) suggests that at least 10% of the population is a good
representation where the population is large and 20% where the population is small. The 20% of
the target population of 500 respondents made a sample size of 100 respondents. Simple
stratified random sampling will be used to select village members where they will come from.
Stratified sampling is suitable when dealing with homogenous subgroups like community
members which forms several segments or stratas. Random sampling is then selected for each
strata (Mugenda & Mugenda, 1999).
3.6 Data Collection Methods and Instruments
Questionnaires were used as the main data collecting tools and used structure and unstructured
questionnaires. The selection of these tools was guided by the nature of data that was collected,
time available and objectives of the study.
The questionnaires were designed and delivered to all respondents in the institution since the
questionnaires were self administered thus reduce the cost, saved time and avoided prejudice.
The questionnaire was divided into two parts. The first part were on personal information and the
second part was on issues relating to socio economic effects of illicit brew to community and
there welfare.
The type of the questions asked will be both closed and open ended. The advantages of this type
of questions are the simplicity in the giving answers. Respondents with busy schedules preferred
this kind of questionnaire most of their time. The other advantage of closed questions is that the
answers given will be relevant. In open ended questions space will be provided for respondents
to give relevant answers. This gives respondents freedom to decide on how to express their
feelings and also makes the respondent to think before answering.
The questionnaire is considered to be effective in the study because;
It is uneconomical way of collecting data compared to other collection tools.
Respondent rate is expected to be high less data compared to other collection
tools
The presence of the researcher at the time of data collection is not necessary as
the questionnaire is self administering.
Finally it can easily be used to collect data.
3.6 Validity and Reliability
3.6.1 Validity
According to Paton (2000), validity is the quality attributed to proposition or measures to the
degree to which they conform to established knowledge or truth. An attitude scale is considered
valid, for example, to the degree to which its results conform to other measures of possession of
the attitude. Validity therefore refers to the extent to which an instrument can measure what it
ought to measure. It refers to the extent to which an instrument asks the right questions in terms
of accuracy.
The researcher discussed the items in the instrument with the supervisors, lecturers from the
department and colleagues. These people were expected to indicate by tick or cross for every
item in the questionnaire if it measure what it is supposed to measure or not.
3.6.2Reliability
According to Mugenda and Mugenda (1999), the reliability of an instrument is the measure of
the degree to which a research instrument yields consistent results or data after repeated trials. In
order to test the reliability of the instrument to be used in the study, the test- retest method will
be used. The questionnaire will be administered twice within an interval of two weeks.
3.7 Data Analysis and Presentation
After the field work, the questionnaires will be checked for completeness to ensure that every
questionnaire is filled. Data capturing will be done using SPSS software. The researcher will use
computer packages to analyze the data and the data will be presented in form graphical, pie chars
and tables.
REFERENCES
Akunaay, Mustapha, Fred Nelson and Elizabeth Singleton (2003) “Community Basted Tourism
in Tanzania: Potantial and Perils in Practice”, 2nd IITP African
Conference on Pease Thourough Tourism, 2003
Ap, J. (1992). Residents perceptions on tourism impacts. Annals of Tourism Research 19, 665-
690.
Ap, J., & Crompton, J. (1993). Residents’ strategies for responding to tourism impacts. Journal
of Travel Research 31(3), 47-50.
Ashley, C., H. Goodwin, D. McNab, M. Scott and L. Chaves (2006):
Becken, S., D. Simmons and C. Frampton (2003): Segmenting Tourists by their Travel Pattern
for Insights into Achieving Energy Efficiency. Journal of Travel
Research, 42(1), 48-56.
Bien, A. et al. (2008): “Sustainable Tourism Baseline Criteria Report (2007): Global Sustainable
Tourism Criteria.
Bishop, J., S. Kapila, F. Hicks, P. Mitchell, and F. Vorhies (2008): Building Biodiversity
Business. Shell International Limited and the International Union for
Conservation of Nature: London, UK, and Gland, Switzerland.
Blackstock, K. (2005). A critical look at community based tourism. Community Development
Journal 40(1), 39-49.
