© 2024 The authors. This article is published by IIETA and is licensed under the CC BY 4.0 license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
OPEN ACCESS
Assessment of community readiness is an important step in developing actions that can be taken in the future. This research aims to identify the readiness of the Bangelan Village community for the development of the Bangelan Agro Tourism Village. condition of community readiness was analyzed qualitatively, and the score assessment of the level of community readiness was analyzed using the 2014 Tri-Ethnic Center Community Readiness Model, which uses five variables, namely community knowledge, leadership, community conditions, community knowledge about problems, and problem-solving resources. The analysis results show that Bangelan Village is on the 6th ladder of "initiation", which means that community members know about local efforts; leadership plays a vital role in planning, developing, and/or implementing new efforts, modifications, or improvements, and attitudes in the community. Based on this readiness, efforts to develop it include carrying out socialization and training, improving facilities and infrastructure, clarifying the institutional framework, and increasing the creativity of leaders.
rural development, Bangelan Village, agro tourism, community readiness model, readiness level
Rural development is an effort to improve the quality of life and welfare of rural communities [1]. The goal of village development is to create a better environment, increase access to basic infrastructure and services, and develop local economic potential [2-5]. Rural development also aims to reduce the development gap between urban and rural areas. Rural development is also in line with the principles of sustainable development, which emphasizes the importance of considering environmental, social and economic aspects in making development decisions [6]. In this context, village development also includes environmental protection, sustainable management of natural resources, and disaster risk reduction [7].
Rural tourism has many significant benefits, for the development of local communities as well as for all village development [8]. The main benefits of village tourism are; 1). Become a new source of income for the village community. With tourists, people can sell local products, such as handicrafts, traditional food, or tourism services such as photo services, etc., 2). Village tourism can create new jobs for rural communities. Such as being a tour guide, providing lodging, restaurants, local transportation, and various other services. 3). Village tourism can help maintain and preserve local culture and traditions [9, 10], 4). To support rural tourism, it is necessary to develop infrastructure such as roads, drainage, sanitation, accommodation and recreation areas [11, 12].
One of the themes for village tourism development is agro-tourism which combines agriculture with other village tourism objects for holidays in the village [13, 14]. The agro-tourism development approach includes conservation-based development, identification of agro-tourism areas or areas, a list of agro-tourism advantages, as well as community and institutional roles [15, 16].
Agriculture is very important in supporting and providing compensation in transforming a village into a tourist village with the agro-tourism concept. The concept of agrotourism is expected to increase village independence, provide employment opportunities and have an impact on improving the community's economy [17]. One of the villages that is developing a village with the concept of agro-tourism is Bangelan Agro Tourism Village, which is in Wonosari District, Malang Regency. The focus of village development is as a center for Robusta coffee, a center for superior goats, a center for beef cattle, a center for compost processing, and a center for rice food, a home industry for processed goat milk, and an increase in natural attractions such as the Tanaka Waterfall, Bangelan Park and Rest Area, and Kampung Baru Fresh Fish Tourism. Rural potential that is identified and managed well will enable tourist villages to develop optimally [18, 19].
Currently, the potential of Tanaka Waterfall is developing quite well, but other potentials are still in the development stage. So that further efforts are needed to develop all the potential that exists. The main obstacles in the development of Bangelan Village as Bangelan Agro Tourism Village are the lack of community involvement in village development, the lack of village institutional functions, and the absence of the concept of embodiment of educational area-based village tourism development, so that every potential that exists in each hamlet is still running on its own [20].
Bangelan Village has also not fully been able to provide jobs to the community. This can be seen from the fact that there are still many people who choose to work outside the village because work in the village does not fully guarantee the fulfillment of community needs. In addition, market access to selling local products is also limited due to a lack of business branding skills and narrow relations or market access to trade.
Community readiness studies are a basic step in formulating actions that regulate steps that can be taken in the future [21]. In developing a tourist village, community readiness is needed to be involved in program development efforts. One of the methods used to assess community readiness is to use the Community Readiness Model from the Tri-Ethnic Center for Prevention Research [21]. There are 2 versions of this model, namely the 2006 Tri-Ethnic Center version and the 2014 Tri-Ethnic Center version.
These two versions of assessing the level of community readiness differ in terms of the number of variables and sounds as well as the number of measuring indicators. The 2006 Tri-Ethnic Center has 6 measuring variables, namely Community Effort, community knowledge regarding efforts, Leadership, community conditions, community knowledge regarding issues, and Problem solving resources. Meanwhile, the 2014 Tri-Ethnic Center has 5 variables, namely community knowledge regarding efforts, leadership, community conditions, community knowledge regarding issues, and problem solving resources. So there are differences in the results of the value of the level of community readiness. This is what underlies researchers to compare the research results on the level of community readiness from the 2006 Tri-Ethnic Center measurement results and the 2014 Tri-Ethnic Center version.
