Untitled document.edited(64)

docx

School

Nairobi Institute of Technology - Westlands *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

MISC

Subject

Communications

Date

Nov 24, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

30

Uploaded by dannetke

Report
Introduction Problem Statement As of late 2019, the COVID-19 virus was constrained within the border of China, where it has been revealed to originate (Morens et al., 2020; Shereen et al., 2020). However, later than the same month, the virus escaped China's border and spread all over the globe (Giuliani et al., 2020). As a result, humans were discovered to be the main target and casualty of the COVID-19 virus. According to the World Health Organization (WHO) Coronavirus Dashboard (2022), as of June 7th, 2023, there were 767,750,853 confirmed cases of COVID-19 and 6,941,095 deaths globally. At the early stage of the pandemic spread, it was discovered that the virus spreads through direct touch and respiratory droplets. This led governments worldwide to impose various preventive measures, some of which were found to be draconian, to reduce transmission and spread (Ziam et al., 2020). The World Health Organization (WHO) Coronavirus Dashboard (2022) provided a summary of the different public health and social measures that were enforced in countries and territories all over the globe in a bid to strike a compromise between preventing the spread of the pandemic and disrupting everyday activities. These preventive measures undoubtedly came with some strict restrictions. However, as of 2022, 131 countries and territories have lifted COVID-related travel restrictions, including 41 countries in Europe, 22 countries in Asia, and 8 countries in Oceania (D'Amours, 2022). Gradually, life began returning to normal as was the case pre-pandemic, and with this gradual resumption of normal life, the travel intention of people began to increase. With the global spread of the COVID-19 virus starting in late 2019 and the attendance measures put in place by governments worldwide, travels were limited, and people's travel intentions were curbed. These measures hit the travel and tourism industry the most (Uğur & Akbıyık, 2020). Travel intentions refer to the likelihood that a consumer will or will not engage in a set of behaviors associated with a tourist service (Hennessy et al., 2016). Many factors come into play in deciding and influencing the travel intentions of individuals. Dai and Jia (2021) suggested that subjective information, the perception of a journey destination, and the mode of travel are behavioral variables that affect one's travel intention. With the COVID-19 pandemic, fears associated with the virus contagion and the risk of death were huge factors in influencing the travel intentions of individuals. During COVID-19, Kim et al. (2022, P.1905) found that "individuals' perceptions about COVID-19, appraisal of travel risk, and travel anxiety were positively related, while travel anxiety was negatively associated with travel desire." Research Gaps Numerous studies have tried to examine the correlation between travel restrictions as a result of measures enforced to prevent the spread of the COVID-19 virus and the travel intentions of people worldwide (Aziz & Long, 2021; Wen et al., 2020). However, travel intention considers to
be one of the least studied topics in the field of tourism still (Makhdoomi and Baba, 2019). In addition, limited studies have been focused on examining the experience of Hong Kong residents with regard to the influence of travel restrictions on travel intentions (Luo & Lam, 2020; Xu et al., 2022). One study found that Hong Kong residents, who form the target sample of this work, have had to encounter more challenges while considering travel decisions and destinations outside Hong Kong, as they do not merely have to consider the preventive measures of the home country (Hong Kong), but also the destination country (Luo & Lam, 2020). Thus, this work will add to the limited literature on this subject and try to fill in some notable research gaps, such as how the residents of Hong Kong reacted to the travel restrictions imposed on the onset of and during the spread of the COVID-19 virus pandemic, how these restrictive measures imposed to curb the spread of the virus, impacted on their travel intentions, and also how these restrictive measures, which have to a large part been relaxed, influences their decisions regarding traveling. Aim of the thesis This work examines and evaluates how Hong Kong residents reacted to the travel-related COVID-19 preventive measures, as seen in how these measures influence their travel intentions and how these measures influence their travel intentions. Moreover, being a resident and citizen of Hong Kong and embracing the connection and sensation of being a resident, the author would like to learn and enliven the travel intention and culture of the people of Hong Kong to understand better what constitutes the thought of the people and what they consider prior to their travel decisions, taking into consideration the various travel restrictions which were enforced. Research Questions To achieve the aim of this work, the thesis will be guided by the following research questions, 1. How did the residents of Hong Kong react to the preventive measures that impact travel? 2. How did residents' travel intentions change with COVID-19? 3. What are the impacts of the past and prospective COVID-19 preventive measures on Hong Kong residents' future travel intentions? Research Approaches
This study begins with a review of the existing literature on travel restrictions due to the COVID- 19 pandemic and travel intentions to provide an overview of the travel-related COVID-19 preventive measures in Hong Kong. In addition, the study will adopt the quantitative research approach and work with primary data, which will be collected by issuing a questionnaire conducted online. The target focus of this study will be Hong Kong residents who will form the target sample. The rationale for picking Hong Kong residents as the focus group is mainly because compared to nearby countries such as Japan, South Korea, and Thailand, Hong Kong had implemented one of the most rigorous measures. Thus, this work intends to examine how these travel restrictions have influenced the travel intentions of Hong Kong residents on future trips. The sampling technique will be convenience sampling, intended to target participants 18 years and above. Numerical data will be gathered from the survey questionnaire issued and analyzed afterward. Descriptive statistics will be used to describe the characteristics of the sample. Figures and tables will display and summarize the survey results graphically. Finally, a discussion of the results and conclusion, recommendations, limitations, and suggestions for future studies will be discussed. Literature Review Travel Intention Definition The theory of travel intention makes an attempt to explain why people choose to travel or not. In general, the theory contends that attitudes, changes of external environment and expectations all have an impact on a person's decision to travel. Travel intention is one of the behavioral intentions formed through selecting, choosing, and decision-making (Hennessy et al., 2016 ). Ajzen (1991) introduced The Theory of Planned Behavior, which proposed that intention comprises three parties: attitudes, subjective norms, and perceived behavioral control, which indicate and reflect the reason for a person's behavior. Attitudes refer to one's expectation and sensation in regards of travelling. Two individuals could hold completely opposite ideas about travelling (Ajzen, 1991), for instance someone tend to go out and enjoy the view and culture while they are on a trip but it can be vice versa for another type of people. Subjective norms refer to how people around us affect our travel intentions by doing or reacting on those travel-related things (Ajzen, 1991). Those ideas and reactions shown by another person could greatly influence how we rate about a travel destination and perceived ideas are developed prior to landing the legs on that country's land. Perceived behavioral control refers to an individual's ability and capability to whether he/she goes on a travel on not (Ajzen, 1991). Examples can be poor financial status, visa application difficulties, travel-related restrictions and safety of the destination. For instance, individual could be discouraged from travelling to United Kingdom as it is no longer in the EU area, yet visa application process for just a 5 days trip is difficult and tiring. Travel intention, travel motivation and travel behavior are three distinct ideas while travel intention refers to an individual's willingness to travel, similar to travel motivation. However, travel behavior refers to the actual travelling action. Furthermore, travel motivation means the
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
rationale in-depth of why people go on or desire to travel (Maitland et al., 2019; Kasim & Ismail, 2017). Huang and Hsu (2009, P.287) defined travel motivation as a critical factor and a driving force behind tourist behavior. Vuuren and Slabbert (2002, P.296) defined travel behavior as 'the way tourists behave according to their attitudes towards a certain product and their response by making use of the product.' Travel behavior is primarily driven by travel intention, and travel intention is controlled by travel motivation. It is typically brought on by push and pull elements that influence customers' feelings about travel-related goods and services (Crompton, 1979; Dann, 1988). Travel intention is formed by two different sources, personal and information sources (Luo & Lam, 2020). Personal source refers to the combination of one's perceptions, expectations, memories and thoughts while information source refers to the external source about news, words from others and knowledge get from various platforms (Beerli & Martin, 2004; Sönmez & Graefe, 1998). However, Shih (1986) mentioned that everyone is a special individual that no one's travel intention is fixed. Continuous monitoring and research are much needed to learn about human's travel intention and behavior as time goes by. Travel intention before COVID-19 Travel intention is crucial in the tourism industry as it is the major factor of why people travel (Beerli & Martín, 2004; Chan et al., 2018). Before the pandemic, people could travel freely and pick the destination they desired; people choose a destination and whether to travel or not based on certain factors such as the elements including culture, travel intentions, budget, and previous experiences (Papatheodorou, 2006; Kajzar et al., 2022). According to previous studies, Vuuren and Slabbert (2011) investigated travel motivation and behavior of tourists to South African resorts across five different factors, which are recreational activities, resting and relaxation, personal values, social experiences, and enriching and learning experiences. Chan et al. (2018) analyzed the push-pull motivations of six groups of visitors to Country Parks in Hong Kong across five factors, including relaxation, exploring new things, facilities, natural scenery, and accessibility. Both demonstrate that rest and relaxation is an important factor in why people travel to a certain destination. In both studies, rest and relaxation show a high percentage of acceptance from the respondents. Moreover, In Vuuren and Slabbert's study (2011), the rest and relaxation factor show the highest mean value among all factors, indicating that it is the most crucial factor influencing and motivating people to travel. Nevertheless, Hennessy, Yun, and MacDonald (2016) found that value for money and overall satisfaction deliver positive and influencing correlations when it comes to tourists picking a neighboring destination to travel to or not. Regarding the study related to the Asia area, Kakyom (2007) also verifies this factor as one of the travel intentions with his study on national cultural festival-goers in Korea regarding their travel motivations. It is mentioned that overall satisfaction upholds a big portion when people decide. These match with
