Constraints to consumption of South Africa's national parks among the emerging domestic tourism market

Abstract

Tourism plays a recognised role in the South African economy, even though it is faced with a number of challenges including levels of seasonality, geographic spread and differing levels of travel and tourism culture within population groups. Literature speaks to the role that domestic tourism can play in addressing these challenges. Within the South African context, emerging markets are population groups entering the market in increasing numbers as domestic tourists, especially those previously neglected during the years of segregation through apartheid. The focus of this exploratory study was to identify the constraints that deter the South African emerging black domestic market from visiting national parks, and more specifically the Kruger National Park. A survey of 350 individuals support existing literature, but highlight the importance of time, distance and affordability as constraints to this market. The study identifies areas in which products could be adapted, as well as aspects that could be considered when formulating marketing messages aimed at this market.

Keywords:

• domestic tourism
• emerging black market
• constraints
• national parks

1. Introduction

During the recent global financial crisis, the tourism industry's direct contribution to worldwide gross domestic product dropped from 3.08% in 2007 to around 2.86% at the lowest points in 2010 and 2011. Making a relatively fast recovery of 3.1% in 2013, however, and with a predicted growth of up to 4.4% in 2023, the industry once again demonstrated its resilience (WTTC, 2013). Amidst this volatility, destinations worldwide are increasingly turning toward domestic tourism as a contributor to a sustained tourism economy (Smeral, 2010). It is stated that a vibrant domestic tourism sector can ‘cushion the industry from fluctuations of the international tourism market and bring stability and predictability in the industry' (Okello et al., 2012:79). Domestic spending makes up the largest part of worldwide travel spend (70.7% in 2012) and also has a slightly larger expected growth of 4.6% in 2023 (WTTC, 2013). The continued growth in domestic tourism is linked to the trend for shorter holidays closer to home, a phenomenon referred to as ‘staycation’ (Papatheodorou et al., 2010), and global trends indicate that tourism is becoming a regional/national rather than a global phenomenon (NDT, 2011a).

Domestic tourism remains an under-researched theme in developing countries partly due to the difficulty to track domestic tourism and with governments and policy-makers placing emphasis on the attractive higher expenditures of foreign visitors (Bui & Jolliffe, 2011; Alipour et al., 2013; Ghimire, 2013; Sun et al., 2013). Both the benefits and problems of emerging mass domestic tourism have been largely ignored by policy-makers in developing countries, despite the increased importance of this market to these economies (Alipour et al., 2013; Hampton & Jeyacheya, 2014). Even in countries where the number of domestic travellers exceeds that of international travellers, domestic tourism development takes place without any systematic government planning (Ghimire, 2013). South Africa represents one of the few examples of a developing country where the national government has made domestic tourism an explicit priority (Rogerson & Lisa, 2005). The National Department of Tourism has identified increasing domestic tourism's contribution as a percentage of the overall tourism contribution to gross domestic product from 54.8% in 2009 to 60% by 2020. Strategies to achieve this include increasing domestic tourism expenditure, tourist volumes and enhancing a travel culture among South Africans (NDT, 2011b). The emerging black³ domestic market for leisure tourism presents a distinct opportunity to achieve these objectives, given the significant growth potential in terms of size and spending power displayed by this market segment (NDT, 2011a; Visagie & Posel, 2013). Despite promotional efforts that started some 20 years ago (Rogerson & Lisa, 2005), domestic trips have shown a decline and a call has been made to the industry to respond with product offerings that appeal to members across all market segments (NDT, 2011a). Such initiatives will arguably fail without sufficient market knowledge, as is the case in most developing markets (Ghimire, 2013).

An increasing number of studies are aimed at understanding the factors that drive domestic tourism in less developed countries. Examples include the study of destination loyalty (Sun et al., 2013) and the effect of income (Yang et al., 2014) among Chinese; destination choice factors among Kenyans (Mutinda & Mayaka, 2012); travel motivations among Vietnamese (Bui & Jolliffe, 2011); intrapersonal constraints among Indian travellers (Anil et al., 2010); and the experiences of Israelis being tourists in their home country (Singh & Krakover, 2015).This study therefore aimed to contribute to knowledge of a domestic market in a developing country by exploring the travel motivations and constraints to domestic travel experienced by the emerging black domestic tourism market in South Africa. As point of reference, the Kruger National Park is used as an attraction that has held enduring popularity among members of the traditional South African domestic market (Grundlingh, 2006).