The main objective of this research is to identify the readiness of the Bangelan Village community in developing the Bangelan Agro Tourism Village using the 2006 version of the Tri-Ethnic Center method with the 2014 version of the Tri-Ethnic Center, measuring the condition of community readiness in each hamlet in the Bangelan Agro Tourism Village based on the dimensions of the level of community readiness. and formulate efforts to develop the Bangelan Agro Tourism Village based on community readiness. Assessment of the level of community readiness in village development is used to evaluate each variable of community readiness level, and analysis of the community readiness model is used to determine the achievement of the level of community readiness in developing tourist villages. Community readiness is obtained through an assessment of community groups involved in village potential development groups such as Pokdarwis (Tourism Awareness Group), Farmer Groups, Farmer Women's Groups, and Village Apparatus [22].
Based on the explanation of the problems above, the research will identify the readiness of the community in Bangelan Village from the results of questionnaires and interviews, then try to compare the value of community readiness between the 2006 and 2014 versions of the Tri-Ethnic Center using the Community Readiness Model analysis.
2.1 Data collection
This research was conducted in Bangelan Village, Wonosari District, Malang Regency, which consists of 4 hamlets. Namely Bangelan Hamlet, Arjomulyo Hamlet, Sidomulyo Hamlet, and Kampung Baru Hamlet. This research uses qualitative and quantitative methods. A qualitative approach to explain the characteristics of the Bangelan Village community as a tourist village, data obtained from questionnaires and semi-structured interviews with key respondents. Meanwhile, quantitative is data that is processed statistically by assessing the value of community readiness using analysis of the 2006 and 2014 versions of the community readiness model.
The variables used in this study are using the 2006 version of the 6 Tri-Ethnic Center Variables namely Community Business, Community Knowledge, Leadership, Community Conditions, Knowledge of Problems and Problem-solving Resources. And 5 variables from the 2014 Tri-Ethnic Center concerning Community Readiness Model namely Community Knowledge, Leadership, Community Conditions, Knowledge of Problems and Problem Solving Resources [23]. The respondents used were 40 key respondents who were considered to know the conditions of Bangelan Village. Each hamlet in Bangelan Village was represented by 10 key respondents. The calculation of the number of key respondents is based on the theory of the Community Readiness model which states that 10 key respondents are sufficient in each area. Based on this theory, the author took 10 people each in each hamlet because the research area was in each hamlet, so that the total population was 40 people in one village [24].
Collecting data through a primary survey in the form of questionnaires, interviews and observations, as well as a secondary survey in the form of literature studies. The questionnaire technique is carried out by providing questionnaire sheets to 40 key respondents, and then the key respondents are interviewed about the village tourism program. Additionally, observation techniques are used to assess the existing tourism conditions in the village, including maintenance of tourist sites and the activities of residents in village development. This observation is conducted in order to compare the survey results obtained from questionnaires and interviews with the existing conditions.
The data collected is then processed using a scoring technique from the community readiness model, or adding up the scores of community readiness values, so that it can be seen which level of community readiness is on the ladder. Based on the Community Readiness model theory, there are 9 steps to measure community readiness namely [23]:
2.2 Data analysis
2.2.1 Descriptive statistical analysis
Statistical analysis is an analysis that aims to provide a description of a set of data without changing it and not generalizing or drawing conclusions that are generally accepted. The use of this analysis is appropriate if the data to be described is sample data and the conclusions made do not apply to the sampled population. The presentation of descriptive statistics can be in the form of tables, graphs, averages (means), deviations and percentage calculations [25]. In this research, the results of the community readiness score questionnaire were tabulated and then analyzed using the Community Readiness model calculation, then the calculation results were explained descriptively statistically.
2.2.2 Study comparison
Comparative research is research that is intended to find out and or test the differences between two or more groups [26]. Comparative research is also research conducted to compare a variable (object of research), between different subjects or different times and find causal relationships [27]. The comparison method is a method used to compare data drawn into new conclusions [28]. In this study, we will compare the results of the readiness value of the Bangelan Village community, namely between the versions of the 2006 Tri-Ethnic Center and the 2014 Tri-Ethnic Center.
These two versions of assessing the level of community readiness differ in terms of the number of variables and sounds as well as the number of measuring indicators. The 2006 Tri-Ethnic Center has 6 measuring variables, namely Community Effort, community knowledge regarding efforts, Leadership, community conditions, community knowledge regarding issues, and Problem solving resources. Meanwhile, the 2014 Tri-Ethnic Center has 5 variables, namely community knowledge regarding efforts, leadership, community conditions, community knowledge regarding issues, and problem solving resources. So there are differences in the results of the value of the level of community readiness. This is what underlies researchers to compare the research results on the level of community readiness from the 2006 Tri-Ethnic Center measurement results and the 2014 Tri-Ethnic Center version.
