Travel Reference
In-Depth Information
ity level. It is also interesting to see that the companies that already had
some investment and business activities in the four CAS countries had a
lower perceived mean score (× -2.54) for “areas of direct tourism facili-
ties” than did those companies (× -3.02) that had no investment or busi-
ness activities at the time of the study The difference was statistically
significant at the 0.026 probability level. This finding may be attributed
to the fact that companies that have experience with the CAS countries
may know the situation of business and investment conditions better.
These companies may be the ones that take risk, as venture capitalists
often do in unexplored markets.
TABLE 3
Factor analysis of the tourism sustainable investment factors.
Sustainability investment consider-
ation
Factor
loading
Eigen-
value
Explained
variance
Reliability
coefficient
Factor 1: Positive investment condi-
tions for sustainability
Appropriate tourism policies
0.813
3.59
39.90%
0.774
Conducive market conditions for tour-
ism market growth and expansion
0.796
More attractive incentives relative to
other investment options and facilities
0.73
Wide market possibilities as a result
of geographic location
0.708
Degree of liberalism in the economy
0.62
Appropriate law and regulations
system
0.405
Factor 2: Attractive investment cost
Low construction cost compare with
European countries
0.887
1.94
21.50%
0.791
Long term use of public land with
infrastructure in place
0.8
Relatively low capital cost and
expenses
0.783
Total variance explained
61.50%
Note
: Extraction Method—principal component analysis; Rotation Method—Vari-
max with Kaiser normalization; KMO (Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin measure of sampling ad-
equacy) - 0.714; Bartlett's test of sphericity: p - 0.000.
Scale rating: 1 - strongly disagree; 2 - disagree; 3 - neither disagree nor agree; 4 -
agree; and 5 - strongly agree.
Search WWH ::
Custom Search