2. Domestic tourism in South Africa

2.1 Overview of development and strategies

Tourism has been greatly affected by the policy of apartheid (Mkhize, 1994) and, as the domestic tourism market was traditionally dominated by a white population who had the greatest levels of wealth, mobility and access to amenities (Flutter & Wood, 1997; Koch & Massyn, 2013), the industry mostly catered to serve this white minority (Rogerson & Lisa, 2005). Only a few domestic destinations catered for black South Africans, but the facilities were limited and often poor in quality (Mkhize, 1994; Rogerson & Lisa, 2005; Grundlingh, 2006). Since the birth of democracy in South Africa in 1994, a dramatic change in the composition and nature of domestic tourism has been witnessed. Given the poor perception of the widening leisure interests of the emerging market, the industry has, however, been accused of insufficient planning, leaving the black population with limited recreational and leisure activities that do not accommodate their needs (Ferrario, 1988; NDT, 2011a). Still, much has been done to increase awareness of travel among members of this market through various promotional channels (Rogerson & Lisa, 2005).

In 2004 the national Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism launched the country's first national domestic tourism growth strategy; with a clear priority on expanding black domestic tourism. The strategy was supported by a marketing campaign run by South African Tourism, called ‘Sho't Left’, aimed at spreading the message that there were many affordable travel options available in close proximity (Rogerson & Lisa, 2005; NDT, 2011a). This was followed by the newly established National Department of Tourism's Domestic Tourism Branch and Domestic Tourism Growth Strategy (DTGS), supported by a new consumer campaign ‘Whatever you are looking for, it is here'. The new DTGS includes prioritised campaigns aimed at both the lower and higher ends of the market, to create a holiday culture among previously disadvantaged groups, and to extend visiting friends and relatives (VFR) visits into leisure tourism (NDT, 2011a). Five target markets were identified in the Marketing Growth Strategy of 2011–13 (SAT, 2010) and the DTGS (which stretches until 2020), consisting of one segment exclusively focusing on the black African population (‘Well-to-do Mzanzi Families’) and two more focusing on the black, coloured and Indian population (‘New Horizon Families’ and ‘High Life Enthusiasts’). Strategic actions to increase tourism volume include creating a domestic travel card similar to SANParks’ Wild Card and packaging linked experiences across the country, for example National Parks Footprint, in partnership with the industry (NDT, 2011a).

2.2 Current domestic market profile

By 2011 only 44% of the total South African adult population was said to be participating in domestic travel, although this number has been showing improvement (NDT, 2011a). Although VFR remained the major purpose of domestic travel, the share thereof decreased by 5% from 77% to 72% in the period July to September 2013 compared with the same period in 2012. The biggest inhibiting factors have been identified as the perception that travel is not affordable and that people have no reason to take a trip (NDT, 2011a; SAT, 2013).

2.3 The emerging black domestic tourism market

Within the South African context, emerging markets are population groups entering the market in increasing numbers as domestic tourists, especially those previously neglected (DEAT, 1996). Gradual improvement in the socio-economic position of the black population in the country has led to an expected growth of this segment to become a greater part of the domestic tourism market. This trend fits with a global trend across many developing countries where leisure travel is no longer the exclusive privilege of the upper classes, but where growth is extending beyond the growing middle class to include members of the lower middle class participating in leisure travel (Rogerson, 2004).

