Destination Marketing of Tourism

1. Portonova Vellar Estuaries:
Testing of New Inclusive Innovative
Eco-Tourism Development in the
Bay of Bengal, South India
Dr. Mutharasu A Selvarasu Professor &
Dr.Manivannan Kaliyaperumal, Director
(Academic Affairs)
Annamalai University,Tamilnadu,India.

2. Tourism

14. Attributes

15. Attributes

16. Need for the Study
Vellar Estuaries is a potential area for development of
ecotourism as it is naturally gifted with mangrove forest,
beaches and Islands.
The local communities fishing related activities have been
constrained after the intervention of power projects and
other industrial initiatives.

17. Research Problem
❖ The tourism at Vellar Estuaries is partially promoted Tamilnadu
Tourism Development Corporation (TTDC) in the form of Mangrove
Boating Tourism (MBT)
❖ There are two more tourism potential available and they are Estuaries
Mouth Tourism(EMT) and Small Island Tourism (SIT).
❖ The alternatives of Tourist product have not been educated to tourist
who come for the pleasure of boating.

18. Objectives
1. To rank the single and combo ecotourist product and
services among tourist visiting Pichavaram tourism
destination.
2. To analyse the preparedness of tourist towards the
strength and opportunity available in Vellar Estuary
keeping aside its weakness and threats.

19. Research Methodology
Research Design: The design of the research is concept testing by ranking tourist
products and services
Sample Design: Data collected from 35 students at post graduate , doctoral level
and from 35 tourist respondents who visited the destination.
Operational Design: Data collected by using 16 pictorial profiles and focussed
depth interview .
Statistical Design: Conjoint Analysis is used to ascertain utility score and SWOT
Analysis was used to analyse the preparedness of tourist towards cooperative
ecotourism.

20. Hypothesis
H01: Tourist prefer multiple pleasure experience more than
single form eco tourist product and service
H02: The tourist are prepared to opt for multiple tourism
choices in the strength and opportunities in the existing
tourism destination

21. Tour package profiles 1-8
card ID Tour Package Price Time Boating Tourist Food
1 SIT-SINGLE Low Long Rowing Group Yes
2 MBT-SIT-COMBO High Short Motor Group Yes
3 SIT-EMT-COMBO High Short Rowing Individual Yes
4 MBT-SINGLE Low Short Motor Group Yes
5 EMT-SINGLE High Long Motor Individual Yes
6 MBT-SINGLE High Long Rowing Individual No
7 MBT-EMT-
COMBO
Low Short Motor Individual No
8 MBT-EMT-
COMBO
High Long Rowing Group Yes

22. Pictorial profile 1-4

23. Pictorial profile 5-8

24. Tour Package Profiles 9-16
Card ID Tour Package Price Time Boating Tourist Food
9 MBT-SINGLE High Long Motor Group No
10 MBT-SIT-EMT-COMBO High Short Rowing Group No
11 MBT-SIT-COMBO Low Long Rowing Individual No
12 EMT-SINGLE Low Short Rowing Group No
13 MBT-SINGLE Low Short Rowing Individual Yes
14 SIT-SINGLE High Short Motor Individual No
15 SIT-SMT-COMBO Low Long Motor Group No
16 MBT-SIT-EMT-COMBO Low Long Motor Individual Yes

25. Pictorial Profile 9-12

26. Pictorial Profile 13-16

27. Conjoint Analysis
Profile of Tourist Product
Utilities
Profile of Tourist Product Utility Estimate Std.E
rror
Tour package MBT-SINGLE -.434 .776
SIT-SINGLE -.425 1.020
EMT-SINGLE -.147 1.020
MBT-SIT -COMBO 1.298 1.020
SIT-EMT-COMBO -.110 1.020
MBT-EMT-COMBO .872 1.020
MBT-SIT-EMT-
COMBO
-1.054 1.020
Boat Row boat .093 .392
Motor boat -.093 .392
Profile of the Tourist
product
Utility
Estimate
Std.Err
or
Tourist individual -.542 .392
group .542 .392
Seafood Yes .472 .392
No -.472 .392
Price low -1.250 .784
High -2.500 1.568
Time Short duration .676 .784
Long duration 1.352 1.568
(Constant) 9.415 1.712

28. Conjoint Analysis
Estimates
Averaged Importance Score Values
Tourpackage 42.826
Boat 8.183
Tourist 12.670
Seafood 11.731
Price 15.950
Time 8.640
Coefficient
B coefficient Estimate
Price -1.250
Time .676
Correlationsa
Value Sig.
Pearson’s R 0.846 .000
Kendall’s tau 0.588 .001
a. Correlations between observed and estimated
preferences

