The Levels of Community Readiness and Community Characteristics in the Development of Tourism Village (Bangelan Village, Malang Regency, Indonesia)

2.1 Data collection

This research on the level of community readiness uses a quantitative approach with primary and secondary data collection methods [13]. First, the level of community readiness (Community Readiness Model) is used to assess readiness which goes through stages in recognizing needs (stimulation of interest). The second is the existence of programs applied to community groups to formulate problem formulations and solutions (initiation). Finally, there is acceptance from regional heads regarding the need for implementation to meet local needs (legitimization), build a specific plan through broader community involvement (decision to act), and implement programs, plans, and solutions that have been made [12].

Observation, interviewing, and delivering questionnaires were primary data gathering methods. Observations are used to ascertain the village's existing state, emphasizing its potential to promote tourism growth. In the readiness level research, interviews were conducted with key informants who were deemed to better understand the development of Bangelan village as a tourism village, including the Bangelan Village Head, tourism managers, and the heads of community groups responsible for village development. Interview data cover potential challenges associated with developing tourist villages, village superior commodities, and community activities related to developing tourist villages.

Meanwhile, a questionnaire addressed to community groups was used to identify the relationship between community characteristics and the level of community readiness. The questionnaire consists of questions related to community readiness dimensions. Respondents are also asked about their characteristics, including gender, age, education level, type of work, and income. There are also key respondents in this study: six people, including the Head of Bangelan Village, Head of Sidomulyo Hamlet, Chair of the Tourism Awareness Group (Pokdarwis), Head of Farmers Group, and Head of Service, and Head of RT. While the research respondents from the general public were determined using the proportionate stratified random sampling technique regarding the table of Krejcei and Morgan [14] and obtained 185 research respondents.

2.2 Data analysis

2.2.1 Descriptive statistical analysis

The statistical analysis aims to describe a data set without changing it and not generalizing or drawing generally accepted conclusions. This analysis is appropriate if the data to be described is sample data and the findings made do not apply to the sampled population. Descriptive statistics are presented in tables, graphs, averages (means), deviations, and percentage calculations [15].

2.2.2 Scoring analysis of community readiness levels based on key respondents

Community readiness levels are scored by the initial step of asking questions to key respondents [8]. Using key respondents is to gather information regarding the community, including community leaders, professionals, or residents who know the community. These respondents can provide in-depth explanations regarding issues that exist in the development of tourist villages. In this case, the key respondents are individuals who have knowledge of society and are not necessarily leaders or decision-makers [12, 16, 17]. Therefore, the readiness level assessment aims to determine the evaluation of crucial respondents regarding community readiness related to developing tourist villages in Bangelan Village. The following (Eq. (1)) is the score equation for the readiness level variable:

S = N x B             (1)

where:

S: Variable Score

N: The total value of each sub-variable

B: Weight

This formula is used to determine the total score of each variable whose data is obtained from the questionnaire results. The interval calculation is carried out to know the class distance to determine the ranking and classification of the variable scores selected. The following equation calculates interval class (Eq. (2)):

Interval $=\frac{\text { Maximum Value-Minimum Value }}{\text { Number of classification }}$       (2)

The questionnaire addressed to the public contains questions where each question has five answer choices with a range of 1 to 5. Nine readiness level ladders sort the scores. The design of the instrument used to measure the scale is a closing statement or question that has five answer choices [18]. The questionnaire consists of 15 questions related to the six community readiness dimensions (K1-K6) below (Eq. (3)).

where:

Strongly Agree = 5

Agree = 4

Enough = 3

Disagree = 2

Strongly Disagree = 1

$\mathrm{CRP}=\frac{V C R}{6}=\frac{\sum K 1+K 2+K 3+K 4+K 5+K 6}{6}$          (3)

where:

CRP: Community readiness point

VCR: Value community readiness

K1: Community Efforts

K2: Community knowledge related to

K3: Leadership

K4: Community conditions

K5: Public knowledge about issues

K6: Resources related to issues

Each variable is explained as follows: 1). Community business is public knowledge about implementing tourism activities, and 2). Community awareness about activities is public knowledge about the growth of tourist communities. 3). Leadership is the process by which leaders participate in the execution of actions. 4). The community condition refers to the community's attitude toward developing a tourist resort. 5). Community awareness of the issue is determined by current information and data availability. 6). The community's willingness to assist [11].