As an outcome of government initiatives taken after apartheid, there has been a growth of a substantial black middle class (Rogerson & Lisa, 2005; Donaldson et al., 2013; Visagie & Posel, 2013). Recent analyses of the ‘affluent households’ by racial group disclosed major shifts in the composition of the affluent in South Africa, unfortunately mostly being in an unequal manner even within racial groups (Leibbrandt et al., 2012; Tregenna & Tsela, 2012). Visagie & Posel (2013) define the African middle class as African households which received a total household income in excess of R12 000 a month and fall into the Living Standards Measure (LSM) 9 and 10 group. Within a time span of eight years (2004–12), the middle class in South Africa rose from 1.6 million to 4.2 million adults. Of these 4.2 million adults, 51% were black, 34% white, 9% coloured and 6% Indian; representing a dramatic shift from the 2004 proportions in the first two categories: 52% white, 32% black, 10% coloured and 6% Indian (Visagie & Posel, 2013). In the Income and Expenditure Survey 2010/2011, black households showed a 34.5% income increase over one year (StatsSA, 2012). Despite this growth, very little research has been focused on the ethnocentric tendencies and buying behaviour of the emerging black middle class as a consumer market (Goldberg & Jansen van Rensburg, 2013). With a duality of social identities emerging within this market, also known as the ‘black diamonds’, much remains to be researched (Donaldson et al., 2013). Similarly, little research has been done to tap into the emerging black middle class as a tourist market; with research in this field being fragmented and lacking cohesion from the researchers (NDT, 2011a). While some research has been conducted on the domestic tourism market in South Africa (Ferrario, 1988; Mkhize, 1994; Flutter & Wood, 1997; Saayman et al., 2001; Visser, 2004; Rogerson & Lisa, 2005; Grundlingh, 2006; Koch & Massyn, 2013), little remains known about the motivations, needs and preferences of this market. There seemingly remains the tendency to travel for the purpose of VFR (Rule et al., 2003; SAT, 2013), despite campaigns to encourage holiday travel that is associated with higher levels of spending (Rogerson & Lisa, 2005; NDT, 2011a).

3. Visitor markets of the Kruger National Park

By 2013 the number of black visitors (referred to as ‘black guests’) to all South African National Parks increased by 11.4% from 389 624 to 434 216, making up 25.5% of total South African guests to the Park (an increase of 1.9%). This included an increase of 10.5% for day visitors and an increase of 19.4% for overnight guests. The increase in the emerging market is in line with the organisational goals of SANParks to encourage all South Africans to consider the country's national parks as possible holiday destinations (Van der Merwe & Saayman, 2008).

The world-renowned Kruger National Park is South Africa's jewel and is world famous because of its wildlife. Its official proclamation in 1926 is said to have spurred leisure tourists to include visits to South Africa's wildlife attractions (Rogerson & Lisa, 2005) and it has held enduring popularity among members of the traditional domestic market (Grundlingh, 2006). As a key nature-based attraction in South Africa, the total number of visitors amounted to 1 450 481 over the period extending from March 2012 to March 2013; along with 913 237 bed nights sold at an occupancy rate of 77.7%. The Park accounts for 66.9% of all SANParks activities (SANParks, 2013).

4. Constraints to consume tourism products

4.1 Constraints to leisure travel

The study of tourist motivations is well established in the literature (Pearce, 2011). As tourists will often have more than one motivation to travel, the lists of tourist motivations are extensive and often present a combination of simultaneous motives (Pearce & Lee, 2005). It has been stated that the main purposes of a trip for domestic travel include pilgrimages, VFR, business travel and, increasingly, a segment of leisure travel (Rogerson, 2004). Intrinsic motivations may include relaxation, family togetherness, escapism and achievement (Bui & Jolliffe, 2011; Özel & Kozak, 2012), similar to that of international travel in many instances.

As the opposite to travel motivations, constraints have been defined as factors that limit the formation of leisure preferences and that inhibit or prohibit participation and enjoyment in leisure, often resulting in non-participation (Crawford & Godbey, 1987; Jackson, 1991). The popular Hierarchical Model of Leisure Constraints orders constraints into three categories: intrapersonal, interpersonal and structural constraints (Crawford et al., 1991), where leisure preferences are formed following the negotiation or absence of the various constraints (Gilbert & Hudson, 2000). Intrapersonal constraints are defined as individual psychological qualities that affect the development of leisure preferences, including stress, fear, shyness, depression, anxiety, reference group attitudes, perceived self-skill, and perceived appropriateness of various leisure activities (Crawford et al., 1991). Interpersonal constraints are defined as social factors appearing within social exchanges and interactions and occur as a result of interaction or the relationship between individuals’ characteristics (Nyaupane et al., 2004), including lack of interest of partners or friends to participate within the tourism product offered (Gilbert & Hudson, 2000; Thapa, 2012). Structural constraints are associated with the setting and are externally derived, including financial resources, time, access, availability of opportunity, family lifecycle, season, work schedule and climate (Crawford & Godbey, 1987). The three stages in the model are hierarchical as intrapersonal constraints are encountered first, followed by interpersonal and eventually structural constraints; or where structural constraints are followed by the negotiation of the first two types of constraints (Crawford et al., 1991). Even though the individual may negotiate around structural constraints, some of these constrains may prove to be insurmountable (Hinch & Higham, 2011). This process of negotiation is increasingly receiving attention in the constraints literature to move beyond measuring the mere perceptions of constraints, but rather exploring deeper-rooted factors that contribute to the formation of such perceptions (Godbey et al., 2010).