The researcher tried to compare the 2 versions of this assessment because previously in 2021 the researcher measured the level of readiness of the Bangelan Village community with the Tri-Ethnic Center in 2006 with the status of Bangelan Village as an Agricultural Village, so that in 2023 the researcher tried to re-identify the readiness of the Bangelan Village community with the Tri-Ethnic Center in 2014 with the status of Bangelan Village as Bangelan Agro Tourism Village. The differences in years, village conditions, village development status and methods for measuring the readiness of the Bangelan Village community indicate that there are differences in the value of the level of readiness of the Bangelan Village community in 2023.
2.2.3 Scoring analysis of community readiness levels
Assessment of community readiness can be carried out using six dimensions of readiness (2006 version) and five dimensions (2014 version). This readiness is used to determine the extent to which the community is ready to address a problem or issue. A scoring and weighting analysis was carried out to measure which of the 9 levels of preparedness of the Bangelan Village community is located. Each indicator is associated with nine levels of community readiness [22], which is known from the total score for all variables. The answer choices for each question item consist of 9 answer choices, ranging from 1 to 9 [29].
The following is the formula for finding the Community Readiness Level using the 2006 Tri-Ethnic Center:
$\mathrm{PKM}=\frac{N K M}{6}=\frac{\sum K 1+K 2+K 3+K 4+K 5+K 6}{6}$ (1)
Information:
NKM: Community Readiness Value
PKM: Community Readiness Point
K1: Community Business
K2: Knowledge of activities
K3: Leadership
K4: Community Conditions
K5: Knowledge of activity issues
K6: Resources for resolution efforts
And here's the formula for finding the level of community readiness using the 2014 Tri-Ethnic Center:
$\mathrm{PKM}=\frac{N K M}{5}=\frac{\sum K 1+K 2+K 3+K 4+K 5+K 6}{5}$ (2)
Information:
NKM: Community Readiness Value
PKM: Community Readiness Point
K1: Knowledge of activities
K2: Leadership
K3: Community Conditions
K4: Knowledge of activity issues
K5: Resources for resolution efforts
3.1 Bangelan Village overview
Bangelan Village is in Wonosari District, Malang Regency. Wonosari District has varied landscapes such as hills, rivers, plantations, rice fields, and others. This natural condition strongly supports the development of tourism in Wonosari District [30]. Bangelan Village is divided into Bangelan Hamlet, Sidomulyo Hamlet, Arjomulyo Hamlet, and Kampung Baru Hamlet. The area of Bangelan Village is estimated to be around 768.10 ha or 16.33% of the total area of Wonosari District. However, the administrative area managed by Bangelan Village is 167.20 ha, because around 600 ha is a coffee plantation area belonging to PTPN XXI. Bangelan Village has a variety of altitudes ranging from 345 meters above sea level to >574 meters above sea level, where the further north, the topography of Bangelan Village is higher, this area can be found in coffee and sengon plants [17].
The Bangelan Village Government supports and encourages the development of educational tourism with various village potentials, both natural resources and livestock potentials, within the village tourism cluster system. The ongoing tourism activities in Bangelan Village include water resource management, education on superior goat breeding, community coffee processing, the improvement of organic rice products, and livestock waste processing [24]. The administrative boundaries of Bangelan Village are as follows.
North: Sumbertempur Village
West Side: Karangrejo Village
South side: Kromengan village
East: Kluwut Village
3.2 Overview of Bangelan Village tourism
Bangelan Village was proclaimed as Bangelan Agro Tourism Village in December 2022 by the Regent of Malang Regency, with a focus on village development, namely water tourism, fresh fish tourism, goat farming and dairy tourism, coffee plantation tourism, and development of village parks. Each hamlet has a different focus on tourism development according to the potential and regional characteristics of each hamlet.
Bangelan Hamlet is the administrative center of Bangelan Village (Figure 1), the Village Hall facility is located in this hamlet, besides being a government facility this village hall is useful as a means of supporting community activities such as training, skill development, and community empowerment or innovation development. In this hamlet there is a tourist object, namely the Area and Bangelan Park (Figure 2) which was developed on the main route entering Bangelan Village. Bangelan Park has tourist support facilities such as cafes, food stalls, fishing ponds, and photo spots.
Figure 1. Administration map of Bangelan Village
Figure 2. Rest area and park Bangelan
Arjomulyo Hamlet is better known as Tanaka Hamlet because of its historical background where this area became a Japanese army settlement during the Japanese colonial period, this hamlet developed the potential for horticultural crops and water tourism or known as Tanaka Waterfall (Figure 3). Tanaka Waterfall is a tour that utilizes nature, namely the river, which was built in early 2020. The hallmark of Tanaka Waterfall is that it provides chair and table facilities in the middle of the river so that tourists can relax in the middle of the river. besides that, at Tanaka Waterfall there is a hall for community gatherings, rest area and park, Banglean cafes, food stalls, toilets, prayer rooms, and swimming pools. The existence of this facility is very supportive of tourist activities.