what Papatheodorou (2016) proposed, that budget is one of the major rationales for people choosing to go on travel or not. Cha et al. (1995) used the push and pull methodology to study and identify six travel motivational variables, including safety, knowledge, adventure, bragging rights, family and sports. They categorized three types of travelers as seeking sports, novelty, or family/relaxation experiences. Throughout the seekers, there were large variations in the factors. Although research on tourism market in Pennsylvania has been conducted personal safety has been the voted as the most important criteria in picking a travel destination (Shih, 1986; Sönmez & Graefe, 1998). Although safety and risk are seen in some researches considering as the most important criteria, however, these factors are still not commonly seen and recognized in previous studies before the outbreak of COVID-19. Travel intention during COVID-19 When COVID-19 hit the globe, it caused massive inconvenience and trouble for tourists worldwide (Li & Ito, 2021; Tsui et al., 2021). With the effect of the pandemic, people's travel behaviors and travel intentions change as they need to adapt to the travel restrictions imposed by different countries (Luo & Lam, 2020; Isaac & Keijzer, 2021). Medical and market information is much needed for the tourism industry to adapt to the different health pandemics (Cahyanto et al., 2016). However, for the travel-related changes to be adjusted and made during and after the pandemic, it is really important tounderstand the people's perceptions in-depth, allowing us to learn about and enliven the travel intention changes at the time (Lehto et al., 2008). The COVID-19 crisis has affected people's travel intentions seriously and enormously (Promsivapallop & Kannaovakun, 2017; Senbeto & Hon, 2020). Quintal et al. ( 2010 ) and Sánchez-Cañizares et al. (2020) concluded that perceived risk impacted tourists' attitudes, further affecting behavioral intention. Tourists' travel intentions and attitudes are more risk-averse, and risk becomes one of the top priorities to consider whether to travel or not. The following study supported the above statement. Ho Chi Minh City's tourism and travel services revenue fell by 69.2% in the first two months of 2021 compared to the same time in 2020. In May 2021, when the pandemic in Vietnam was under control, tourism income rose by 23.3% compared to the previous year (Bui, 2023). Bui (2023, P.2) has concluded that 'All above figures are reflected in changes in the domestic tourist's behavior and travel intention as they perceived all information risks arising from the pandemic.' Results of the study of the effect of COVID-19 perception on the travel intention of residents from Sapporo, Japan (Li & Ito, 2021) indicate that travel intentions are negatively affected by COVID-19 perceptions in the early phase of the pandemic. 'Similar result can be found from a study on the Fukushima nuclear accident, where revisit intention was also directly reduced by higher physical risk' (Li & Ito, 2021, P.499). However, Luo and Lam's study (2020) on the effect of fear of COVID-19 on Hong Kong residents found that fear of COVID-19 has a negative impact on locals' travel intentions which is caused by travel anxiety and risk-aversing attitude but a positive correlation cannot be proved
between travel intention and fear of COVID-19. Apart from Asia, a study of the travel intention of Serbians during the COVID-19 pandemic (Tepavčević et al., 2021) also shows identical results; a negative correlation between fear of COVID-19 and travel intention. Tepavčević et al. (2021) also mentioned it is true that people were scared of being infected, but it did not affect their travel intentions as after Serbia uplifted the travel restrictions, both local and international tourists' number greatly increased. This phenomenon is known as revenge tourism, supported by what Abullah (2021) advocated that tourists' travel intentions and decisions are driven by boredom during the period of strict isolation and travel restriction imposed. 2.1.3 Travel intention after COVID-19 Until now, with the ongoing vaccination effort and lower number of confirmed cases in the world, most countries have removed travel restrictions and preventive measures in their own areas to convenient people to resume travelling again. The United States eased all travel restrictions and opened its borders to all tourists, vaccinated or not vaccinated (U.S. Consulate General Hong Kong and Macau, 2023). Also, in Europe, starting from 13 December 2022, they have withdrawn all travel restrictions for tourists within or outside the Schengen area (European Union, 2023). However, COVID-19 is still found around the globe; however, the number of infected and death has greatly reduced than that between 2019-2022, in which more than 100 countries had only reported less than 1000 confirmed cases or even zero in the last 7 days (WHO, 2023). Although COVID-19 will not be completely eradicated and vanished, some consider now a post-COVID-19 period already as most travel restrictions are withdrawn, the vaccination rate is high, and most importantly, death and infected cases numbers are much lower than before. In a public speech in September, even President Biden said that the pandemic was over (Shmerling, 2022). Wang et al. (2020) suggested that changes on people's travel intentions are expected to see, as well as some travel motivations will be changed and remained for a long time even after COVID-19 completely over. One funny phenomenon that seen is that people prefer domestic travel rather than international travel as most of the borders were closed and the fear of the pandemic had held people back from travelling during the most dangerous time of the era. History/ Practice of Preventive Measures in a Pandemic In the past decades, humankind has experienced various diseases, viruses, and pandemics, yet we always manage to survive and weather the storm (Rajakaruna et al., 2017). According to Eisinger and Fauci (2018) and Kamarulzaman et al. (2016) studies, During Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) and Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome (AIDS) pandemic, different parties carried out various prevention to keep the pandemic under control. The first that they have mentioned is to advocate the use of condoms, clean medical supplies, and screen blood supply before use. Moreover, both parties have confirmed that prevention is the most effective and useful preventive strategy. Kamarulzaman and her team (2016) proposed that education and communication promotions helped to reduce risky behaviors, while most HIV and AIDS transmission is through sharing sharp objects and sexual intercourse. Australia, Switzerland, Canada, South Africa, and
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
Kyrgyzstan benefited by educating their citizens about the dangers of HIV and AIDS and ways to prevent them. Nevertheless, blood screening assisted in the pandemic by determining who is infected with the viruses and preventing them from performing dangerous behaviors. Through continuous developments and studies, medical parties have invented a medication called 'preexposure prophylaxis' (PrEP); if patients intake PrEP constantly and correctly, it is very effective in preventing HIV acquisition for up to 95% (Eisinger & Fauci, 2018). With the introduction of this drug, the infection rate of HIV and AIDS significantly reduced which made it gradually became epidemic, being socially accepted and adopted. Ebola is a virus transmitted via direct contact with infected animals and then human interactions (Centre for Health Protection, 2022). 33 outbreaks of Ebola viruses have been reported in six African nations in 2014 (Martínez et al., 2015). Also, a different strain of the Ebola virus was responsible for the most recent and greatest outbreak, which involved over 28,000 cases in West Africa (Trad et al., 2017). Vaccination is the most effective and reliable method to control the Ebola virus, as it prevents this virus from entering our immune systems. The first Ebola vaccine development started in 1980, and the currently in-use vaccine is 97.5% effective at stopping EBOV transmission (Woolsey & Geisbert, 2021). Yet, infected people are first isolated and taken care of until the virus is fully cleared from the body. However, with the massive number of outbreaks seen in West Africa, drugs named Favipiravir, were used which was originally a medication for Influenza treatments, and Brincidofovir, another medication that can inhibit DNA polymerase within human bodies (Trad et al., 2017). Although many education programs were implemented, the need for masks and gloves was not advocated back then (Martínez et al., 2015). Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) is a similar pandemic to Ebola in which humans can be infected by direct contact with infected animals and other human beings. In 2003, the outbreak of SARS spread around Asia, including Hong Kong, China, Vietnam, Taiwan, and so many more, there were more than 8000 confirmed cases, and more than 700 deaths were reported globally (Lam et al., 2003). "Professor Kwok-Yung Yuen claimed that Bat was the real culprit of the SARS virus, a renowned professor of communicable diseases from HKU Li Ka Shing Faculty of Medicine" (Chen et al., 2013, P.S164). With the HK government as an example, Isolation and quarantines were enforced in the local community to prevent to spread of the SARS virus. They reduced hospital visits frequency, required mandatory isolation of SARS patients, and proposed travel restrictions on people who have had contact with confirmed cases. Second, they aggressively advertised the information about SARS and its prevention to the public to raise their awareness. The HK government required children to undergo a temperature check before entering schools to prevent outbreaks among the kids. Hong Kong Food and Environmental Hygiene Department encouraged all residents to wear face masks to protect their health; however, it was not compulsory (Centre of Health Protection, 2013). COVID-19-related Travel Restrictions in Hong Kong Between 2020- Early 2022