Jackson (1993) also identified six dimensions of constraints that appear to be common across settings: social isolation, characteristics that involve interaction between people; accessibility, lack of or limited access to transportation; personal reasons, representing an individual's abilities or motivations; cost, experience costs or the cost of equipment; time, referring to levels and intensity of participation; and facility, crowding and maintenance. Several researchers have explored constraints within the tourism context. Hung & Petrick (2012) tested the Motivation–Opportunity–Ability model to explain travel intentions, highlighting the importance of constraint negotiation. Some of the constraints that can be associated with the tourism industry, and that can affect the consumption of its product offerings, include lack of money, insufficient time, inaccessibility, and unsuitable weather conditions (Thapa, 2012).

In the South African context, constraints to domestic travel have been identified as ‘cannot afford to travel', ‘no reason to take a trip', ‘time constraints', ‘no income/unemployment' and a ‘dislike of travelling' (NDT, 2011a). According to the Hierarchical Model, these would be categorised as intrapersonal (no reason; dislike) and structural (too expensive; time; no income). A study conducted by Sindiga (1996) similarly found structural constraints (wages being too low to afford tourism) to be a major constraint for Kenyans to travel domestically; requiring adjustments leading to tourism product diversification and spatial deconcentration of facilities to cater for a broader cross-section of people. At the same time, research has indicated increased countering of constraints to domestic tourism in developing countries through increased capacity and desire to travel among urban populations, improvements in economies and living standards, developments in transport, and tailored marketing to address market preferences (discussed in Rogerson & Lisa, 2005).

4.3 Constraints to visiting national parks

Despite the growing popularity of nature-based tourism (Teigland, 2000; Wight, 2002), it has been found that individuals perceive constraints to participation in nature-based tourism comparable with that of traditional leisure activities. In a study based on the Hierarchical Model of Constraints, Pennington-Gray & Kerstetter (2002) found structural constraints such as time and money to be most important, followed by interpersonal constraints such as the influence of friends and, lastly, intrapersonal constraints. A similar study (Pennington-Gray et al., 2002) also identified various constraints at these three levels: intrapersonal (lack of interest, fear of crime, uncertainty about having the required skills to participate); interpersonal (lack of interest from companion(s) and other family members); and structural (lack of time/money/information/transportation/equipment, poor weather conditions, parks being too crowded/too far away, and facilities not being well maintained).

The dominance of structural constraints has similarly been noted by other researchers. Despite the attractiveness of wildlife and natural amenities, a lack of quality infrastructure places a serious limitation on visitations to parks by both domestic and international visitors (World Bank, 2007). A study on the Kafue National Park in Zambia (Thapa, 2012) found that international and domestic visitor segments indicated varying degrees of perceived constraints, with structural constraints being more common among domestic visitors. In a study on factors influencing the surrounding domestic population to visit Nairobi National Park in Kenya (Okello et al., 2012), it was found that the majority (66%) of the community had visited the park. Even though the lack of free time (structural), the lack of interest in wildlife (personal) or the thinking that protected areas in Kenya were meant for foreign tourists (personal) were not hindrances to local community visiting the parks, they noted that key constraints were lack of extra disposable income (structural), high cost of food and hospitality services inside the park for local communities (structural), and poor marketing of parks especially targeting local Kenyans (structural). Schneider et al. (2011) also found structural constraints to be dominant among visitors to wilderness areas.