Sidomulyo Hamlet is better known as a livestock hamlet because of its well-developed livestock potential. Due to the potential of goat farming, Bangelan Village is also known as a center for Boer Goats, South Malang Regency. These goats are managed by the Karya Mulya farmer group. In 2019 the Karya Mulya group received assistance from the Malang District Animal Husbandry Service for 20 goats and the construction of a communal cage (Figure 4a). Since then, goat farms have been growing and utilizing other livestock products such as goat milk and goat manure compost. In 2020 the Bangelan village government is increasingly developing the potential of goat's milk by building a Bangelan Café (Figure 4b) and Dairy House (Figure 4c) and Bangelan Café (Figure 4a) to increase the marketing of goat's milk.
Figure 3. Tanaka Waterfall
Figure 4. a) Communal Cage, b) Bangelan Café, c) Dairy House
Kampung Baru hamlet is the hamlet that is farthest from the government center of Bangelan Village. To access Kampung Baru Hamlet, the community usually takes the main road in Karangrejo Village and Jambuwer Village, because the road in Bangelan Village is in a damaged condition and is still rocky, making it difficult to access. Because the distance is quite far from the government center of Bangelan Village, it has an impact on limited community knowledge regarding the tourism village development program. Skills and business development are also hampered not as smooth as in Sidomulyo Hamlet, Arjomulyo Hamlet and Bangelan Hamlet. In developing tourism villages, in 2021 utilizing village funds in the amount of 120 million, and in 2022 getting more assistance from Bank BRI to increase MSMEs and develop fresh fish tourism (Figure 5).
Table 1. Total dimensional calculation of community preparedness level version 2006
Variable |
Dsn Banger |
Dsn. Arjomulyo |
Dsn. Sidomulyo |
Dsn. New Village |
Bangelan Village Readiness |
Community Business |
4.4 |
6.4 |
5.2 |
4.4 |
5.1 |
Community knowledge related to business |
5.7 |
8.2 |
7.0 |
4.8 |
6.4 |
Leadership |
6.4 |
7.3 |
6.5 |
6.4 |
6.7 |
Community Conditions |
5.6 |
8.3 |
6.1 |
5.2 |
6.3 |
Community knowledge related to the problem |
5.7 |
6.4 |
6.2 |
5.6 |
6.0 |
Resources for prevention efforts |
6.5 |
7.9 |
7.6 |
7.0 |
7.3 |
Community Readiness |
|
6.3 |
Source: Analysis Results, 2022
3.3 Community readiness level
3.3.1 Tri-ethnic center 2006
In calculating the level of community readiness based on village potential development groups, it was carried out using the results of the questionnaire, which were then calculated for each variable score so that the level of community readiness in the development of Bangelan Agro Tourism Village was determined. Based on the calculation of the highest value.
Figure 5. Fresh fish tourism
The 2006 version of community readiness assessment can be carried out using six dimensions of readiness level. Analysis of the 2006 version of the Community Readiness Model was carried out to measure at which level of the 9 levels of community readiness, the readiness of the Bangelan Tourism Village community is located. Based on the results of the calculations in Table 1 above, the overall value of the level of community readiness is 3.8, if calculated through the formula it can be as follows:
$\begin{aligned} & \mathrm{PKM}= \frac{N K M}{6}=\frac{\left(\sum X 1+\sum X 2+\sum X 3+\sum X 4+\sum X 5+\sum X 6\right)}{6} \\ &=\frac{(5.1+6.4+6.7+6.3+6.0+7.3)}{6}=6.3\end{aligned}$
From the calculation of the readiness level value above, it can be seen that the readiness value category is in the table below.
Table 2. Classification of community readiness values
No Stairs |
Readiness Level |
1 |
No Awareness |
2 |
Denial/resistance |
3 |
Vague awareness |
4 |
Preplanning |
5 |
preparation |
6 |
Initiation |
7 |
stabilization |
8 |
Confirmation/expansion |
9 |
High level of community ownership |
Source: Author, 2023
Based on Table 2 above, it can be seen that the level of readiness of the Bangelan village community is on the 6th step, namely Initiation, because it has a score of 6.3. Initiation means an activity or action has been completed started by community members and is ongoing, but is still seen as a new venture. There may be great enthusiasm among leaders because of limitations and problems that have not yet been experienced.
3.3.2 Tri-ethnic center 2014
The development of the Community Readiness Model theory has been carried out by Stanley, et al in 2014, since the last editions in 2006 and 2014. In the 2014 version, the community readiness model has 5 measurement indicators, namely community knowledge related to business, leadership, community conditions, knowledge related to problems and, Problem solving resources. The following is the result of the 2014 version of community preparedness measurement results.