Although COVID-19 started spreading worldwide in late 2019, the Hong Kong (HK) government did not deliberately implement any travel restrictions. The first COVID-19-related travel restrictions appeared on 24 February 2020, which stated that regardless if the travelers were HK residents or not, as long as they are coming from Daegu and Gyeongsangbuk-do in Korea, they would have to undergo 14 days of quarantine in assigned quarantine centers. The rest of the travelers from Korea and Mainland China had to undergo medical surveillance for 14 days (The Government of HKSAR, 2020). This restriction was implemented due to the serious and high confirmed cases in Korea back then. On 6 March 2020, the HK government announced that starting from 8 March 2020, all travelers arriving at the Hong Kong international airport would have to complete a health declaration form which worked with airlines to remind the passengers to fill in the declaration form before boarding (The Government of HKSAR, 2020). A few days afterward, the HK government implemented a compulsory quarantine arrangement for travelers arriving from all Schengen areas in the EU. For travelers arriving from Daegu and Gyeongsangbuk-do in Korea, Iran, and Emilia-Romagna, Lombardy, and Veneto regions in Italy required a mandatory quarantine in the assigned quarantine centers for 14 days while the rest of the EU Schengen Area, Hokkaido in Japan, and the rest of Korea required a compulsory home quarantine for 14 days (The Government of HKSAR, 2020). On 15 March 2020, the HK government expanded the quarantine restrictions to travelers arriving from Ireland, the UK, the US, and Egypt 14 days before landing at HK international airport. These travelers were required to undergo compulsory home quarantine for 14 days. The Spokesman of the HK government claimed that in the past 14 days, 56.5% were imported cases which took up more than 50% of the total confirmed cases; thus, actions above were taken. Moreover, since the regulations did not require face masks, the HK government suggested all travelers continue wearing face masks for 14 days after being discharged from quarantine control (The Government of HKSAR, 2020). Within the same month, the HK government intensified the travel restrictions, with all non-HK residents banned from entering Hong Kong; Suspension of all transit flights and services until further notice; All travelers from Mainland, Macao, and Taiwan were required to undergo compulsory quarantine for 14 days still (The Government of HKSAR, 2020). Starting from 6 January 2022, the Hong Kong government intensified the quarantine restriction for inbound Hong Kong residents' travelers arriving from some specific countries, for example, European countries, the U.S., Canada, and so many other countries, that they would have to undergo 21 days quarantine in quarantine hotels that were cooperating with the government. On the 26th day upon arrival, travelers would need to perform a compulsory PCR test at the community testing centers. All non-Hong Kong residents were forbidden to enter Hong Kong. On 23 January 2022, as the new COVID virus was discovered and rapidly spreading, the Hong Kong government imposed a flight suspension mechanism which flights coming from Australia, Canada, France, India, Nepal, Pakistan, the Philippines, the U.K., and the U.S. which meant all travelers, even Hong Kong residents were not allowed to return to Hong Kong. However, on 26 March 2022, with the massive inconvenience caused and complaints from Hong Kong residents
claiming how ridiculous the government was to deny their residents from returning home. Thus, flight suspension mechanisms were then cancelled. Between Late 2022 - 2023 On 23 September 2022, all overseas countries and Taiwan travelers were not required to perform a PCR test before departure but to perform an antigen test 12 hours before boarding instead. Withdrawal of the vaccination requirement for Hong Kong residents remained the same for non- Hong Kong resident travelers. After entering the Hong Kong border, compulsory quarantine was no longer required. Instead, medical surveillance for 3 days would be undergone; travelers were allowed to leave their accommodations. Moreover, all travelers arriving from Taiwan and oversea countries did not have to wait for the PCR test result at the airport after being tested; they could leave the airport as soon as the test was performed (The Government of HKSAR, 2022). On 28 December 2022, the HK government officially announced that all travelers worldwide would need to perform a PCR test within 48 hours or an antigen test 12 hours before departure to Hong Kong (The Government of HKSAR, 2022). Moving forward, on 19 January 2023, the Hong Kong government withdrew the arrangement of quarantine and isolation starting from 30 January, whether they were still positive for the COVID-19 PCR test or not. They said that "following three years of COVID-19 epidemic in Hong Kong, with the ever evolvement of the virus and Omicron becoming the predominating variant, coupled with the enhancement of prevention and treatment capacities of the healthcare system and the handling capacity of society as a whole, the risk posed by COVID-19 to local public health has been apparently altered" (The Government of HKSAR, 2023). On 3 February 2023, the connection and travel policies between Mainland China and the world completely resumed, meaning that no PCR test nor quarantine is required, and all non-HK and HK travelers are allowed to travel freely without any barrier. However, travelers aged 3 or above wanting to travel to Mainland through Hong Kong who stayed in Taiwan or overseas within 7 days will have to carry out a PCR test with a negative result 48 hours before departure (The Government of HKSAR, 2023). On the same day, the Hong Kong government also announced that the vaccination requirement for non-Hong Kong residents to be fully vaccinated is eased and withdrawn (The Government of HKSAR, 2023). Travel Intention of Hong Kong residents outside Hong Kong Before COVID-19 Hong Kong as an international Finance Centre, large number of investments and cashflow flooded into Hong Kong during the 80's while Hong Kong people were getting wealthier and going on a trip was gradually normalized. (Armstrong & Mok, 1992). "In 1992, tourism became the second largest industry in Hong Kong bringing total tourism receipts of 48,389 million Hong Kong dollars (Armstrong & Mok, 1992, P.99)." From Armstrong and Mok study (1992), they found that among all 13 attributes choices such as safety, scenic beauty, price of trip and so on,
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
surprisingly that safety has ranked the most important attribute while vice versa for friends and relatives at destination. A survey was conducted in 2019 shows that there is a positive correlation between travel intention for the coming year and with previous travel behavior (The Hong Kong Tourism Board, 2019). For those Hong Kong residents who are used to travel frequently before the pandemic will continue to travel as frequently as they used to. McKercher and Hui research (2004) has proven that terrorism activities and economic uncertainties bring immediate yet negative impacts on Hong Kong resident travel intention which they would rather postpone or cancel their trips and leave it in the future for safety reason. McKercher and Hui (2004, P.111) have also proven that "in the absence of further terrorist attacks, outbound travel participation rates have returned to normal relatively quickly, and by April/May 2002 were at pre-attack levels." The above two studies have shown that Hong Kong residents consider safety as the most critical factor when it comes to travel intention. Safety concern seems to be ranked before price of trip or relaxation. The theory is as well supported by Zhang et al. (2004) which they conducted research regarding Hong Kong residents' outbound leisure travel. During COVID-19 A CNN report (2021) stated that Hong Kong residents were among the most traveled people on the planet, traveling almost 94.7 million miles in 2019. This information was provided by the Hong Kong Census and Statistics Bureau. Some Hong Kong residents voiced annoyance when asked about the government's travel limitations because they frequently travel. Others, however, recognized the necessity of the limits as a defense against the COVID-19 virus's spread. Global tourism significantly dropped by 80% in 2019 (Luo & Lam, 2020). Hong Kong people's outbound travel departures number in 2019 was 94.7 million trips, then dramatically decreased to 910 thousand trips in 2021 which shows a drop of over 90% (Statista, 2022). A reduction in mobility is seen, and it indicates that the travel intention of HK people greatly changed due to the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. During the pandemic, Luo and Lam (2020) study found that fear of COVID-19 is positively correlated with travel anxiety and risk attitude. A negative correlation between travel anxiety, risk attitude, and travel intention is seen, meaning that the more travel anxiety, the less Hong Kong people are willing to travel. However, the correlation between fear of COVID-19 and travel intention does not seem to exist. Xu et al. (2022) also proved Luo and Lam right in their study; they got the same results indicating that travel anxiety impacted perceived travel behavior. However, a direct relationship between this variable, travel attitudes and intentions, is not observed. Xu et al. (2022) study shows that with the impact of the pandemic, Hong Kong residents who went on outbound travel were more likely to avoid planning a lot of attractions on the same day; rather, they would only visit a single attraction daily. Furthermore, participants of the study tended to schedule a relaxing trip and went for minor attractions instead (Xu et al., 2022).
3 Methodology 3.1 Introduction The thesis's main aim is to explore the influence of COVID-19 preventive measures on Hong Kong residents' travel intentions. The research will collect data to fill in the gap that was identified in chapter one of this thesis. This chapter will discuss the research design approaches, introduction to surveys, survey development, and lastly data collection process and analysis. 3.2 Research Design There are various ways to obtain primary data. There are three major research approaches: quantitative, qualitative, and mixed research approaches (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). "Qualitative research focuses on understanding a research query as a humanistic or idealistic approach. Qualitative method is used to understand people's beliefs, experiences, attitudes, behavior, and interactions. It generates non‐numerical data" (Pathak et al., 2013, P. 192). Qualitative approach is usually done through interviews with various professionals and researchers to understand their points of view on certain research topics (Rahman, 2016). The quantitative approach involves the analysis of numerical data so as to test a theory, when a testing hypothesis and mostly involves a large pool of samples (Rasinger, 2013). "Quantitative methods seek regularities in human lives, by separating the social world into empirical components called variables which can be represented numerically as frequencies or rate, whose associations with each other can be explored by statistical techniques and accessed through researcher-introduced stimuli and systematic measurement" (Payne & Payne, 2004. P. 180). Based on the aim of this research, it is beneficial to undergo quantitative approach as it involves randomly selecting a large sample pool to answer certain questions making the results more reliable (Carr, 1994; Rahman, 2016). Mixed approach is, as named, the combination of qualitative and quantitative research approaches, which allows researchers to perform a study efficiently by implementing both to fill up each approach's disadvantages (Malina et al., 2011). Malina et al. (2011) have further explained that "exploring more complex aspects and relations of the human and social world may be analyzed quantitatively and qualitatively" (p. 61). Nevertheless, carrying out a mixed approach is relatively time-consuming, as well as the complexity of the study can greatly increase.