Despite the evident dominance of structural constraints, all of the constraints contribute to the way individuals perceive participation in nature-based tourism, and they can be broadly applicable to parks throughout the world in varied degrees.

5. Methodology

A quantitative methodology was used for this exploratory study. Data were collected from members of the target population at a shopping mall situated 426 km from Kruger National Park in Mpumalanga province. Mpumalanga province is home to a large section of Kruger National Park and is also the second largest visitor-generating province for domestic visitors to all SANParks (SANParks, 2013). Non-probability (convenience) sampling in the form of a mall-intercept survey was utilised. The target population consisted of black⁴ adults (aged 18 years or older) who had never visited the Kruger National Park. A self-administered questionnaire consisting of 10 questions was used. Questions 1 and 2 were qualifying questions (respondent age and previous visitation to Kruger National Park). Question 3 enquired about the last destination visited in South Africa. If none, respondents listed multiple reasons why they had not been able to go on holiday (based on the constraints identified in the literature). Questions 5 and 6 focused on multiple reasons why the respondent would or would not visit the Kruger National Park (based on the constraints identified in the literature). Question 7 asked respondents to indicate the importance of a list of destination features on a five-point Likert scale (1 = not at all important; 5 = very important). Questions 9 and 10 captured demographic details of the respondents.

6. Results

6.1 Descriptive statistics

A total of 350 usable questionnaires were collected. Both genders were almost equally represented in the sample. The majority of the respondents were of the age groups 18 to 25 years and 26 to 35 years (28.9% each). The dominant income categories were R10 000 to R19 999 (35.1%) and R5000 to R9999 (34.3%). The demographic profiles of the respondents are further illustrated in Table 1.

Table 1: Demographic profile of respondents

Variable	Category	Frequency (n)	Percentage (%)
Gender	Male	176	50.3
	Female	174	49.7
	Total	350	100
Age	18 to 25	101	28.9
	26 to 35	101	28.9
	36 to 45	68	19.4
	46 to 55	63	18
	56 to 65	14	4
	65+	3	0.9
	Total	350	100
Income	Less than R5 000	55	15.7
	R5 000 to R9 999	120	34.3
	R10 000 to R19 999	123	35.1
	R20 000 to R30 000	31	8.9
	More than R30 000	21	6
	Total	350	100

Respondents were asked how often they go on holiday; with the majority selecting ‘Seldom' (41.4%), followed by ‘Regularly' (26.3%). One-quarter of respondents selected ‘Never' (25.4%).

The respondents that answered ‘Often', ‘Regularly' and ‘Seldom' were asked to write down the last holiday destination that they had visited in South Africa. The most visited province was Kwa-Zulu Natal (52.9%), followed by the Western Cape (17.6%) and then the North-West (17.6%). Kwa-Zulu Natal included destinations such as Durban, Umhlanga, Ballito and Margate. Western Cape destinations were mostly Cape Town; North-West was Sun City; Eastern Cape was either Port Elizabeth or East London; Limpopo included Phalaborwa and Bela-Bela; Free State included the Vaal Dam (largest stretch of shoreline situated in this province); Northern Cape included Kgalagadi Transfrontier Park; and, lastly, Gauteng included Soweto.

The 89 respondents that answered ‘Never' in the previous question on travel frequency answered a multiple-choice question about the reasons why they have not been able to go on holiday (refer to Table 2). The main reason identified by respondents (68.5%) was that they cannot afford it. Table 2 also indicates the type of constraints mentioned based on the Hierarchical Model of Constraints. Interestingly, in terms of general ‘holiday’ experiences, intrapersonal constraints related to feelings of uncertainty, disinterest and lack of skills featured strongly.

Table 2: Reasons for not going on holiday

Reason	Frequency (n)	Type of constraint
Cannot afford it	61	Structural
Enjoy the comfort of home	17	Intrapersonal
Do not know where to go	15	Intrapersonal
Too much planning	14	Intrapersonal
Holiday destinations are too far	11	Structural
Not interested in travelling	8	Intrapersonal

All of the respondents then had to indicate the possible main reasons for visiting the Kruger National Park, should they consider it (Table 3). The top three reasons selected included a relaxing atmosphere (44.9%), an interest in wildlife (43.4%) and liking outdoor activities (28.9%).

