Persepsi Wisatawan Tentang Daya Tarik Wisata Danau Kerinci

##plugins.themes.academic_pro.article.main##

Aini Wirya
lise asnur

Abstract

The background of this research is the observation of Lake Kerinci and several negative reviews of tourists about Lake Kerinci found on google reviews, such as fish cages in Lake Kerinci which were established freely and uncontrollably, causing the natural scenery of Lake Kerinci to be disturbed and polluted, accessibility difficulties for tourists who using public transportation, water shortages in public toilets, causing the cleanliness of the toilets to not be maintained, there are still illegal collection activities (Pungli), and the number of trash bins is still small and inadequate, causing a lot of garbage to be scattered along with the absence of cleaners. This research aims to find out what tourists think about the tourist attraction of Lake Kerinci which is reviewed using indicators: attraction, accessibility, amenities and ancillary service. This research is a quantitative descriptive research, The research sample amounted to 82 people from 428 population and used accidental sampling technique. The data was obtained by distributing a structured questionnaire using a Likert Scale. Data analysis used descriptive analysis to categorize respondents' answers. The results of the study stated that the perception of tourists about the tourist attraction of Lake Kerinci is categorized as bad with a percentage of 40%. (1) Based on the attraction indicator, it is categorized as bad with a percentage of 54%. (2) Based on the indicators of accessibility (accessibility) is categorized as sufficient with a percentage of 67%. (3) Based on the indicators of amenities (facilities) are categorized as bad with a percentage of 42%. (4) based on the ancillary service indicator (supporting facilities) it is categorized as bad with a percentage of 34%.

##plugins.themes.academic_pro.article.details##

How to Cite
Wirya, A., & asnur, lise. (2022). Persepsi Wisatawan Tentang Daya Tarik Wisata Danau Kerinci. JURNAL KAJIAN PARIWISATA DAN BISNIS PERHOTELAN, 3(1), 69-76. https://doi.org/10.24036/jkpbp.v3i1.33372

References

[1] A.J, Muljadi. 2012. Kepariwisataan dan Perjalanan, Jakarta: Raja Grafindo Persada.
[2] Desmita. 2011. Psikologi Perkembangan Peserta Didik. Bandung: PT. Remaja Rosdakarya Offset.
[3] Kotler, Philip and Kevin Lane Keller. 2016. Marketing Management. 15th Edition. Pearson
Education. Inc.
[4] Sunaryo, Bambang. 2013. Kebijakan Pembangunan Destinasi Pariwisata Konsep dan Aplikasinya di Indonesia. Yogyakarta: Gava Media.
[5] Putra, Putu Karyana. 2018. Identifikasi Komponen Daya Tarik Wisata dan Pengelolaan Pantai Labuan Sait, Desa Adat Pecatu, Kabupaten Bandung. Jurnal Destinasi Pariwisata. Vol.6 No.2, Hal. 292-298.
[6] Republik Indonesia. 2009. Undang-Undang No.10 Tahun 2009 tentang Kepariwisataan. Sekretariat Negara. Jakarta.
[7] Ansofino. 2012. Economica, Jurnal Program Studi Pendidikan Ekonomi STKIP PGRI Sumatera Barat. Vol.1 No.1 Hal.1-17.
[8] Sugiama, A Gima. 2011. Ecotourism: Pengembangan Pariwisata berbasis konservasi alam. Bandung: Guardaya Intimarta.
[9] Hanif, S., dan Praman, D. 2018. Pengembangan Bisnis Pariwisata Dengan Media Sistem Informasi. Yogyakarta: CV. Andi Offset.
[10] Prabawati, Ni Putu Diah. 2020. Desa Canggu, Bali Sebuah Basecamp Bagi digital Nomad? Identifikasi Produk Wisata Berdasarkan 4A (Attraction, Amenity, Accessibility, Ancillary). Vol. 14 No.2 Hal.91-108.

Most read articles by the same author(s)

Obs.: This plugin requires at least one statistics/report plugin to be enabled. If your statistics plugins provide more than one metric then please also select a main metric on the admin's site settings page and/or on the journal manager's settings pages.