A quantitative approach is selected due to its appropriateness to answer this research's research questions. Moreover, this approach will provide the most reliable results within a short period. Bielefeld (2006) described the quantitative approach as "testing a theory composed of variables, measured with numbers, and analyzed with statistical procedures in order to determine whether the predictive generalizations of the theory hold" (p. 4). Leavy (2017) suggested that if a researcher aims to explore, describe or explain, quantitative research will be the most appropriate approach to implement. This statement can be reflected in this thesis, where the goal of this research is to explore, explain and evaluate the current travel intention of Hong Kong residents after the effect of COVID-19-related travel restrictions. Neman (2006) advocated that by continually, repeatedly running quantitative research by different researchers at different times, human beings can understand different events in depth. Thus, a quantitative research method was chosen in the form of a survey (i.e., online questionnaire), allowing the researcher to reach as many participants as possible and enhancing the accuracy and validity of the final results (Rutberg & Christina, 2018). Furthermore, an online questionnaire is a convenient data collection method to reach a large sample population, as electronic devices allow participants to fill in the survey whenever they are available. 3.3 Introduction to Surveys A survey is defined as "the process of collecting information from a sample of individuals by following their answers to the provided questions" (Check & Schutt, 2012, p. 160). A survey provides way to gather data and analyze the results. According to Roopa & Rani (2012), a survey can employ three approaches; quantitative (a questionnaire with numbered entries), qualitative (questions are open-ended), and combined (both numerical and open-ended questions are used). According to Singleton and Straits (2009), survey research is commonly used in psychological research as it is mainly used to both explore and describe traits in human behavior. For decades researchers have employed the surveys to gather information from a large group of people. A survey can range from administering a limited number of targeted questions in a random location to administering a set of questions to many participants and interpreting results using various analysis tools (Singleton and Straits, 2009). There are multiple different ways one can conduct a survey. For example, there are questionnaires, either online, through email, or in person; there are also one on one interviews, panel design and omnibus surveys (Scheuren, 2004; Mahmutovic, 2022). Questionnaires are a form of written surveys where the sample demographic provide their own written answers. Some view a limitation as being unable to fully express opinions due to set boundaries of questions. Being able to ask further on certain areas and ideas can give that a larger understanding when conducting qualitative data (Goddard & Villanova, 2006). When considering the survey method, it is important to understand the critical characteristics before starting. First, there is a need to establish the right sample size that will sufficiently answer the research questions and formulate the relevant questions. This approach will allow for the study to stay on point and make it simpler for analysis later on. Designing and planning are other critical stages as knowing how a sample group will be selected
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
and how the respondents will be reached. The method of distribution will also have a multitude of benefits and their own disadvantages so choosing the correct one will increase response rate and overall reliability. The response rate is the most important when conducting a survey, and to increase this, it comes down to how questions are worded and the whole structure of the survey, which will make it best for respondents. While increasing reliability, it also goes hand in hand with validity by testing the survey design, allowing us to catch errors and create improvements. Having a schedule for the overall survey execution will improve the succession rate of the study. Finally, cleaning the data throughout looking for outliers and anomalies that can skew the final data set (Brewer et al., 2015). When conducting any form of survey, one must be aware of how influential the words of a question can sound. Having leading questions can influence people's responses making the data unreliable. This can be avoided by having a clear objective of the data that needs to be corrected by using the right wording when formulating the questions (Questionnaire Design, 2023). One of the advantages of using the survey method is the large reach that it can have, holding a larger sample size increases reliability within a study as it will be more representative. However, researchers would need to have assurance that the survey is reaching the correct target, for example using online / electronic surveys have such a vast reach they could possible over reach to other countries (Jones et al., 2013). Another main benefit of using surveys is that this method can be very timely and cost efficient which is why it is the best choice for this study. Saving on time while collecting data will allow for more effort to be injected into other areas such as the analysis of the data (Andrade, 2020). 3.4 Survey Development The process of developing the survey questions intended to answer the three research questions as outlined in chapter two of the thesis. A survey was constructed in English and can be found in the Appendices section as Appendix 1. It consisted of six sections, which concerned issues about 1) past behavior and actions in tourism; 2) actions on COVID-19 travel-related restrictions; 3) feelings generated from COVID-19 pandemic travel restrictions; 4) current and future behavior and actions in tourism; 5) current travel attitudes; and 6) personal information of the respondents. In total, there were 36 questions. The first section covers questions 1-3. Question 1 sought to understand the frequency of international travel by Hong Kong residents before the COVID-19 pandemic. Question 2 sought to understand the factors that influenced the participants' decision while making international travel prior to the pandemic. Question 3 wanted to understand the extent of control of the international travel that the participants had prior to the COVID-19 pandemic. These three questions aimed at understanding the travel intentions of Hong Kong residents before the COVID-19 pandemic as many factors come into play in deciding and influencing the travel intentions of individuals. The second section covers question 4-11. Question 4-7 asked the usefulness of wearing masks, compulsory quarantine, vaccination and filling international travel declaration form to prevent COVID-19 transmission respectively. Question 8 asked how the COVID-19 travel restrictions affected the participants' traveled frequency between 2019 and 2022. Question 9 asked the
respondents if the COVID-19 travel-related restrictions caused the residents to reconsider travel plans between 2019 and 2022. Question 10 was a question regarding how many times per year did the residents travel outside of Hong Kong during the COVID-19 pandemic. Question 11 asked the factors that influenced the residents' decision to travel during the COVID-19 pandemic. These questions allow researcher to understand what the respondents thought of that were related to tourism during the pandemic which pattern changes might be seen. The third section covers questions 12-19. Question 12 asked how the participants viewed the control of their travel behavior during the COVID-19 pandemic. Question 13 asked if the residents were concerned about the health risks associated with traveling outside of Hong Kong during the COVID-19 pandemic. Question 14 asked how the participants perceived their safety while traveling outside of Hong Kong during the COVID-19 pandemic because of the preventive measures in place. Question 15-16 asked if the participants felt nervous or annoyed about traveling during the pandemic because of the travel restrictions respectively. Question 17 was regarding if the residents felt if travelling was risky and question eighteen asked if the participants were comfortable while travelling during the pandemic because of the travel restrictions. Lastly, question 18 sought to understand if the participants felt safer to travel before the pandemic or during the pandemic. The fourth section covers questions 20-26. Question 20 asked the participants the types of travel did they engage in when the COVID-19 pandemic subsided. Question 21 asked participants how likely the residents would travel outside of Hong Kong in the next six months. Question 22 asked how many times per year would the participants plan to travel outside of Hong Kong after the COVID-19 pandemic. Question 23 asked participants to what extent would they still concerned with contracting COVID-19 while traveling. Question 24 asked the participants what extent are they concerned about the overall health risks related while traveling. Question 25 asked if the residents are comfortable travelling now. Question 26 asked the factors that would influence residents' decision to travel on future trips. So as to understand the residents current travel attitudes, fifth section covers the following four questions. Question 27-29 asked if the participants felt nervous risky or comfortable to travel now when the travel restrictions are removed respectively. Finally, question 30 asked if the removal of travel restrictions has made them feel international travel is now safe. The sixth section, also the last sections asked the demographic data of the participants including gender, age, education level, current employment status, monthly income level before taxes (in HKD) and residential status in Hong Kong. 3.5 Data Collection Process and Analysis The only requirement for the participants would be the identity of Hong Kong people who resided in Hong Kong from before the pandemic until now, regardless of other demographic characteristics. They were recruited based on convenient sampling through social media such as Instagram and WhatsApp, which ensured that the contacted personnel would mainly be Hong Kong people within the participants' social circle. Participants simply had to complete the questionnaire online through Google Form with their own electronic device within the data
collection period, which started from 25th May 2023 at 11pm and ended on 8th June 2023 at 11pm. 105 participants had contributed to participate in the study. The collected data would be analyzed through IBM SPSS Statistics. IBM SPSS Statistics would mainly be used for the statistical tests. In order to find out the frequencies of each question in the dataset, frequency distribution test would be run. 4. Findings and Discussion 4.1 Demographics information of respondents Among all respondents, 49.5% were male, 43.8% were female, 5.7% prefer not to say and 1% were other. In terms of age group, 50.5% were aged 18-24 which takes up the majority, 24.8% were aged 25-34, 12.4% were aged 35-44, 9.5% were aged 45-55, 1.9% were aged under 18 and 1% were above 55. Looking at the education level of the respondents, 48.6% of the respondents hold an undergraduate degree, 23.8% hold a graduate degree. 21% hold a high school degree or equivalent. Regarding the current employment status, 47.6% were full-time employed and 38.1% were students. Concerning the monthly income before tax, 42.9% of the respondent earned 10001-30000 HKD and followed by 41% with a monthly income of 0-10000 HKD which completely makes sense as a big chunk of the respondents is students, Lastly, regarding the residential status in Hong Kong, most of the respondents are permanent Hong Kong citizens which takes up 93.3% of the total. 3.8% of them hold a long stay visa and 2.9% hold a short stay visa. 4.2 Past Behavior and Actions in Tourism Concerning the past behavior and actions in tourism of the respondents is essential to compare their current and future behavior and actions, to find out if changes are noted. The first question is about the frequency of traveling outside Hong Kong before the COVID-19 pandemic. 72.2% of respondents travelled 1-3 times annually, and 16.2% travelled 4-6 times annually. 3.8% did not travel at all. Both frequencies with 7-9 and 10+ times annually recorded 1.9% respectively.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
Second question's result is as follows. 73% of respondents thought that price is the factor that influence their decision to travel. 67.6% voted for destination safety and 53.3% voted for job or school obligations. 26.7% and 22.9% of respondents voted for travel restrictions and personal and family health respectively. Annual Leave, did I ever been to that destination before, sightseeing, shopping, 'just because' and family choices all recorded 1%. Regarding the third question regarding respondents indicating to what extent the respondents agree with the statement: I had control over my travel behaviour outside of Hong Kong before the COVID-19 pandemic. 50.5 % of all respondents agreed with the statement and 36.2% were strongly agree. 10.5% were neutral about the statement. 1.9% disagreed and 1% strongly disagreed. 4.2 Actions on COVID-19 Travel-related Restrictions Concerning the actions on COVID-19 travel-related restrictions, in regard of wearing a mask is useful in preventing COVID-19 transmission. 59% agreed with the statement while 22.9% strongly agreed with it. 10.5% were neutral and 4.8% showed strongly disagree. The rest (2.9) of the respondents disagreed. Looking at the results of question 5, again 59% agreed with the statement, and 13.3% were neutral about it. 12.4% and 11.4% disagree and strongly agree respectively. 3.8% strongly disagreed with the statement. For question 6, the statement about if vaccination is useful in preventing COVID-19 transmission. 34.3% disagreed while 21.9% agreed. Moreover, 19% strongly agreed while 18.1% were neutral about it. The frequency of strongly disagree was 6.7% Looking at the result of question 7 about filling in a health declaration form before departure and landing is useful in preventing a COVID-19 transmission, 37.1% of the respondents disagreed with the statement and 21.9% strongly disagreed. 20% were neutral and 15.2% agreed. 5.7% strongly agreed.