Based on the results of the calculations in Table 3, the overall value of the level of community readiness is 6.5, if calculated through the formula it can be as follows:
$\begin{gathered}\mathrm{PKM}=\frac{N K M}{6}=\frac{\left(\sum X 1+\sum X 2+\sum X 3+\sum X 4+\sum X 5+\sum X 6\right)}{5} \\ =\frac{(6.4+6.7+6.3+6.0+7.3)}{5} =6.5\end{gathered}$
Table 3. Total calculation of community preparedness level dimensions version 2014
Variable |
Dsn. Banger |
Dsn. Arjomulyo |
Dsn. Sidomulyo |
Dsn. New Village |
Bangelan Village Readiness |
Community knowledge related to business |
5.7 |
8.2 |
7.0 |
4.8 |
6.4 |
Leadership |
6.4 |
7.3 |
6.5 |
6.4 |
6.7 |
Community Conditions |
5.6 |
8.3 |
6.1 |
5.2 |
6.3 |
Community knowledge related to the problem |
5.7 |
6.4 |
6.2 |
5.6 |
6.0 |
Resources for prevention efforts |
6.5 |
7.9 |
7.6 |
7.0 |
7.3 |
Community Readiness |
6.5 |
Source: Analysis Results, 2023
From the calculation of the readiness level value above, it can be seen that the readiness value category is in Table 4.
Table 4. Classification of community readiness values
No Stairs |
Readiness Level |
1 |
No Awareness |
2 |
Denial/resistance |
3 |
Vague awareness |
4 |
Preplanning |
5 |
preparation |
6 |
Initiation |
7 |
stabilization |
8 |
Confirmation/expansion |
9 |
High level of community ownership |
Source: Author, 2023
Based on Table 4. above it also shows the same level, which is on the 6th Initiation ladder because it has a score of 6.5. Initiation means:
Forms of maintaining this condition are village programs such as planning community activities to maintain support for issues, holding training for the community, introducing program evaluation through training, holding meetings to review progress, and changing/modifying strategies. This activity illustrates that tourism leaders and actors are starting to play an active role in efforts to develop tourist villages by focusing on expanding and improving tourism activity services. The problem-solving resource component is the highest component, because most of the resources allocated for development efforts come from sources that are expected and provide stable or sustainable support, such as BI's CSR and tourism management results. After that followed the Leadership component.
Assessment of community readiness according to the Tri-Ethnic Center both the 2006 and 2014 versions both show the level of readiness of the people of Bangelan Village to be on the 6th ladder, namely Initiation. Even though the numbers of indicators to identify readiness are different, where the 2006 version of the Tri-Ethnic Center is identified with 6 indicators, and both the 2014 version of the Tri-Ethnic Center identify with 5 indicators, the results still show the same level. Changes in the number of dimensions proposed by Linda R. Stanley (2014), where the 1st dimension of community business and the 4th dimension of community conditions have similar objectives, namely related to community attitudes towards efforts/programs. Because it has the same purpose, the researchers look at possible considerations for why there is a change in the number of indicators [24].
3.4 Tourism village development efforts based on community readiness values
The tourist object of Bangelan Village which is currently being visited by many local tourists and tourists from outside the area is Tanaka Waterfall which is in Arjomulyo Hamlet. In one day the average number of tourists who come is 600 people, if calculated in 1 week the average turnover is reached 30 million.
In order for Bangelan Agro Tourism Village to continue to develop and run, not only to be busy at the beginning, there needs to be an innovative village government program or policy that supports tourism village development activities. Based on the results of an analysis of the level of community readiness, it was found that the dimensions that most influenced community readiness were problem-solving resources and leadership. The community believes that their biggest problem in developing potential is financing constraints. Limited funds greatly affect the community to manage village potential. In addition, the leadership factor also greatly influences the achievement of the tourism village program. The community believes that leadership is important because it involves decisions about program implementation, smooth running of programs, and ensuring that existing programs are sustainable.
The community is already able to take part in social organizations and often takes part in discussion/socialization activities, already knows the potential of their village and the benefits of developing village tourism because the information is already available. If there are village problems, the community is willing to spare their time, make donations, and provide space/place. However, as an effort to increase community readiness so that the development of tourist villages continues and the community is more ready to participate, there are several recommendations that can be made, including:
3.4.1 Bangelan Hamlet
Tourism development in Bangelan Hamlet focuses on the development of the Bangelan Rest Area and Boer Goat Farm. Based on the identification of community readiness in the previous discussion sub-chapter, there are problems that hinder the development of this tourist attraction, such as limited development ideas, lack of community involvement, not optimal function of rest areas, and lack of rest area branding. Apart from being seen from the results of the analysis the level of readiness of the community is still on the 6th ladder, namely Initiation, to reach the 7th ladder "Stabilization" it is necessary:
Figure 6. Example of a tour package billboard
Figure 7. Example map of tourist routes in Bangelan Village
3.4.2 Arjomulyo Hamlet
Tourism development in Arjomulyo Hamlet focuses on developing the Tanaka Waterfall Tourism. Tanaka Waterfall has been operating since 2021, currently the monthly income is around 60-120 million. This result can help the community more or less. Each month in each RT, get financial assistance of 1 million rupiah. Because there are 12 RTs, each month spends 12 million for development in each RT.