Table 3: Reasons for considering visiting Kruger National Park

Reason	Frequency (n)
Relaxing atmosphere	157
Interest in wildlife	152
Like outdoor activities	101
I would not consider it	47
Affordable family holiday	43
Close holiday destination	40

Respondents were then asked to indicate all of the reason(s) why they have never visited the Kruger National Park (could choose more than one option) (Table 4). The top three reasons included that it was too expensive (47%), they did not have enough time to visit (31%) and that it was too far to travel to (23%). Table 5 illustrates the frequencies for all of the reasons as well as the type of constraint mentioned based on the Hierarchical Model of Constraints. From the table it is clear that, similarly to what has been found in the literature, structural constraints feature strongly as deterrents to visiting the Park.

Table 4: Reasons for not visiting Kruger National Park

Reason	Frequency (n)	Type of constraint
It is too expensive	166	Structural
I do not have enough time to visit	107	Structural
It is too far to travel to	80	Structural
Family/friends are not interested	76	Interpersonal
Unsure about availability of suitable accommodation	68	Structural
Lack of information available about the park	58	Structural
I am not interested in wildlife	50	Intrapersonal
I do not like outdoor activities	30	Intrapersonal
It is not an appealing atmosphere	17	Structural
Weather conditions are unsuitable	13	Structural
It is not a family holiday destination	9	Interpersonal

Respondents had to rate a list of features according to their importance when considering going on holiday to a destination such as the Kruger National Park. This list was divided into four sections: infrastructure, nature, activities and general features (refer to Table 5).

Table 5: Importance of various categories of features

Feature	Mean	Standard deviation
Infrastructure	3.93	1.000
Quality of the buildings	4.21	0.929
Easily accessible	4.04	0.854
Decent roads	3.93	1.027
Good restaurants	3.90	1.002
Various and varied accommodation options	3.89	1.000
Affordable shopping facilities	3.63	1.175
Natural	4.06	0.950
Clean and unpolluted environment	4.34	0.783
Beautiful natural scenery and landscape	4.14	0.841
Various species of wildlife	3.92	1.153
Suitable weather conditions	3.85	1.006
Activities	3.59	1.110
Something to do for the whole family	3.87	1.108
Having different experiences	3.79	0.974
Variety of social activities	3.64	1.055
Rich cultural heritage	3.59	1.098
A lot of outdoor activities (adventure/sport)	3.53	1.167
Limited activities to ensure a relaxed atmosphere	3.48	1.043
Educational activities	3.41	1.190
Various activities for children	3.39	1.253
General features	4.24	0.850
Safe and secure destination	4.56	0.711
Value for money	4.51	0.741
Welcoming and knowledgeable staff	4.29	0.820
Easy to find information	4.19	0.835
Various booking options	4.09	0.920
Rules and regulations to manage visitors	4.03	0.922
Level of overcrowding	3.99	0.987

The most important infrastructural features were indicated as quality of the buildings (mean = 4.21) and ease of accessibility (mean = 4.04). There was least agreement among respondents on the importance of affordable shopping facilities (standard deviation [SD] = 1.175). A clean and unpolluted environment (mean = 4.31) and beautiful natural scenery and landscape (mean = 4.14) were the two most important natural features. There was least agreement among respondents on the importance of various species and wildlife (SD = 1.153). The three most important features concerning activities included something to do for the whole family (mean = 3.87), having different experiences (mean = 3.79) and a variety of social activities (mean = 3.64). There was least agreement among respondents on the importance of various activities for children (SD = 1.253). The last section concerning the general features of a destination such as Kruger National Park indicated safety and security as the most important factor (mean = 4.56), closely followed by value for money (mean = 4.51) and welcoming and knowledgeable staff (mean = 4.29). There was least agreement among respondents on the importance of the levels of overcrowding (SD = 0.987).

 Table 6 presents the top 10 most important features across all categories.