Table 1. Scoring level of community readiness

The rating scale's total score representing the readiness level ladder is determined using alternate answers 1-5. Thus, the first ladder has a value range of 1 to 1.4. The second ladder has a value range of 1.5 to 1.9, and so forth. The following table (Table 1) summarizes the level of community preparedness for each readiness scale.

2.2.3 Analysis scoring of community readiness levels based on community groups

The assessment of community preparation levels was conducted using data from questionnaires completed by 185 respondents. Five criteria were used to evaluate the data: very high, high, moderate/moderate, low, and very low. The readiness assessment is completed by assigning a score to each criterion. The population of this study is defined as the number of individuals who are members of the village's prospective development group. As a result, farmer groups, POKDARWIS, women farmer groups, and livestock groups were contacted for research samples.

The highest value is if all respondents answer very high (5 points), and the lowest answer is very low (1 point). The highest value could calculate in Eq. (4) and the lowest in Eq. (5). The Data range is Eq. (6), and the interval is in Eq. (7). The following is the formula (Eq. (4), Eq. (5), Eq. (5) and Eq. (7)).

Highest Value= Number of respondents x highest weight = 185 x 5= 925     （4）

Lowest Value= Number of respondents x lowest weight= 185 x 1 = 185      （5）

Data Range= Highest score- Lowest score= 905 – 181= 740       （6）

Interval $=\frac{\text { Data Range }}{\text { Number of classification }}=\frac{740}{5}=148$      (7)

This data (Table 2) is utilized to establish the range of responses to the community preparedness questionnaire, which will be processed to ascertain the characteristics of community readiness based on community characteristics.

Table 2. Range class

2.2.4 Cross tabulation analysis

Cross-tabulation analysis or elaboration technique is the simplest analytical method to explain the relationship between variables firmly. In cross-tabulation analysis, the relationship between research variables is reviewed based on the percentage distribution in the cells in the table. The percentage is always calculated on the influencing variable [18]. Variables used in the cross-tabulation analysis are categorical variables with a nominal scale [19]. In this study, the independent variables used include knowledge, public awareness, skills, experience, age, and livelihood. While the dependent variable used is the level of community readiness. The use of crosstab analysis is carried out to identify whether there is a relationship between community characteristics and the level of readiness of the Bangelan Village community. In cross-tabulation analysis, there is a chi-square as a statistical indicator. Through the chi-square test expressed in rows and columns, it can be seen whether the variables studied are related or not. The provisions in the chi-square test include:

(a) If the probability value is in the Asymp column. Sig > 0.05, then H0 is accepted where the variables studied are not related.

(b) If the probability value of the Asymp column. Sig < 0.05, then H1 is accepted where the variables tested are related to each other.

Various factors influence the level of community readiness. In this case, the cross-tabulation analysis is used to see whether there is a link between a person's traits and the level of community readiness. The results of the cross-tabulation analysis are presented in Table 5 and Table 6.

The crosstab test Chi-square shows a value of 0.003 less than 0.05. The involvement of men in the development of Bangelan Tourism Village is more dominant than women. Sixty male and sixty-nine female respondents were classified as ready (Table 5). The test results indicate a relationship between gender and community readiness excise. In the development of the Bangelan Tourism Village, the involvement of the male sex community is more dominant due to the need for energy. However, women who are women are also involved in the development of tourist villages, such as joining the Women Farmers Group (KWT), which is tasked with guarding stalls in tourist areas on certain days.

According to the crosstab result about age and level of readiness (Table 7), most respondents were between the ages of 37 and 46, and 43 were classified as ready. The test results show that age and community readiness are not related.

Table 5. Results of crosstab gender

Source: Analysis Results, 2021

Table 6. Chi-square test of gender and level of readiness

Source: Analysis Results, 2021

Table 7. Results of crosstab age and level of readiness

Source: Analysis Results, 2021

Table 8. Chi-square test of age and level of readiness

Source: Analysis Results, 2021

The crosstab test Chi-square shows a value of 0.129 greater than 0.05 (Table 8). Based on the survey results, the majority of the people involved in the development of the Bangelan Tourism Village are farmers and ranchers who already have mature thoughts. Youth involvement in the development of Bangelan Tourism Village is still minimal due to regeneration that has not been thoroughly carried out by community groups such as farmer groups. However, youth are now starting to be involved in tourism activities such as parking attendants and security officers at tourist attractions.