Based on the analysis of community readiness, it was found that the readiness of the Arjomulyo Hamlet community was at the 7th level of "Stabilization". This condition is illustrated by the community taking full responsibility and developing the existing basic potential. This condition is in accordance with the existing conditions because the people in each RT always receive financial assistance, and many people protect and maintain the existing potential. Voluntarily, many people work at the Tanaka Waterfall Tourism.
But behind the success, they still face many obstacles, especially in the process of maintaining and developing their existing potential. The obstacles are the problem of funding which is felt to be lacking, and limited community manpower, so training and assistance is needed for the community, especially in terms of business branding, photo service capabilities, and learning to build MSMEs that take advantage of hamlets' potential such as cassava chips, tempeh, and other major vegetables.
In addition, it is necessary to activate promotions by utilizing technology. As we know that as time progresses, the use of technology is also increasingly sophisticated. Currently online marketing is the best way to market products including tourism village activities so that people outside the village can find out about the existence of Bangelan Tourism Village Agro, rather than just knowing that outsiders will plan to visit and ensure that people can access data and information related to tourism villages. easily and not only certain people who can access the data and information. This effort can be done by providing an openly accessible online platform.
3.4.3 Sidomulyo Hamlet
Tourism development in Sidomulyo Hamlet focuses on the development of the Communal Goat Cages, Milk Houses and Bangelan Café. Based on the results of the level of community readiness, the condition of readiness is on the 6th ladder, namely initiation. Most of the people already know the existence of potential in Sidomulyo Hamlet. The number of people involved is also almost the entire community, but those who play an active role in the utilization of these resources are quite a few. For example, only 7 people manage goat milk, only 5 people manage active communal pens and only 4 people manage cafe bangelan. Most of the others only breed in their homes. Based on the results of the analysis, the problems that hinder the development of potential are the lack of community participation, and the lack of branding of processed goat milk and processed coffee products from UMKM. as well as limited ability to manage compost. Apart from being seen from the results of the analysis the level of readiness of the community is still on the 6th ladder, namely Initiation, to reach the 7th ladder "Stabilization" it is necessary:
Figure 8. Existing Sidomulyo Dairy House (Front view and kitchen)
Figure 9. Sample drawing of Sidomulyo Dairy House development
Based on the picture above, it is necessary to build or provide special houses for goat milk production, besides that it is necessary to clarify the institutional framework that manages and fulfills BPOM requirements, one of which is a clean kitchen and far from sanitation such as bathrooms. Based on the existing conditions, the kitchen is still narrow and close to the bathroom.
3.4.4 Kampung Baru Hamlet
Tourism development in Kampung Baru Hamlet focuses on developing Fresh Fish Tourism. This tour has been planned since 2021, but until now the conditions have not been sufficient for tourists to visit. Because the construction has not been completed and the access road is still in a state of disrepair. This condition hinders the development of this tourism. Based on this statement also supports the researcher's statement to recommend several efforts:
Road repairs in Kampung Baru Hamlet need to be repaired because the condition is damaged and narrow, moreover the location of Kampung Baru Hamlet is very far from the government center of Bangelan Village, so if the road is damaged it greatly influences the factor of tourists' desire to visit. Can be seen below the road conditions in Kampung Baru Hamlet and road recommendations if repaired. Below is a picture 5.25. existing road, and Figures 10-12 recommendations for road improvement.
Figure 10. Existing road conditions
Figure 11. Example figure rRoad improvement recommendations
Figure 12. Cross section of Jl. New Village Kingdom
Based on research by Hasdiandi, A. (2021) says that in determining a tourist object to visit, tourists have many considerations that are influenced by many factors. One of these factors is the condition of the road which is closely related to the level of accessibility to tourism objects. So good road conditions are one of the reasons tourists choose to visit these tours [34].
The fresh fish tourism area needs to be rebuilt, because the existing condition of the pavement is still dirt and filled with weeds. Therefore, the researchers recommend the conditions of the fresh fish tourism area model as shown in Figure 13 of the existing Fresh Fish Tourism area, and Figure 14 recommendations for the fresh fish tourism area model.
Figure 13. Existing fresh fish tourism area
Figure 14. An example of a fresh fish tourism area model
The research examines the condition of community readiness in the development of the Bangelan Village tourism village.