29. SWOT Analysis
Favourable Unfavourable
Internal: Strength
i. Preferred destination: Natural surroundings (17.14%), Boating services
(22.86%), Mangrove forest (40.00%), Islands (14.29%), Eco park awareness
center (5.71%)
ii. Group Tourism: Family(31.43%) and friends(40.00%)
iii. Coordination: support from local fishing community (88.57%)
iv. Tourist attraction: offer double boating service opportunity (77.14%)
v. Access ability :Availability of Transport facilities (68.57%)
vi. Uniqueness :Mangrove forest are unique (60.00%) ecotourism, Professionalism
by Tourist guides (42.86%)
Internal: Weakness
i. Rules and regulations: Strict enforcement 45.71%).
ii. Scope: Areas need to be explored (40.00%)
iii. Specialized Services : Sensitive local people
(37.14%)
iv. Accommodation : Lack of good accommodation
(31.43%)
v. Waste: Lack of improvement (20.00%)
External: Opportunities
i. Foreign tourist: Attraction campaign (71.43%)
ii. Seasonality: Vocational (65.71%)
iii. Mass tourism: development: Promote beach tourism (62.86%)
iv. Local product and sea food: Increase in sales (60.00%)
v. Cooperative tourism: Existing fisher can initiate
a.Cooperative Ecotourism (54.29%),
b.development of hotels and restaurants (51.43%)
vi. Local people participation as home guard workforce to improve security
(54.29%)
vii. Revenue Leads to development: (51.43%)
External: Threat
i. Threat to life among tourist due to poor security
force(80.00%).
ii. Support: lack of involvement from workforce
(37.14%)
iii. Competition: Unhealthy competition (20.00%)

30. Findings
1. MBT-SIT combo has higher utility value indicating greater preference followed by MBT-EMT combo
2. Least preference are given for single tour packages like MBT, SIT and EMT.
3. MBT-SIT-EMT combo was also less preferred and has negative utility value of -1.054.
4. There is inverse relationship between price and utility with high price corresponding to lower utility score
5. Group tourism, Long duration and provision for seafood has higher utility as expected.
6. Row boat has more utility value than Motor boat.
7. The linear Regression coefficient for Price and Time are -1.250 and 0.676 respectively.
8. Tour package has most influence on overall preference followed by Price. Boat type was given least preference
9. Pearson’s R correlation coefficient value is 0.846 which is greater than 0.7 indicating strong positive relationship
between observed and estimated preference and this supports Hypothesis1.

31. Findings
10. Kendall’s tau coefficient value is 0.588 which shows positive towards degree of concordance between observed and
estimated preference.
11. Preference of Tourist are highly influenced by the tour packages offered.
12. Tourist would like to travel in groups, prefer combo of any two combination using rowboat for long duration and less
price with provision for seafood
13. The presence of Mangrove forest, boating service, group tourism and coordination of local people add strength
( 42.38%) even though there are some Weakness(34.86%) related to strict rules & regulations, Lack of good
communication & Waste management practices.
14. The existing threat (40.71%) is due to poor security force, lack of involvement of workforce and unhealthy competition
but it can be compensated by available opportunities (58.93%) like participation of local people as home guard to
improve security, development of cooperative tourism, sale of local products and increase in revenue. Since
percentage of opportunity is more than the threat it supports hypothesis2.
15. The internal factor contribute to 38.62% while the external factors contribute to 49.82% for attaining the objectives.

32. Suggestions and Recommendations
❖ There is possibility for developing floating market at Porto Nova combining all three Tourism.
❖ Implementation of cooperative ecotourism with innovation will contribute to Economic Growth.
❖ Government should support these activities Through
- New policy formulation
- Provision for Incentives
- Providing Business licence
- Offering loan facilities for operating Tourism projects .

33. House Boat

34. House Boat Type 2

35. Conclusion
❖ Tourism is a Global leisure activity and is a major source of income for many countries
❖ An attempt is made to study the awareness, preference for alternative tourist packages and
Preparedness for cooperative ecotourism.
❖ Data was collected by using pictorial profile , interview schedule and are analyzed through conjoint
analysis and SWOt analysis.
❖ It is found that tourist would like to travel in groups, prefer combo of any two combination using
rowboat for long duration and less price with provision for seafood.
❖ SWOT analysis revealed that mangrove forest , boating services and coordination oby fishing
community are main strength of the study area.
❖ Strict enforcement of rules and sensitiveness of local community are found as the weakness of this
area.
❖ There is opportunity for developing cooperative ecotourism. Involvement of local people and their
participation as home guards, can overcome the prevailing Threat due to poor security force.
❖ Floating market contribute a lot to Thailand’s economy. similarly implementation of cooperative

36. GOOD THOUGHTS,GOOD INNOVATIVE IDEAS
WILL ALWAYS GIVE GOOD RESULTS
THANKYOU