Table 6: Top 10 most important features

Feature	Mean	Standard deviation	Category
Safe and secure destination	4.56	0.711	General
Value for money	4.51	0.741	General
Clean and unpolluted environment	4.34	0.783	Natural
Welcoming and knowledgeable staff	4.29	0.820	General
Quality of the buildings	4.21	0.929	Infrastructure
Easy to find information	4.19	0.835	General
Beautiful natural scenery and landscape	4.14	0.841	Natural
Various booking options	4.09	0.920	General
Easily accessible	4.04	0.854	Infrastructure
Rules and regulations to manage visitors	4.03	0.922	General

The respondents were then asked to indicate the different types of travel information sources used when travelling to a destination (Table 7). The top three information sources used by the respondents included friends and relatives (59.4%), search engines (52.9%) and brochures (42.6%).

Table 7: Sources of information

Information source	Frequency (n)
Friends and relatives	208
Search engines (e.g. Google)	185
Brochures	149
Television/radio advertisements	127
Travel magazines	115
The official tourism website	99
Social network (Facebook, Twitter, etc.)	76
Travel agents	56
Travel blogs	37

6.2 Cross-tabulations

Cross-tabulations were conducted to determine the level of importance of the various features (indicated in Table 5) in relation to the constraints (indicated in Table 4). The Kolmogorov–Smirnov test indicated non-normality of the data (p < 00) and resultantly Pearson's chi-square was used to test the significance of the relationships (95% confidence interval) (refer to Table 8 for the cross-tabulations).⁵ Several of the relationships were found to be significant. The majority of respondents who indicated not being interested in wildlife as a constraint indicated the importance of beautiful natural scenery and landscape (77%), having different experiences (72%) and something to do for the whole family (65%). Respondents who indicated the travel distance as a constraint also indicated the importance of other structural features such as ease to find information (92%), easy accessibility (90%) and the quality of the buildings (90%). Respondents that indicated the Park as being too expensive also placed emphasis on various and varied accommodation options as well as good restaurants (both 81%). Respondents that indicated time as a constraint indicated the importance of having different experiences (89%). Respondents that indicated they do not like outdoor activities indicated something to do for the whole family as important (72%), but various species of wildlife not (70%). Respondents that indicated lack of information as a constraint also indicated the importance of a lot of outdoor (89%) and educational (87%) activities. Lastly, respondents that indicated the Park as not having an appealing atmosphere emphasised the importance of having different experiences (67%) and a lot of outdoor activities (67%).

Table 8: Cross-tabulations of constraints and important features

		Important features		Chi-square tests
Constraint		Not important	Important	Value	Asymptomatic significance (two-sided)
I am not interested in wildlife		Beautiful natural scenery and landscape
	Yes	8	27 (77%)	32.576^a	0.000
	No	6	252
		Having different experiences
	Yes	11	28 (72%)	9.342^a	0.009
	No	24	196
		Something to do for the whole family
	Yes	15	28 (65%)	15.334^a	0.000
	No	30	212
It is too far to travel to		Easily accessible
	Yes	7	64 (90%)	6.878^a	0.032
	No	9	206
		Good restaurants
	Yes	12	47 (80%)	6.959^a	0.031
	No	20	197
		Easy to find information
	Yes	5	55 (92%)	12.349^a	0.002
	No	8	232
It is too expensive		Various and varied accommodation options
	Yes	26	111 (81%)	11.330^a	0.003
	No	9	141
		Good restaurants
	Yes	25	105 (81%)	14.028^a	0.001
	No	7	139
I do not have enough time to visit		Having different experiences
	Yes	10	81 (89%)	10.596^a	0.005
	No	25	143
I do not like outdoor activities		Various species of wildlife
	Yes	16 (70%)	7	49.143^a	0.000
	No	32	240
		Something to do for the whole family
	Yes	8	21 (72%)	8.979^a	0.011
	No	37	219
Lack of information available about the park		A lot of outdoor activities (adventure/sport)
	Yes	5	41 (89%)	7.751^a	0.021
	No	62	152
		Educational activities
	Yes	5	33 (87%)	8.206^a	0.017
	No	75	142
It is not an appealing atmosphere		Having different experiences
	Yes	5	10 (67%)	8.200^a	0.017
	No	30	214
		A lot of outdoor activities (adventure/sport)
	Yes	10 (67%)	5	18.194^a	0.000
	No	57	188

^aSignificance p < 0.05.