This research was funded by Penelitian Doktor Lektor Kepala (DLK), Contract Number 44/UN10/PN/2023, and the APC was funded by Universitas Brawijaya.
[1] Septiansyah, B., Setiawan, A. (2021). Pelaksanaan pembangunan di desa nanjung kecamatan margaasih kabupaten bandung. JISIPOL| Jurnal Ilmu Sosial dan Ilmu Politik, 5(1): 24-37.
[2] Iskandar, A.H. (2020). SDGs Desa: Percepatan Pencapaian Tujuan Pembangunan Nasional Berkelanjutan. Yayasan Pustaka Obor Indonesia.
[3] Prayitno, G., Syaifurridzal, M. (2017). Social capital and public participation on planning in coastal area development. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 79(1): 012019. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/79/1/012019
[4] Prayitno, G., Hayat, A., Efendi, A., Auliah, A., Dinanti, D. (2022). Structural model of community social capital for enhancing rural communities adaptation against the COVID-19 pandemic: Empirical evidence from Pujon Kidul Tourism Village, Malang Regency, Indonesia. Sustainability, 14(19): 12949. https://doi.org/10.3390/su141912949
[5] Prayitno, G., Sari, N., Putri, I.K. (2019). Social capital in poverty alleviation through PRO-POOR tourism concept in slum area (case study: Kelurahan jodipan, Malang City). GEOMATE Journal, 16(55): 131-137. https://doi.org/10.21660/2019.55.37152
[6] Liu, Y., Zang, Y., Yang, Y. (2020). China’s rural revitalization and development: Theory, technology and management. Journal of Geographical Sciences, 30: 1923-1942. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11442-020-1819-3
[7] Rachmawati, E. (2020). Tourism and community empowerment at gunung leuser national park, Indonesia. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 528(1): 012001. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/528/1/012001
[8] Orbawati, E.B., Sujatmiko, F., Fauziah, N.M. (2020). Village community readiness in estabilishing a global village. Jurnal Ilmu Sosial, 19(1): 58-91. https://doi.org/10.14710/jis.19.1.2020.58-91
[9] Tseng, M.L., Chang, C.H., Wu, K.J., Lin, C.W.R., Kalnaovkul, B., Tan, R.R. (2019). Sustainable agritourism in Thailand: Modeling business performance and environmental sustainability under uncertainty. Sustainability, 11(15): 4087. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11154087
[10] Prayitno, G., Dinanti, D., Efendi, A., Hayat, A., Dewi, P.P. (2022). Social capital of Pujon Kidul communities in supporting the development of the COVID-19 resilience village. International Journal of Sustainable Development and Planning, 17(1): 251-257. https://doi.org/10.18280/ijsdp.170125
[11] Fang, W.T. (2020). Rural tourism: The way we green, sustainable, and healthy. In Tourism in Emerging Economies, 103-129. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-2463-9
[12] Riska Farisa, B.M., Prayitno, G., Dinanti, D. (2019). Social capital and community participation on infrastructure development in Pajaran Village, Malang Regency Indonesia. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 239(1): 012046. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/239/1/012046
[13] Nurlaela, S., Mursito, B., Shodiq, M.F., Hadi, P., Rahmawati, R. (2021). Economic empowerment of agro tourism “Jawaunik” (Java unique): A case study in Indonesia. Journal of Asian Finance, Economics and Business, 8(5): 741-748. https://doi.org/10.13106/jafeb.2021.vol8.no5.0741
[14] Prayitno, G., Hayat, A., Efendi, A., Tarno, H., Fikriyah, Fauziah, S.H. (2022). Structural model of social capital and quality of life of farmers in supporting sustainable agriculture (Evidence: Sedayulawas Village, Lamongan Regency-Indonesia). Sustainability, 14(19): 12487. https://doi.org/10.3390/su141912487
[15] Utami, B.A., Kafabih, A. (2021). Sektor pariwisata Indonesia di tengah pandemi COVID 19. JDEP (Jurnal Dinamika Ekonomi Pembangunan), 4(1): 8-14. https://doi.org/10.33005/jdep.v4i1.198
[16] Auliah, A., Prayitno, G., Ari, I.R.D., Rahmawati, Wardani, L.E., Meidiana, C. (2022). The role of social capital facing pandemic COVID-19 in tourism village to support sustainable agriculture (Empirical evidence from two tourism villages in Indonesia). Economies, 10(12): 320. https://doi.org/10.3390/economies10120320
[17] Nugraha, A., Prayitno, G., Rahmawati, R., Auliah, A. (2022). Farmers’ social capital in supporting sustainable agriculture: The case of pujon kidul tourism village, Indonesia. Civil and Environmental Science, 5(2): 235-249. https://doi.org/10.21776/ub.civense.2022.00502.12
[18] Augusty, W., Subagiyo, A., Wijayanti, W., Prayitno, G. (2022). Mapping of tourism potential and assessment of development stages in Sidomulyo Tourism Village, Batu City. Civil and Environmental Science, 5(1): 96-106. https://doi.org/10.21776/ub.civense.2022.00501.10
[19] Arizkha, Y.F., Prayitno, G., Dinanti, D., Biloshkurskyi, M.V., Hiddlestone-Mumford, J., Illingworth, J., Pant, S.C., Atkinson, C., Li, S. (2023). The effect of social capital relations and community participation in the development of the bejijong tourism village, Indonesia. Regional and Rural Studies, 1(2): 46-56. https://doi.org/10.21776/rrs.v1i2.18
[20] Prayitno, G., Auliah, A., Ari, I.R.D., Effendi, A., Hayat, A., Delisa, A., Siankwilimba, E., Hiddlestone-Mumford, J. (2023). Social capital for sustainable tourism development in Indonesia. Cogent Social Sciences, 10(1): 2293310. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2023.2293310
[21] Mishra, S. (2021). Community readiness for tourism product innovation. Local Food and Community Empowerment through Tourism, 308.