Question 8 is about how COVID-19 travel restrictions affect the respondents' travel frequency between 2019 and 2022. 51.4% of respondents travelled less often and 43.8% did not travel at all. 3.8% travelled just as usual, and only 1% travelled more often. Concerning the results of question 9 about whether the COVID-19 travel-related restrictions caused the respondents to reconsider travel plans between 2019 and 2022. 95.2% voted yes and 4.8% voted no. For question 10, regarding the frequency of respondents' travel outside of Hong Kong during the COVID-19 pandemic. 51.4% travelled 0 times. 41.9% travelled 1-3 times and 6.7% travelled 4-6 times. None of the respondents attempted to travel 7-9 or more than 10 times during the pandemic. Question 11, the last question in this section is about the factors that influenced respondents' decision to travel during the COVID-19 pandemic. Travel restrictions was the most picked factor at 68.6%. Followed by destination safety at 61%, price at 37.1%, personal or family health at 34.3%, job or school obligations at 25.7%, exchange and overseas internship at 1%, and quarantine at 1%. 4.4 Feelings Generated from COVID-19 Pandemic Travel Restrictions To further understand the respondents' travel intentions, emotions and feelings-related questions were asked. Concerning the answers of question 12, about control over own travel behaviour (e.g., destination choice, travel mode, length of the trip) outside of Hong Kong during the COVID-19 pandemic. 42.9% of respondents agreed with the statement while 23.8% disagreed. 14.3% were neutral about the statement. 11.4% strongly agreed and 7.6% strongly disagreed. Moving onto question 13 regarding a statement about if the respondents were concerned about the health risks associated with traveling outside of Hong Kong during the COVID-19 pandemic.52.4% agreed and 21% strongly agreed. Followed by neutral at 15.2%, disagreed at 10.5% and strongly disagreed at 1%. Looking at the results of question 14, the statement 'I felt safe traveling outside of Hong Kong during the COVID-19 pandemic because of the preventive measures in place.' 53.3% of all disagreed with the statement while 23.8% were neutral about it and 19% agreed. Strongly agree, and strongly disagree were both at 1.9% Question 15 was a statement about if respondents felt nervous about traveling during the pandemic because of the travel restrictions. 50.5% agreed with the statement. 19% were neutral about it, 13.3% strongly agreed, 11.4% disagreed and 5.7% strongly disagreed. Moving forward to question 16, 'I felt annoyed about traveling during the pandemic because of the travel restrictions.' 51.4% of the respondents agreed and 29.5% strongly agreed with the statement. 10.5% were neutral, 8.6% disagreed and that none of the respondents voted for the category strongly disagree.
Concerning the results of question 17, asking respondents whether traveling was risky during the pandemic because of the travel restrictions. 49.5% agreed and 24.8% strongly agreed. Followed by 15.2% were neutral, 9.5% disagreed and 1% strongly disagreed. Looking at the results of question 18, a statement about if respondents felt very comfortable traveling under travel restrictions during the pandemic. 48.6% of the respondents disagreed, followed by 23.8% were neutral, 14.3% agreed, 8.6% strongly disagreed and 4.8% strongly agreed. Question 19, last question in this section, asking respondents' thought on international travel under travel restrictions. 48.6% thought that it was as safe as before the pandemic, 27.6% thought it was less safe than before the pandemic and lastly, 23.8% thought it was safer than before the pandemic. 4.5 Current and Future Behavior and Actions in Tourism Moving forward to a section to explore respondents' current and future behavior and actions in tourism which is the major goal of the research, to get this data and compare it with the previous behavior and actions. Looking at the results of question 20, 'what types of travel did you engage in when the COVID- 19 pandemic subsided?' 61.9% engaged in international travel and 35.2% engaged in domestic travel. 1% for none, both and study abroad respectively. For question 21 which is regarding how likely will respondents travel outside of Hong Kong in the next six months. 54.3% will very likely to travel outside of Hong Kong in the next six months and 32.4% will likely to. Followed by 8.6% were neutral, 4.8% will unlikely to but none of them voted very unlikely. Looking at the results of question 22 about the frequency of respondents plan to travel outside of Hong Kong after the COVID-19 pandemic. 69.5% plan to travel outside of Hong Kong 1-3 times annually. 21.9% plan to travel 4-6 times. 4.8% for 0 times and 3.8% for 7-9 times. None of the respondents attempted to plan to travel 10 or more annually. Concerning the answers of question 23, 'to what extent are you still concerned with contracting COVID-19 while traveling?' 42.9% are slightly concerned, followed by 39% are not concerned
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
at all, 15.2% are somewhat concerned, 1.9% are moderately concerned and 1% are extremely concerned. Moving onto question 24 regarding to what extent are respondents concerned about the overall health risks related while traveling. 58.1% of the respondents are slightly concerned. 24.8% are not concerned at all. 11.4% are somewhat concerned. 4.8% are moderately concerned and 1% are extremely concerned. For question 25, a question asking to what extent are respondents now comfortable with traveling. 61% are comfortable with traveling now, 22.9% are very comfortable with traveling. 12.4% are neutral about it, 2.9% are uncomfortable and 1% are very uncomfortable. Looking at the results of question 26, 'What factors will influence your decision to travel on future trips?' Price is the factor that leads the way at 79%. Followed by destination safety at 66.7%, job, and school obligations at 55.2%, travel restrictions at 31.4%, personal or family health at 27.6%, AL, destination I have never been to, and sightseeing at 1% respectively. 4.6 Current Travel Attitude Moving forward to question 27, a statement asking respondents whether they feel nervous about traveling right now after the travel restrictions are removed. 46.7% disagreed with the statement. 21% of them strongly disagreed, 15.2% agreed, 10.5% were neutral about it and lastly 6.7% strongly agreed. Concerning the results of question 28, asking respondents if traveling is risky now after the travel restrictions are removed. 49.5% disagreed that traveling is risky now and 23.8% strongly disagreed. Followed by 11.4% agreed, 10.5% were neutral and 4.8% strongly agreed. Looking at the results of question 29, 'I feel very comfortable traveling right now after the travel restrictions are removed'. 54.3% of the respondents agrees that they feel very comfortable traveling right now. 27.6% strongly agreed with the statement. 9.5% were neutral, 4.8% disagreed and 3.8% strongly disagreed. Question 30, last question of this section asked respondents that upon removal of the travel restrictions, how they think that international travel is now safer than, as safe as or less safe than before the pandemic. 81.9% think that outbound travel now is as safe as before the pandemic, while 9.5% think it is safer than before the pandemic and 8.6% think it is less safe than before. 1. How did the residents of Hong Kong react to the preventive measures that impact travel?
