IJASTE – International Journal of Applied Sciences in Tourism and Events Vol.3 No.2 December 2019 221 EXPLORING LOCAL COMMUNITY PERCEPTION TO THE ECOTOURISM DEVELOPMENT ATTRACTION AT TUMPA MOUNT FOREST PARK, MANADO, INDONESIA Jufrina Mandulangi1, Benny Irwan Towoliu2 State Polytechnic of Manado, Manado, Indonesia email: 1jufrinam@gmail.com, 2benny.tourism@gmail.com, ABSTRACT Tourism development is inseparable from the role of local communities, government and the private sector. But in practice sometimes only the government and the private sector dominate the development of tourism. Local people who are part and even the owner of a natural and social-cultural tourism attraction are not involved in planning the development of a tourist area, and tend to be marginalized. This study aims to explore the perception of local communities towards the development of the Tumpa Mount People's Forest Park as an Ecotourism Attraction. Descriptive qualitative research methods are used to describe or use the details obtained from respondent’s explanation supported by data that are quantitative. Respondents sampling technique is purposive. The results show that the community support the establishment of this area is to become ecotourism attraction. Keywords: local community, ecotourism development attraction INTRODUCTION The concept of pro-poor-tourism shows - tourism development must provide benefits for increasing the income of local residents. Tourism must at least be able to open full or part-time employment opportunities, provide benefits to people's lives in the form of supporting facilities and infrastructure, as well as opportunities for the community in the decision-making process to improve life by ensuring better access to tourists and tourism operators, ( Hermantoro, 2010). This means that the local community is empowered in a tourist attraction. Community empowerment can be in the form of; (1) enable setting where strengthen conditions at the local level to be good, so that local people can be creative, (2) empowering local communities where the local people must be improved in their knowledge and skills so as to be able to utilize settings properly and (3) socio-political support, support is needed in the form of social, political, mailto:author@author1.com mailto:author61@author2.com IJASTE – International Journal of Applied Sciences in Tourism and Events Vol.3 No.2 December 2019 222 networking etc., (Pitana, in Permanasari, 2010). The last few years alternative forms of tourism that are suitable and can protect the ecological, social-cultural environment and the improvement of people's welfare are ecotourism. Ecotourism is responsible travel to natural areas which conserves the environment and improves the welfare of local people, (Ties in Lindberg & Hawkins 1993). Ecotourism must empower local residents then develop small business, improve infrastructure, security, communication, health and more, and make sure that tourism does not lead to environmental degradation, teach local population to respect native culture, improve conditions, prevent and encourage community participation in planning and decision making process, (Ashley, et. al 2001). Meanwhile Ecotourism is a form of tourism that preserves the ecological environment, preserves social culture, is not consumptive, orientation towards local residents in the form of supervision and provides economic benefits, (Goodwin, 1996; Fennell, 1999; EAA, 2000). The development of a tourist area is a strategy used to advance, improve, and improve the condition of tourism of an object and tourist attraction so that tourists can visit and be able to provide benefits to the community around the object and attraction of tourism and for the government, (Paturusi, 2008). Mount Tumpa is the name of the mountain located in the northern part of Manado City ± 15 Km from Manado City Center and very close to the Bunaken National Park. Defined as a Community Forest Park based on the Decree of the Minister of Forestry of the Republic of Indonesia Number SK.434 / Menhut-II / 2013 dated July 17, 2013. In accordance with the vision of the city of Manado as an ecotourism model city, in 2012 in the Regional Tourism Development Master Plan (RIPPDA) of this region designated as a forest and mountain ecotourism product. In planning the development of ecotourism should need to do an assessment of the potential of nature whether it is feasible or not ecotourism products developed (Towoliu, et.al, 2018). However, considering that some of these areas are part of the Bunaken national marine park, and the area is also designated as a forest park, then in fact that the Mount Tumpa area is still a natural area that can be used as an ecotourism area. IJASTE – International Journal of Applied Sciences in Tourism and Events Vol.3 No.2 December 2019 223 In the development of ecotourism, local people are an inseparable part of a tourist attraction. They need to get understanding and attention and also be invited to be involved in these activities. The purpose of this study was to determine the perception of the community around the area of the development of Tumpa Mount as an ecotourism attraction. RESEARCH METHOD In this study using two forms of data, namely primary data and secondary data. For primary data collected through surveys to communities located around the area by using a purposive sampling method (Basuki, 2006). The main data collection locations are in five villages that are directly adjacent to the Mount Tumpa Forest Park (TAHURA/Taman Hutan Raya Gunung Tumpa) such as; Molas, Meras, Tongkaina, Pandu and Tiwoho villages and other surrounding communities who are considered to have interactions with the Mount Tumpa region. The number of respondents taken amounted to 59 people with the consideration of (1) that that the characteristics of community life are dominated by farmers and fishermen meaning that their livelihoods are homogeneous, (2) community life in the TAHURA region is considered to affect the development of tourism in the region, (3) the magnitude of the sample needed is only for information considerations (Antara, 2009). The survey was made in the form of a list of questions totaling 19 questions using