A STUDY ON THE CONCEPT AND CAUSES OF DESTINATION REJECTION

Öz

During the process of consumer’s decision of purchase, the individual is assumed to choose the most appropriate product. Thus, the products which do not have the feature of being the most appropriate product are not preferred. However, in some cases the consumers can refuse the product for some reasons. The point to be emphasized here is the difference between not preferring and refusing. The concept of destination rejection which is a consumer behaviour, and which can be seen in destinations as a touristic product is the subject of this study. When the literature is reviewed, it is noticed that there is no study about refusing destinations in terms of anti-consumption though there are studies about preference of destinations. Thanks to this study which focuses on the factors leading to destination rejection, we also aim to contribute towards filling this gap in literature. In this study in which the Cappadocia Region is taken up, the factors which can lead to destination rejection are put in order according to their level of significance through AHP method. The aim of the study is to help the concept of destination rejection to be understood by local and national administrations and all other stakeholders. And also we aim to contribute to the filling of the gap in the literature and as well as recommend contemporary work area for future studies

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Destination Rejection,AHP,Tourism

A STUDY ON THE CONCEPT AND CAUSES OF DESTINATION REJECTION

Öz

During the process of consumer's decision of purchase, the individual is assumed to choose the most appropriate product. Thus, the products which do not have the feature of being the most appropriate product are not preferred. However, in some cases the consumers can refuse the product for some reasons. The point to be emphasized here is the difference between not preferring and refusing. The concept of destination rejection which is a consumer behaviour, and which can be seen in destinations as a touristic product is the subject of this study. When the literature is reviewed, it is noticed that there is no study about refusing destinations in terms of anticonsumption though there are studies about preference of destinations. Thanks to this study which focuses on the factors leading to destination rejection, we also aim to contribute towards filling this gap in literature. In this study in which the Cappadocia Region is taken up, the factors which can lead to destination rejection are put in order according to their level of significance through AHP method. The aim of the study is to help the concept of destination rejection to be understood by local and national administrations and all other stakeholders. And also we aimed to contribute to the filling of the gap in the literature and as well as recommend contemporary work area for future studies.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Destinasyon Karşıtlığı,AHP,Turizm

Kaynakça

1. Alleyne, D. & Boxill, I. (2003). The impact of crime on tourist arrivals in Jamaica. International Journal of Tourism Research, 5(5), 381- 391.
2. Alonso, J. A. & Lamata, M. T. (2006). Consistency in the analytic hierarchy process: A new approach. International Journal of Uncertainty, Fuzziness and Knowledge-Based Systems, 14(04), 445-459.
3. Austin, C. G., Plouffe, C. R., & Peters, C. (2005). Anti-commercial consumer rebellion: Conceptualisation and measurement. Journal of Targeting, Measurement & Analysis for Marketing, 14(1), 62-78.
4. Berrittella, M., La Franca, L., & Zito, P. (2009). An analytic hierarchy process for ranking operating costs of low cost and full service airlines. Journal of Air Transport Management, 15(5), 249- 255.
5. Bottero, M., Comino, E., & Riggio, V. (2011). Application of the analytic hierarchy process and the analytic network process for the assessment of different wastewater treatment systems. Environmental Modelling & Software, 26(10), 1211-1224.
6. Cherrier, H. (2009). Anti-consumption discourses and consumer- resistant identities. Journal of Business Research, 62(2), 181- 190. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2008.01.025.
7. Choi, S.H. (2011). Anti-consumption becomes a trend. SERI Quarterly, 4(3), 117-120.
8. Delacote, P. & Montagné-Huck, C. (2012). Political consumerism and public policy: Good complements against market failures? Ecological Economics, 73, 188-193. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2011.10.020

9. Fujii, E. T. & Mak, J. (1979). The impact of alternative regional development strategies on crime rates: Tourism vs. agriculture in Hawaii. The Annals of Regional Science, 13(3), 42-56.
10. Iyer, R. & Muncy, J. A. (2009). Purpose and object of anti- consumption. Journal of Business Research, 62(2), 160-168. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2008.01.023
11. Kutvan, A. B., & Kutvan, S. A. (2013). Turizm planlamasinda destinasyon çekiciliklerinin ölçümü: Bir yöntem yaklaşimi. (Turkish). Measurement Of Destination Attractiveness In Tourism Planning: A Method Approach. (English), 6(11), 159- 183.
12. Larsen, S., Brun, W. & Øgaard, T. (2009). What tourists worry about– Construction of a scale measuring tourist worries. Tourism Management, 30(2), 260-265.
13. Lawson, R. & Thyne, M. (2001). Destination avoidance and inept destination sets. Journal of Vacation Marketing, 7(3), 199.
14. Lee, M. S. W. Fernandez, K. V., & Hyman, M. R. (2009). Anti- consumption: An overview and research agenda. Editorial. Journal of Business Research, pp. 145- 147. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/ login.aspx?direct=true&db=bth& AN=36016410&lang=tr&site=ehost-live
15. Lee, M. S. W., Motion, J. & Conroy, D. (2009). Anti-consumption and brand avoidance. Journal of Business Research, 62(2), 169-180. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2008.01.024
16. Ömürbek, N. & Tunca, M. Z. (2013). Analitik hiyerarşi süreci ve analitik ağ süreci yöntemlerinde grup karari verilmesi aşamasina ilişkin bir örnek uygulama. Suleyman Demirel University Journal of Faculty of Economics & Administrative Sciences, 18(3), 47-70.
17. Özalpman, D. (2010). Bir temellendirilmiş kuram denemesi: Politik amaçla marka seçen tüketici yönetimi. İstanbul Üniversitesi İletişim Fakültesi Dergisi, 2(39), 119.
18. Penaloza, L. & Price, L. L. (1993). Consumer resistance: A conceptual overview. Advances in Consumer Research, 20(1), 123-128.
19. Roux, D. (2007). Consumer resistance: Proposal for an integrative framework. Recherche et Applications en Marketing (English Edition) (AFM c/o ESCP-EAP), 22(4), 59-79.
20. Saaty, T. L. (2003). Decision-making with the AHP: Why is the principal eigenvector necessary. European journal of operational research, 145(1), 85-91.
21. Shaw, D. & Moraes, C. (2009). Voluntary simplicity: an exploration of market interactions. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 33(2), 215-223. doi: 10.1111/j.1470- 6431.2009.00760.x
22. Sönmez, S. F. & Graefe, A. R. (1998). Determining future travel behavior from past travel experience and perceptions of risk and safety. Journal of Travel Research, 37(2), 171- 177.
23. Sönmez, S. F. & Graefe, A. R. (1998). Influence of terrorism risk on foreign tourism decisions. Annals of Tourism Research, 25(1), 112-144.
24. Urfalıoğlu, F. T. & Genç, T. T. (2013). Çok kriterli karar verme teknikleri ile Türkiye’nin ekonomik performansının Avrupa birliği üye ülkeleri ile karşılaştırılması. Marmara Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, (2), 329.
25. Van Tran, X. & Bridges, F. S. (2009). Tourism and crime in European nations. e-Review of Tourism Research, 7(3), 52-67.
26. Wind, Y. & Saaty, T. L. (1980). Marketing Applications of the Analytic Hierarchy Process. Management Science, 26(7), 641-658.
27. Ventura, K. (2013). Marka kaçınması: Beyaz eşya markalarına yönelik kalitatif bir uygulama. Uludağ Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 32(1), 53.
28. Saaty, Thomas L., & Vargas, Luis G. (2012). Models, methods, concepts & applications of the analytic hierarchy, springer.