2. How did residents' travel intentions change with COVID-19? 3. What are the impacts of the past and prospective COVID-19 preventive measures on Hong Kong residents' future travel intentions? To answer the first research question, according to the results of the survey, Hong Kong residents were rather negative when reacting to the preventive measures that impact travel, 95.2% of them claimed that COVID-19 travel-related restrictions caused them to reconsider travel plans between 2019 and 2022. This result matches the research of McKercher and Hui (2004) that Hong Kong residents would rather postpone or cancel their trips under economic uncertainties. 68.6% voted that travel restrictions impacted their decision to travel during the COVID-19 pandemic, which this percentage is recorded as the highest percentage among all the factors listed. Concerning emotion and feelings, the trend is negative as well. Over 50% of respondents did not feel safe traveling outside of Hong Kong when the travel restrictions were in place, felt nervous and annoyed about traveling during the pandemic because of the travel restrictions. Moreover, 49.5% thought that traveling was risky because of the travel restrictions and 48.6% did not feel comfortable traveling during the pandemic with travel restrictions in place. All the statistics showed that Hong Kong residents were strongly upset by the preventive measures that impact travel. This verified Luo and Lam's study (2020) claiming that travel anxiety and risk-averting attitude have a negative impact on Hong Kong residents' travel intentions. Concerning the answers to the second research question, before the pandemic, the factors that influence the decision to travel before the COVID-19 pandemic are mostly focused on price (73.3%), destination safety (67.6), and also job or school obligations (53.3%) which more than 50% of the respondents agreed these factors are impacting them whether to travel or not. However, the same question was asked afterward with only changing the time setting to during the pandemic, massive changes were seen in respondents' answers. Travel restrictions (68.6%) were the most concerned factor, followed by destination safety (61%). These were the only two factors that recorded votes over 50%. This indicates that Hong Kong residents' focus shifted from price and job or school obligations to travel restrictions, while destination safety remained its position before and during the pandemic. Armstrong and Mok (1992) and Zhang et al. (2004) both found that safety is the most important factor that influences people decision to travel, and the theory is verified by the survey results.
The answers to the third research question are as followed. The impacts of the past and prospective COVID-19 preventive measures on Hong Kong residents' future travel intentions are not seen. 54.3% and 32.4% of respondents are very likely and likely to travel internationally in the next six months respectively. 69.5% of all were planning to travel outside of Hong Kong 1-3 times after the pandemic which showed a similar figure as 76.2% of respondents traveled outside of Hong Kong 1-3 times annually before the pandemic. By comparing the dataset, it can be considered that their travel frequencies are starting to resume back to pre-COVID time. A question regarding the factors that influence the decision to travel on future trips, respondents' choices had changed from travel restrictions and destination safety, back to price, destination safety, and job or school obligations which were exactly the same as the answers before the pandemic. This does not match with Wang et al. (2020) suggestion that changes in travel intentions and motivations of humans are expected to be seen, and that domestic travel will be preferred rather than international travel. 5. Conclusion and Recommendations This thesis sought to examine the relationship between the international travels' restrictions imposed during the COVID-19 pandemic and the travel intentions of the Hong Kong residents. The findings of this thesis are intended to contribute to the shallow literature on this topic and fill the existing research gaps on how the COVID-19 restrictive measures influenced the travelling decisions of Hong Kong residents. The study evaluated how the Hong Kong residents perceived the COVID-19 preventive measures and how these measures affected their prior behavior on travel intentions. The approach adopted to conduct this study was first reviewing the existing literature on travel restrictions as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic and travel intentions of Hong Kong residents. This in-depth analysis of the existing literature on this topic was intended to provide an overview understanding of how the preventive measures influenced the travel intentions of the Hong Kong residents. A quantitative research approach was adopted which led to the analysis of primary data collected from online questionnaires. A convenience sampling technique was adopted to target the Hong Kong residents who formed the target sample for this study. The numerical data obtained from survey questionnaire was analyzed using descriptive statistics. 105 participants were used to arrive at the findings of this study. The findings of this study found out that Hong Kong residents were generally negative when reacting to the preventive measures that impacted international travel. Most respondents claimed that COVID-19 travel-related restrictions made them to readjust travel plans at the height of the pandemic. This finding concurs with the claims of McKercher and Hui (2004) that Hong Kong residents would rather postpone or cancel their trips under economic uncertainties. All the statistics showed that Hong Kong residents were strongly upset by the preventive measures that impact travel. This verified Luo and Lam's study (2020) which claims that travel anxiety and risk-averting attitude have a negative impact on Hong Kong residents' travel intentions. Travel restrictions was found to be the main factor influence the decision to travel before the COVID-19 pandemic. Other factors that influenced the Hong Kong resident's decision to travel were price, destination safety and school obligations. Additionally, the impacts of the past and prospective COVID-19 preventive measures on Hong Kong residents' future travel intentions are not seen in this study. This does not match with Wang et al. (2020) suggestion that changes in travel
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
intentions and motivations of humans are expected to be seen, and that domestic travel will be preferred rather than international travel. Recommendations and Suggestions for Future Studies The findings of this study offer a strong theoretical and empirical basis to researchers who might be interested in conducting studies on the impacts of pandemics preventive measures on travel behaviors and intentions in the future. This study focused on Hong Kong residents solely and it would be sound if such a study is extended to other states globally. A new study should be conducted to understand how residents of different countries reacted to the preventive measures imposed globally to curb the spread of the COVID-19 pandemic. This is based on the common understanding that residents from different cultural and social backgrounds could have reacted differently towards the preventive measures and they could have a different perception of travel intentions based on the information they accessed on how to prevent the spread of COVID-19. Additionally, the empirical evidence obtained from this study can be used in the broad tourism industry to adopt the best travel guidelines to suit the needs of travelers in case of occurrence of a pandemic similar to COVID-19. This recommendation is based on the important finding from this study that most Hong Kong residents were concerned about their destination safety during the pandemic. To enrich the findings of this study, future work on the same theme can focus on conducting a comparative study of the different approaches used to conduct similar studies in other different places globally. It would be crucial to establish the findings of this study if the participants were collected randomly from different countries. Such a study would eliminate the cultural, ethnic and geographical barriers. This study adopted the convenience sampling technique in order to reach to the intended participants. This approach is a limitation to this study since it constrains the findings. This sampling technique has been criticized as it limits the sample representativeness. The study also used 105 participants and with a large sample size, the study would have yielded different findings to reach to a stronger conclusion. This sample size was settled for due to the limited time available to conclude the study. However, the study still provided crucial implications of the COVID-19 preventive measures on the travel intentions of Hong Kong residents. Bibliography Abdullah, M.N.A. (2021). Revenge tourism: Trend or impact post pandemic Covid-19?. Promoting Creative Tourism: Current Issues in Tourism Research. Armstrong, R. W., & Mok, C. (1995). Leisure Travel Destination Choice Criteria of Hong Kong Residents. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 4(1), 99–104. doi:10.1300/j073v04n01_07 Aziz, N.A, & Long, F.(2021). To travel, or not to travel? The impacts of travel constraints and perceived travel risk on travel intention among Malaysian tourists amid the COVID-19. Journal of Consumer Behaviour , 21(2), 352-362. https://doi.org/10.1002/cb.2008
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