[22] Plested, B.A., Edwards, R.W., Jumper-Thurman, P. (2006). Community readiness: A handbook for successful change. Tri-Ethnic Center for Prevention Research, Colorado State University.
[23] Prayitno, G., Meidiana, C., Wardani, L.E., Hidayana, I.H., Widianti, A.P. (2022). Kesiapan Masyarakat &Pengembangan Desa Wisata Pertanian dalam Menunjang Pertanian Berkelanjutan. Madza Media.
[24] Stanley, M. (2014). Community readiness for community change. Tri-Ethnic Center for Prevention Research. Sage Hall: Colorado State University. https://tec.colostate.edu/communityreadiness/.
[25] Sholikhah, A. (2016). Statistik deskriptif dalam penelitian kualitatif. KOMUNIKA: Jurnal Dakwah Dan Komunikasi, 10(2): 342-362. https://doi.org/10.24090/komunika.v10i2.953
[26] Zhang, W., Bray, M. (2020). Comparative research on shadow education: Achievements, challenges, and the agenda ahead. European Journal of Education, 55(3): 322-341. https://doi.org/10.1111/ejed.12413
[27] Mohajan, H.K. (2020). Quantitative research: A successful investigation in natural and social sciences. Journal of Economic Development, Environment and People, 9(4): 50-79. https://doi.org/10.26458/jedep.v9i4.679
[28] Prince, S.A., Cardilli, L., Reed, J.L., Saunders, T.J., Kite, C., Douillette, K., Fournier, F., Buckley, J.P. (2020). A comparison of self-reported and device measured sedentary behaviour in adults: A systematic review and meta-analysis. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, 17: 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12966-020-00938-3
[29] Edwards, R.W., Jumper-Thurman, P., Plested, B.A., Oetting, E.R., Swanson, L. (2000). Community readiness: Research to practice. Journal of Community Psychology, 28(3): 291-307. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1520-6629(200005)28:3<291::AID-JCOP5>3.0.CO;2-9
[30] Prayitno, G., Dinanti, D., Rahmawati, R., Wardhani, L.E., Auliah, A. (2022). Community decision making based on social capital during COVID-19 pandemic: Evidence from Bangelan Village tourism, Indonesia. Journal of Socioeconomics and Development, 5(1): 127-139. https://doi.org/10.31328/jsed.v5i1.3477
[31] Pramesti, P.U., Susanti, R., Ramandhika, M. (2021). Fasilitas penunjang rest area desa wiru: Sebuah usulan desain. Jurnal Pengabdian Bukit Pengharapan, 1(1): 55-60.
[32] Sukmana, E., Islamy, H. (2019). Peranan kepala desa dan partisipasi masyarakat dalam pembangunan fisik di desa aikmel kabupaten lombok timur provinsi nusa tenggara barat. J-3P (Jurnal Pembangunan Pemberdayaan Pemerintahan), 4(2): 95-109. https://doi.org/10.33701/j-3p.v4i2.855
[33] Cornellia, A.H. (2023). Pengembangan strategi marketing UMKM dan atraksi wisata desa wisata tepus gunungkidul. Jurnal Abdimas Pariwisata, 4(1): 78-83.
[34] Hasdiandi, A. (2021). Pengaruh kondisi jalan terhadap persepsi wisatawan memilih obyek wisata. In Seminar Nasional Insinyur Profesional (SNIP), 1(1). http://doi.org/10.23960/snip.v1i1.93
[35] Saputra, B., Abdillah, M.F. (2023). Strategi promosi wisata desa waturejo melalui digital marketing. 'Ibadatuna: Jurnal Pengabdian Masyarakat, 2(1): 147-160.