Table 9. Results crosstab education level and readiness

Source: Analysis Results, 2021

Table 10. Chi-square test of education level and readiness level

Source: Analysis Results, 2021

Based on the result of crosstab education level and readiness (Table 9), there are 62 respondents with education in elementary school, 17 respondents in junior high school, and 19 respondents in high school. The level of community education affects competence in terms of knowledge (Table 10).

The crosstab test Chi-square is more significant than 0.05. The test results show that the level of education with community readiness is not related. However, some activities improve community competence, such as socialization and training from various parties. The training and socialization activities that Bangelan Village has held include training on milk processing for the Women Farmers Group (KWT), the development of the Farmers Group by the Livestock Service Office, and various outreach and training activities carried out by academics.

The test results show that the type of work with community readiness is related (Table 11). The crosstab shows that 34 farmer respondents were in the "very ready" group, and 50 farmers were in the "ready" group.

The crosstab test Chi-square shows a value of 0.000 less than 0.05 (Table 12). In most cases, farmers and ranchers are more likely to participate in tourism development activities. This could be because they meet, socialize, or do things in groups or around tourist attractions. Farmers who are members of farmer groups more often carry out training activities to improve competence and deliberation between group members. They tend to be more prepared in developing tourist villages. In addition, the availability of information media that has been integrated into the group facilitates public acceptance of the information provided.

Table 11. Crosstab type of work and level of readiness

Source: Analysis Results, 2021

Table 12. Chi-square test of type of work and level of readiness

Source: Analysis Results, 2021

Based on the crosstab results between income and level of readiness (Table 13), most respondents are members of farmer groups (105 people), which 54% are classified as ready to develop tourism villages. Community members of the village potential development group tend to have easier access to information and activities that support their competence.

The crosstab and Chi-square test results showed a value of 0.000, more diminutive than 0.05 (Table 14). Based on these results, it is known that there is a relationship between income and the level of community readiness. Direct involvement in the tourism village business also affects community readiness. It can be seen in the crosstab results where managers, technicians, and parking guards tend to be very ready to develop tourist villages along with the many experiences they have. Meanwhile, among traders who sell tourist objects, 66.7% of them are classified as quite ready because they only sell on certain days and rarely participate in deliberation activities for the development of tourist villages.

Based on the crosstab analysis result of engagement on community readiness level (Table 15) indicate a relationship between involvement in the development of tourist villages and the level of readiness. Respondents who are members of community groups tend to be more prepared in developing tourist villages. This is partly due to the ease of obtaining information facilitated by the group. In addition, members of community groups more often receive training or socialization that can increase competence at work. This corresponds to the Chi-square test results (Table 16), the calculated Chi-Square value is 36,158. With a significance level of 5% and df=10, the Chi-square table value is 18.307, so the Chi-Square count > from the Chi-square table. Meanwhile, the Asym. Value. Sig. shows a value of 0.000 < 0.05.

Table 13. Results of crosstab between income and level of readiness

Source: Analysis Results, 2021

Table 14. Chi-square test of income and level of readiness

Source: Analysis Results, 2021

Based on the results of the analysis above, it can be seen that the people of Bangelan Village are in a ready condition for the development of Tourism Villages. Several characteristics that influence community readiness are gender, type of work, and community involvement in tourism village development. Gender is related to the division of labor between men and women in work both in agriculture and tourism. This division of labor accelerates community readiness in developing programs in the village. Orbawati [17] found that to increase community readiness in realizing the global village tourism sector, the village government must increase the availability of resources (including huma resources). In contrast, the type of work will influence tourism development because farmers who develop tourism will be more enthusiastic. This is because they will positively impact the certainty of the market location in village tourism attractions. In line with Nugraha [22] finding, there is some implication for the development of tourism and sustainable agriculture.

Table 15. Crosstab analysis of engagement on community readiness levels

Table 16. Chi-square test of engagement on community readiness levels