Beck, M.J. & Hensher, D.A. (2020). Insights into the impact of COVID-19 on household travel and activities in Australia – The early days under restrictions. Transport Policy . 96. P.76-93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2020.07.001 . Bielefeld, W. (2006). Quantitative research for nonprofit management. Nonprofit Management & Leadership . 16(4). 395-409. Bui, T.T.B. (2023). Applying the extended theory of planned behavior to understand domestic tourists' behaviors in post COVID-19 era. Cogent Social Sciences. 9(1). P.1-17 10.1080/23311886.2023.2166450 Bureau of Immigration. (2020. March 19). Sub : Travel and Visa restrictions related to COVID- 19. Government of India. https://boi.gov.in/content/advisory-travel-and-visa-restrictions-related- covid-19-1 Caber, M., González-Rodríguez, M. R., Albayrak, T., & Simonetti, B. (2020). Does perceived risk really matter in travel behaviour? Journal of Vacation Marketing , 26(3), 334–353. Cha, S., McCleary, K. W., & Uysal, M. (1995). Travel motivations of Japanese overseas travelers: A factor-cluster segmentations approach. Journal of Travel Research, 34 (1). P.33–39. 10.1177/004728759503400104 . Cahyanto, I., Wiblishauser, M., Pennington-Gray, L., & Schroeder, A. (2016), "The dynamics of travel avoidance: the case of ebola in the U.S", Tourism Management Perspectives.20. P.195- 203.10.1016/j.tmp.2016.09.004. Carr, L. T. (1994). The strengths and weaknesses of quantitative and qualitative research: What method for nursing. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 20(4), P. 716-721. http:/dx.doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2648.1994.20040716.x Chan, C.S., Yuen, S.K., Duan, X., & Marafa, L.M.(2018). An Analysis of Push-Pull Motivationsd of Visitors to Country Parks in Hong Kong. World Leisure Journal .P.191-208. https://doi.org/10.1080/16078055.2018.149652. Chen, F.,Cao, S.,Xin, J., & Luo, X. (2013). Ten years after SARS: where was the virus from?. Journal of Throacic Disease. 5(2). P.S163–S167. 10.3978/j.issn.2072-1439.2013.06.09 Centre for Health Protection. (2022. November 4). Ebola Virus Disease. Department of Health HKSAR. https://www.chp.gov.hk/en/features/34199.html Centre for Health Protection. (2013. September 3). Checklist of Measures to Combat SARS. Department of Health HKSAR. Checklist of Measures to Combat SARS
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. SAGE Publications, Inc. Crompton, J. L. (1979). Motivations for pleasure vacation. Annals of Tourism Research, 6 (4), 408–424. CNN Travel. (2021, September 9). Travel-starved Hong Kong residents frustrated with 'zero Covid' plight. https://www.cnn.com/travel/article/hong-kong-travel-restrictions-cmd/index.html Dai, Y. & Jia, L. (2021). A Study on Tourists' Travel Intention Under the Situation of Novel Coronavirus Pneumonia Epidemic: An Application of the Structural Equation Model. Atlantis Press , 517, 942-947. 10.2991/assehr.k.210121.183. D'Amours , A. (2022. November 2). List of the 127 countries where 100% of pandemic travel restrictions have been lifted. Flytrippers . https://flytrippers.com/countries-without-covid- restrictions/ . Discover Hong Kong. (2019, November 21). The Hong Kong Tourism Board Survey 2019. https://www.discoverhongkong.com/eng/about-hktb/newsroom/news- releases/2019/20191121.jsp European Union. (2023. February 20). "Re-open EU" . https://reopen.europa.eu/en GCO.(2020. March 08). Statement by the Government Communications Office on the temporary suspension of entry of those arriving from certain countries as a preventive measure, due to the spread of Coronavirus (COVID-19) worldwide. Government Communications office State of Qatar. https://www.gco.gov.qa/en/2020/03/statement-by-the-government-communications-office- on-the-temporary-suspension-of-entry-of-those-arriving-from-certain-countries-as-a-preventive- measure-due-to-the-spread-of-coronavirus-covid-19-wor/? doing_wp_cron=1671569965.1402490139007568359375 Hall, C. M., Scott, D., & Gössling, S. (2020). Pandemics, transformations and tourism: Be careful what you wish for. Tourism Geographies , 22(3), 577–598. https://doi.org/10.1080/14616688.2020.1759131 Hennessey, S. M. Yun, D., & MacDonald, R. (2016) Determinants of Travel Intentions to a neighboring Destination. Travel and Tourism Research Association: Advancing Tourism Research Globally , 16. https://scholarworks.umass.edu/ttra/2010/Oral/16 Hugo, N. (2021). The strength of the industry during the coronavirus pandemic. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research , 45(5), 931–933. https://doi.org/10.1177/10963480211000825 Isaac, R.K., & Keijzer. J. (2021). Leisure travel intention following a period of COVID-19 crisis: a case study of the Dutch market. International Journal of Tourism Cities. 7(3). P.583-601. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJTC-08-2020-0158
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
Kajzar, P., Dolák, R., & Krkošková, R.(2022). Using Google Trends in International Tourism: A Case Study of the Czech and Slovak Republics. Academica Turistica. 14(2). P.205-216. 10.26493/2335-4194.14.205-216. Kamarulzaman, A., Reid, S.E., Schwitters, A., Wiessing, L., El-Bassel, N., Dolan, K., Moazen, K., Wirtz, A.L., Verster, A.,& Altice, F.L. (2016). Prevention of transmission of HIV, hepatitis B virus, hepatitis C virus, and tuberculosis in prisoners . The Lancet, 388(10049). P. 1115–1126. 10.1016/s0140-6736(16)30769-3. Kasim, A., & Ismail, N. (2017). Tourists' Motivations to Travel: A Theoretical Perspective on the Existing Literature. Tourism, Heritage & Services Marketing, 3, 53-57. 10.20867/thm.24.1.8 Kim, E.E.K., Seo, K., & Choi, Y.(2022). Compensatory Travel Post COVID-19 Congnitive and Emotional Effect of Risk Perception. Journal of Travel Research. 6(8). 1895-1909. Lai, C., Li, X. & Harrill, R. (2013). Chinese outbound tourists' perceived constraints to visiting the United States. Tourism Management , 37, 136-146. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2013.01.014 . Lam, W.K., Zhong, N.S., & Tan, W.C. (2003). Overview on SARS in Asia and the World.Wiley Public Health Emergency Collection .8(1). P.S2–S5. 10.1046/j.1440-1843.2003.00516.x Leavy, P. (2017). Research Design (illustrated ed.). Guilford Publications.https://books.google.de/books?hl=en&Ir=&id=hxyDDgAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg= PP1&dq=research+approaches&ots=T5613Umdf3&sig=Az- Lehto, X., Douglas, A.C., & Park, J. (2008), "Mediating the effects of natural disasters on travel intention", Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing. 23. P. 29-43, doi: 10.1300/J073v23n02_03. Li, S.R. & Ito, N. (2021). "Nothing Can Stop Me!" Perceived Risk and Travel Intention Amid the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Comparative Study of Wuhan and Sapporo. Information and Communication Technologies in Tourism 2021 . P.490-503 Luo, J.M. & Lam, C.F. (2020). Travel Anxiety, Risk Attitude and Travel Intentions towards "Travel Bubble" Destinations in Hong Kong: Effect of the Fear of COVID-19. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health , 17 (21). https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17217859 Malina, M. A., Nørreklit, H. S. O., & Selto, F. H. (2011). Lessons learned: advantages and disadvantages of mixed method research. Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management, 8(1), P. 59–71 . 10.1108/11766091111124702 Maitland, B., Wang, D., Mitchell, C., & Liu, Z. (2019). Understanding travel behavior: A study of school children. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 130, 576-586. doi:10.1016/j.tra.2019.10.010
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
Makhdoomi, U.M., & Baba, M.M. (2019). "Destination image and travel intention of travellers to Jammu & Kashmir: the mediating effect of risk perception", JOHAR – Journal of Hospitality Application & Research.14(1).p. 35-56. Martínez, M.J., Salim, A.M., Hurtado, J.C., & Kilgore, P.E.(2015). Ebola Virus Infection: Overview and Update on Prevention and Treatment. Infect Dis Ther 4, P.365–390. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40121-015-0079-5 Matiza, T., & Kruger, M. (2021). Ceding to their fears: A taxonomic analysis of heterogeneity in COVID-19 associated perceived risk and intended travel behaviour. Tourism Recreation Research , 46(2), 158–174. https://doi.org/10.1080/02508281.2021.1889793 McKercher, B., & Hui, E. L. L. (2004). Terrorism, Economic Uncertainty and Outbound Travel from Hong Kong. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing. 15(2-3). 99– 115. https://doi.org/10.1300/J073v15n02_06 Muley, D., Ghanim, M.S., Mohammad, A., & Kharbeche, M. (2021). Quantifying the impact of COVID–19 preventive measures on traffic in the State of Qatar. Transport Polic y, 103, 45-59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2021.01.018 Neman, W.L. (2006). Social research methods: qualitative and quantitative approaches (6th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education, Inc. Neuburger, L., & Egger, R. (2020). Travel risk perception and travel behaviour during the COVID-19 pandemic 2020: A case study of the DACH region. Current Issues in Tourism , 24(7), 1003–1016. https://doi.org/10.1080/13683500.2020.1803807 Park, S. H., Hsieh, C. M., & Lee, C. K. (2017). Examining Chinese college students' intention to travel to Japan using the extended theory of planned behavior: Testing destination image and the mediating role of travel constraints. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing , 34(1), 113–131. https://doi.org/10.1080/10548408.2016.1141154 Papatheodorou, A. (2006). Managing Tourism Destinations. Northampton, Edward Elgar Publishers. Pathak, V ., Jena, B ., & Kalra, S . (2013). Qualitative research. Scholarly Journal. Perspectives in Clinical Research . 4(3 ). P.192. 10.4103/2229-3485.115389. Payne, G., & Payne, J. (2004). Key concepts in social research. London: Sage. Promsivapallop, P.,& Kannaovakun, P. (2017). "A comparative assessment of destination image, travel risk perceptions and travel intention by young travellers across three ASEAN countries: a study of German students". Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, 22(6). P. 634-650. 10.1080/10941665.2017.1308391.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