7. Discussion and conclusion

This paper aimed to explore some of the constraints keeping members of the emerging black domestic tourism market from visiting Kruger National Park as a leisure destination. From the results, it was found that the majority of respondents very seldom went on holiday and a significant number did not go on holiday at all. The top three reasons indicated by the respondents for not undertaking travel were ‘cannot afford it’, ‘enjoying the comfort of home’ and ‘not knowing where to go’. The latter two reasons can be classified as intrapersonal constraints and coincide with current statements that there is not a culture of travel among this market (NDT, 2011a). The first reason of affordability is also in line with current market research (SAT, 2013). The majority of respondents that did go on holiday identified KwaZulu-Natal as their last visited destination – coinciding with current market knowledge (SAT, 2013).

The major constraints for not visiting the Kruger National Park were identified as three structural constraints, namely finances (‘too expensive’), time (‘don't have time to visit’) and accessibility (‘too far’). One interpersonal constraint (‘family/friends not interested’) followed, before two more structural constraints featured that both relate to the availability of information. Where an interpersonal constraint such as disinterest from reference groups is difficult to manage (Thapa, 2012), the other structural constraints are aspects that can be managed through effective communication messages to educate the market and ensure the use of appropriate communication channels. The top sources of information were indicated as friends and family (word of mouth), search engines, brochures, television and travel magazines. Except for search engines, these channels are considered more ‘traditional’, with the market shying away from other recently emerging channels such as social media and travel blogs. This has to be kept in mind when developing marketing strategies – and is seemingly being approached in the correct way by the national destination marketing organisation, South African Tourism, when evaluating their domestic campaigns (Rogerson & Lisa, 2005; NDT, 2011a).

The most important feature categories of the Park as a leisure destination were indicated as ‘general features’, followed by the ‘natural features’, ‘infrastructural features’ and, lastly, the ‘availability of activities’. Some of these important features can directly be linked to the top constraints. Value for money is linked to the constraint of the Park being seen as too expensive. Importantly, financial constraints (‘cannot afford it’) were also indicated as the most prominent reason why the respondents had not yet been on holiday in general – highlighting the aspect of affordability and value for money for this market. A second important factor is that of information. The majority of respondents who indicated uncertainty about the product offering and lack of information as constraints also indicated ease of finding information as very important to them.

The study indicates that providing value for money and ensuring affordability to the emerging black market is of extreme importance. The perceived time constraint is also an important aspect that needs to be addressed. Given that the majority of respondents indicated Kwa-Zulu Natal as their last destination visited (situated approximately 600 km from the fieldwork location as opposed to the distance of 426 km to the Park), it seems that travelling far distances should not be a constraint, as some of the respondents indicated. The emerging market needs to be educated on the ease of accessibility of the Park through existing transportation infrastructure and by distributing the product through the most appropriate channels as used by the market.

An increased level of awareness and interest in the wildlife and outdoor activities at the park could also eliminate additional constraints, making the Kruger National Park more appealing to the entire family. The emerging market could also be informed of the alternative activities and experiences available apart from wildlife.

The study is limited by a relatively small sample size, considering the size of the total population. No in-depth reasoning or probing questions could be asked with the self-administered questionnaire to explore underlying and more personal reasoning of respondents. Future research could thus consider a qualitative approach such as focus groups. Further research could be done concerning the variations of the constraints and important factors across gender, age and income groups within the emerging domestic market. Importantly, future research should focus on incorporating knowledge related to constraint negotiation in leisure, as discussed by various authors (such as Schneider & Stanis, 2007; Son & Yarnal, 2011; Hung & Petrick, 2012), to inform these mentioned strategies that will assist in countering perceived constraints by facilitating the negotiation process (Hinch & Higham, 2011).

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to acknowledge the contributions of Ms C M da Costa and Mrs P Fani to the article.

Notes

³Generic term that means Africans, coloureds and Indians (NDT, 2011a). Note that no distinction is made between the various ethnic groups that exist within the black African population group.

⁴Generic term that means Africans, coloureds and Indians (NDT, 2011a).

⁵The categories ‘very important’ and ‘important’ were recoded into one category ‘important', while the categories ‘not at all important’ and ‘less important’ were recoded into one category ‘not important’.