Brohman, J. (1996). New directions for tourism in the Third World. Annals of Tourism Research
23(1), 48-70.
Bujra, J. (2006). Lost in translation? The use of interpreters in fieldwork. In V. Desai & R.B.
Potter, (eds), Doing development research (pp. 172-179). London: SAGE
publications Ltd.
Bull, A. (1995). The economics of travel and tourism. Longman. Business Register March 2006,
Statistics Canada, Total Tourism Sector and Labour Force Survey 2006,
Statistics Canada Travel Alberta Business Strategy 2010-2013.
By, R. and C. Dale. (2008): “The successful management of organisational change in tourism
SMEs: initial findings in UK visitor attractions.” The International Journal
of Tourism Research,
Chang, W. (2001): Variations in multipliers and related economic ratios for recreation and
tourism impact analysis.
Choi, H. S. C., & Sirikaya, E. (2005). Measuring residents’ attitudes toward sustainable tourism:
Development of sustainable tourism attitude scale. Journal of Travel
Research 43, 380-394. community participation; Khama Rhino Sanctuary
Trust, Botswana. Journal of Sustainable Tourism 19(1), 97-114.
Cooper, C., J. Fletcher, A. Fyall, D. Gilbert and S. Wanhill (2008): Tourism: Principles and
Practice. Essex: Pearson Education Limited.
Cortina, J.M. (1993). What is coefficient alpha? An examination of theory and application.
Journal of Applied Psychology 78(1), 98-104.
Dalem, A.A.G.R. (2002): “Ecotourism in Indonesia.” Asian Productivity Organization.
Dogan, H. (1989). Forms of adjustment: Sociocultural impacts of tourism. Annals of Tourism
Research 16(2), 216-236.
Doxy, G. (1975). A causation theory of visitor-resident irritants: Methodology and research
inferences. In Proceedings of the Travel Research Association (pp. 195-
198). San Diego.
Driml, S., J. Robinson, A. Tkaczynski and L. Dwyer (2010): Tourism Investment in Australia: A
Scoping Study. Queensland: Sustainable Tourism Cooperative Research
Centre
Ecotourism Society (TIES) (2005): “Consumer Demand and Operator Support for Socially and
Environmentally Responsible Tourism.” CESD/TIES Working Paper No.
104. April 2005.
Fortuny, M., Soler, R., Cánovas, C., and Sánchez, A. (2008): “Technical approach for a
sustainable tourism development.
France, L. (1998). Local participation in tourism in the West Indian Islands. In E. Laws, B.
Faulkner & G. Moscardo (eds), Embracing and managing change in
tourism: International case studies (pp. 222-234). London: Routledge.
Goodwin, H. (2006) Community-based tourism failing to deliver?. ID 21 Insight 62. London:
Department for International Development.
Goodwin, H. (2011). Taking responsibility for tourism: responsible tourism management.
Oxford: Goodfellow Publishers Limited.
Gössling, S. (2005): In Tourism Recreation and Climate Change.
Gössling, S. (2010): Background Report (Water) prepared for the tourism chapter of the UNEP
Green Economy Report.
Gössling, S. and Hall, C M (eds.) (2006): Tourism and Global Environmental Change:
Ecological, Social and Political Interrelationships. Routeledge, London.
Hagler Bailly, Inc. (1998): “Assessment of Voluntary International Environmental Certification
Programs. Report prepared for Jamaican Hotel and Tourist Association,
Arlingon, VA: Halger Bailly.
Hall, C.M. and Coles, T. (2008): “Introduction: Tourism and international business.” In T. Coles
and C.M. Hall (Ed.), International Business and Tourism:
Hall, M. C., & Lew, A. A. (2009). Understanding and managing tourism impacts: An integrated
approach. New York: Routledge.
Hamele, H. and S. Eckhartd (2006): Environmental Initiatives by European Tourism Businesses.
A contribution to the development of sustainable tourism in Europe.
Hatton, M. J. (1999). Community-based tourism in the Asia Pacific. Ontario/CTC/APEC: School
of Media Studies, Humber College.