Rajakaruna, S.J., Liu, W.B., Ding, Y.B., & Cao, G.W. (2017). Strategy and technology to prevent hospital-acquired infections: Lessons from SARS, Ebola, and MERS in Asia and West Africa. Military Medical Research. 4(32). P.1-6. 10.1186/s40779-017-0142-5 Rahman, M. S. (2016). The Advantages and Disadvantages of Using Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches and Methods in Language "Testing and Assessment" Research: A Literature Review. Journal of Education and Learning, 6(1), P.102. 10.5539/jel.v6n1p102. Rasinger, S. M. (2013). Quantitative research in linguistics: An introduction. A & C Black. Roopa, S., & Rani, M. S. (2012). Questionnaire designing for a survey. Journal of Indian Orthodontic Society, 46(4_suppl1), 273-277. Rutberg, S. & Christina, D. (2018) Focusing on the Fundamentals: À Simplistic Differentiation Between Qualitative and Quantitative Research. Nephrology Nursing Journal . 45(2). P.209-212. Sánchez-Cañizares, S. M., Cabeza-Ramírez, L. J., Muñoz- Fernández, G., & Fuentes-García, F. J. (2020). Impact of the perceived risk from Covid-19 on intention to travel, current issues in tourism. https://doi.org/10.1080/13683500.2020.1829571 Senbeto, D.L., & Hon, A.H. (2020). "The impacts of social and economic crises on tourist behaviour and expenditure: an evolutionary approach", Current Issues in Tourism, 23(6). P. 740- 755. 10.1080/13683500.2018.1546674. Shih, D. (1986). VALS As A Tool of Tourism Market Research: The Pennsylvania Experience. Journal of Travel Research, 24(4), 2–11. doi:10.1177/004728758602400401 Shmerling, R.H. (2022. October 26). "Is the COVID-19 pandemic over, or not?" . Harvard Health Publishing. https://www.health.harvard.edu/blog/is-the-covid-19-pandemic-over-or-not- 202210262839 Sönmez, S. F., & Graefe, A. R. (1998). Influence of terrorism risk on foreign tourism decisions. Annals of Tourism Research, 25(1), 112–144.doi:10.1016/s0160-7383(97)00072-8 Statista. (2022. October 5). Number of international tourist arrivals worldwide 1950-2021. Statista Research Departmen t. https://www.statista.com/statistics/209334/total-number-of-international-tourist-arrivals/ . Statista. (2022. October 20). Number of outbound trips from Hong Kong from 2010 to 2021 (in millions). Statista Research Department. https://www.statista.com/statistics/1292851/hong-kong- outbound-trip-number/
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
Tepavčević, J., Blešić, I., Petrović, M.D., Vukosav, S., Bradić, M., Garača, V., Gajić, T., & Lukić, D. (2021). Personality Traits That Affect Travel Intentions during Pandemic COVID-19: The Case Study of Serbia. Sustainability 2021, 13 (22). P.1-18. https://doi.org/10.3390/su132212845 The Government of Hong Kong Special Administrative Region Press Release. (2020. February 25). DH strengthens port health measures on inbound travellers from Korea. https://www.info.gov.hk/gia/general/202002/25/P2020022500007.htm?fontSize=3 The Government of Hong Kong Special Administrative Region Press Release. (2020. March 13). DH to further extend and adjust health quarantine arrangements on inbound travellers from overseas. https://www.info.gov.hk/gia/general/202003/13/P2020031300832.htm?fontSize=1 The Government of Hong Kong Special Administrative Region Press Release. (2020. March 15). DH to further strengthen health quarantine arrangements on inbound travellers from overseas. https://www.info.gov.hk/gia/general/202003/15/P2020031500630.htm?fontSize=1 The Government of Hong Kong Special Administrative Region Press Release. (2020. March 18). Compulsory Quarantine of Persons Arriving at Hong Kong from Foreign Places Regulation gazetted. https://www.info.gov.hk/gia/general/202003/18/P2020031800758.htm?fontSize=1 The Government of Hong Kong Special Administrative Region Press Release. (2020. March 24). Government announces enhancements to anti-epidemic measures in four aspects. https://www.info.gov.hk/gia/general/202003/24/P2020032400050.htm?fontSize=1 . The Government of Hong Kong Special Administrative Region Press Release. (2020. March 27). Government adjusts boarding, quarantine and testing arrangements for inbound travellers on risk-based principle. https://www.info.gov.hk/gia/general/202203/27/P2022032700005.htm? fontSize=1 The Government of Hong Kong Special Administrative Region Press Release. (2020. April 6). Entry restriction on non-Hong Kong residents coming from overseas extended. https://www.info.gov.hk/gia/general/202004/06/P2020040600671.htm?fontSize=1 The Government of Hong Kong Special Administrative Region Press Release. (2020. September 24). Government announces lifting of compulsory quarantine requirement on arrival at Hong Kong. https://www.info.gov.hk/gia/general/202209/24/P2022092400048.htm?fontSize=1 The Government of Hong Kong Special Administrative Region Press Release. (2021. January 23 )Government maintains boarding restrictions for places with severe epidemic situation and compulsory quarantine arrangements. https://www.info.gov.hk/gia/general/202101/23/P2021012300050.htm?fontSize=1 The Government of Hong Kong Special Administrative Region Press Release. (2022. January 3). Government tightens boarding and quarantine requirements for places with Omicron cases detected. https://www.info.gov.hk/gia/general/202201/03/P2022010300532.htm?fontSize=1
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
The Government of Hong Kong Special Administrative Region Press Release. (2022. December 13). Government adjusts five anti-epidemic measures. https://www.info.gov.hk/gia/general/202212/13/P2022121300859.htm?fontSize=1 . The Government of Hong Kong Special Administrative Region Press Release. (2022. December 28). Government adjusts testing arrangements for inbound persons. https://www.info.gov.hk/gia/general/202212/28/P2022122800773.htm?fontSize=1 The Government of Hong Kong Special Administrative Region Press Release. (2023. January 19). Government cancels arrangement of issuing isolation orders. https://www.info.gov.hk/gia/general/202301/19/P2023011900678.htm?fontSize=1 . The Government of Hong Kong Special Administrative Region Press Release. (2023. February 3). Testing requirements for inbound persons coming to Hong Kong from places around world upon full resumption of normal travel with Mainland. https://www.info.gov.hk/gia/general/202302/03/P2023020300627.htm?fontSize=1 The Government of Hong Kong Special Administrative Region Press Release. (2023. February 3). Government lifts vaccination requirement for non-Hong Kong residents arriving from overseas places. https://www.info.gov.hk/gia/general/202302/03/P2023020300618.htm? fontSize=1 Trad, M.A., Naughton, W., Yeung, A., Mazlin, L., O'sullivan, M., Gilroy, N., Fisher, D.A., & Stuart, R.L. (2017). Ebola virus disease: An update on current prevention and management strategies. Journal of Clinical Virology . 86. P. 5-13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcv.2016.11.005. U.S. Consulate General Hong Kong and Macau. (2023. March 13). "COVID-19 information" . https://hk.usconsulate.gov/u-s-citizen-services/covid-19-information/ Wang, W. C., Lu, W. C., & Chen, Y. C. (2020). Travel intentions during the COVID-19 outbreak in Taiwan: Effects of fear and risk perception. Sustainability, 12(18), 7317. 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.655860 . Woolsey, C., & Geisbert, T.W. (2021). Current state of Ebola virus vaccines: A snapshot. PLoS Pathog.17(12). 10.1371/journal.ppat.1010078 Wen, J., Kozak, M., Yang, S., & Liu, F. (2020). COVID-19: Potential effects on Chinese citizens' lifestyle and travel. Tourism Review , 76(1), 74–87. https://doi.org/10.1108/TR-03-2020-0110 WHO. (2022. November 4). "WHO Coronavirus (COVID-19) Dashboard" . https://covid19.who.int WHO. (2023. Februray 20). "WHO Coronavirus (COVID-19) Dashboard" . https://covid19.who.int/table.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help
Woodside, A. G., and MacDonald, R. (1993). General System Framework of Customer Choice. Decision-Making Process and Preference Change of Tourist: Intertemporal and Intercountry Perspectives. University of Innsbruck, 30-59. https://dlib.bc.edu/islandora/object/bc-ir:100972/datastream/PDF/view Xu, Y., Peng, P., Claramunt, C. & Lu, F.(2022).Impact of COVID-19 on Tourists' Travel Intentions and Behaviors: The Case Study of Hong Kong, China. Web and Wireless Geographical Information Systems, 3238. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-06245-2_2 Xu, J., Choi, H.S., Lee, S.W., & Law, R. (2022). Residents' attitudes toward and intentions to participate in local tourism during and after the COVID-19 pandemic. Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research. 27(5). P. 473-488. https://doi.org/10.1080/10941665.2022.2091945 . Zaim,S., Cong, J.H., Sankaranarayanan, V. & Harky, A. (2020). COVID-19 and Multiorgan Response. Current Problems in Cardiology , 45(8). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpcardiol.2020.100618. Zhang, H.Q., Qu, H., &Tang, V.M.O. (2004).A case study of Hong Kong residents' outbound leisure travel.Tourism Management. 25(2). P. 267-273. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0261- 5177(03)00096-7.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help

Related Documents

Cultural awareness refers to the ability to recognize.docx
Untitled document.edited (22).docx
topic 11 dq1. 11.docx
b14.pdf
Exploring Communication Organizations.edited.docx
Is Online Learning More Effective than Classroom Instruction.edited.edited.docx
Blind Activity Form.docx
BSBXCM501 Task 3 Assessment Templates V1.1221.docx
Week 4 Discussion.docx
Writing An Interview Essay.pdf
GEN201 week4 discussion..docx
5d33dc44-c99e-4693-8669-8fdbe38df355.pdf