a Likert Scale with alternative answers, namely strongly agree, agree, do not know, disagree and strongly disagree. The results of the answers are made in the form of a percentage. Whereas for secondary data taken what is needed is the number of residents in each village and type of community livelihood. This data was obtained from the Unit Pelaksana Teknis Taman Hutan Raya (UPT TAHURA) Gunung Tumpa, North Sulawesi Province. (Technical Implementation Unit- Mount Tumpa Forest Park) RESULT AND DISCUSSION Based on research results; secondary data obtained from the UPT Tahura shows demographic data as shown in Figure I, IJASTE – International Journal of Applied Sciences in Tourism and Events Vol.3 No.2 December 2019 224 Data on the number of people living in the Tumpa Mount area based on village are Molas (39%), Meras (7%), Tongkaina (12%) Pandu (33%) and Tiwoho ((9%). These five residential areas are flat the people live from managing the natural resources in the area, so from the attitudes and behaviors of the people have the same tendency in daily activities, this trend can be seen from the pattern of community livelihoods as shown in Figure 2 below. the percentage of jobs are farmers (41%), fishermen (19%), private employees (20%), civil servants (6%), trading (4%), handyman (3%) breeder (1%) and others (6%) ) The livelihoods of the people around the area are dominated by farmers and fishermen. Source: UPT Tahura (Taman Hutan Raya) Homogeneous livelihood patterns such as farmers and fishermen greatly affect the level of community decisions in making decisions in determining their attitudes and perceptions. This means that the development of ecotourism-shaped tourism in the region, will greatly touch and directly affect the work life occupied by the community at this time. Following are the results of questionnaire data collection on 59 respondents, namely the community living in the Tumpa Mount Forest Park area. IJASTE – International Journal of Applied Sciences in Tourism and Events Vol.3 No.2 December 2019 225 Source: UPT Tahura (Taman Hutan Raya) In Table 1 shows the profile of respondents. The percentages of respondents who were in the villages were: Molas (55.9%), Meras (13.6%), Pandu (15.3%) Tongkaina (6.8%) and others (8.5%). The data is considered to be represented from each village area when compared to the data in Figure 1. Table 1. Respondent Profile Category Frequensi Percent Village Molas 33 55.9 Meras 8 13.6 Pandu 9 15.3 Tongkaina 4 6.8 Lainnya 5 8.5 Gender Male 30 50.8 Female 29 49.2 Age <20 Years 0 0.0 21 s/d 30 Years 14 23.7 31 s/d 40 Years 26 44.1 41 s/d 50 Years 15 25.4 > 51 Years 4 6.8 IJASTE – International Journal of Applied Sciences in Tourism and Events Vol.3 No.2 December 2019 226 Education Primary School 4 6.8 Junior High School 16 27.1 Secondary High School 30 50.8 High Education 9 15.3 Source: data process The gender of the respondents shows the same division of men (50.8%) and women (49.2). Furthermore, age seems to be dominated by productive age at work, namely age 21 to 30 years (23.7%), 31 to 40 years (44.1%), 41 to 50 years (25.4%) and> 51 years (6.8%). This means that in terms of maturity and work productivity, the average adult has the ability to make decisions; this is also supported by elements of education that are considered adequate. For the education category of respondents seen as having sufficient educational background, namely: Secondary High School (50.8%), Junior High School (27.1%) Higher Education (15.3%) and Primary School (6.8%). This means that the average respondent has taken a good formal education, at least having sufficient thinking skills in providing input for the development of tourism around the region. Table 2 Local Community's Perception of Ecotourism Development N o Uraian PERCENTAGE (%) SA A N DA SDA 1 The area was developed as a tourist area 81.4 15.3 1.7 1.7 0.0 2 Interested in being involved in tourism development planning 45.8 44.1 8.5 1.7 0.0 3 Involved in supervising the ecotourism project location 49.2 40.7 8.5 1.7 0.0 4 Asking the opinions from community and religion leaders in the development of tourist areas 55.9 30.5 13.6 0.0 0.0 5 Local people work on projects like guides restaurant and lodging employees, parking attendants etc.) 40.7 39.0 8.5 11.9 0.0 6 Local people as managers of accommodation services, restaurants, attractions and transportation 47.5 33.9 8.5 10.2 0.0 7 Local people become marketing and promotion personnel by working with a tour operator 33.9 44.1 11.9 10.2 0.0 8 Local people as a provider of basic necessities ecotourism projects such as foodstuffs (vegetables, fruits,meat, flowers, fish, rice etc.) 45.8 42.4 5.1 6.8 0.0 9 Local people as providers of building materials such as palm fiber, bamboo, wood, matting and carving 25.4 45.8 11.9 16.9 0.0 10 Local community as a provider of handicrafts, souvenirs,such as: typical food, carvings, woven paintings 39.0 39.0 5.1 16.9 0.0 11 Local communities as project management service business managers ecotourism such as tent rentals, diving equipment, workshops etc. 20.3 55.9 10.2 13.6 0.0 IJASTE – International Journal of Applied Sciences in Tourism and Events Vol.3 No.2 December 2019 227 12 Willingness to maintain the natural environment and all animals that exist in the Tumpa Mountain region 91.5 8.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 13 Will not cut wood or hunt animals in Tumpa Mount area 74.6 20.3 5.1 0.0 0.0 14 Willing to remind and even reprimand relatives neighbors not to do damage (logging / hunting) in the Tumpa Mount area 61.0 32.2 3.4 1.7 1.7 15 Willing to other communities to plant back on the mountain is already broken. 52.5 45.8 1.7 0.0 0.0 16 Do not expand the plantation area to its limit specified as the object area. 20.3 55.9 6.8 15.3 1.7 17 The pattern of farming is inherited from parents and happy to keep the habit. 32.2 61.0 5.1 1.7 0.0 18 Life together (mutual cooperation) between communities already for a long time and happy to be maintained. 66.1 32.2 1.7 0.0 0.0 19 Good habits from parents / ancestors in everyday life it needs to be maintained 59.3 39.0 1.7 0.0 0.0 Source: data process In Table 2, the following shows the percentage of answers from each respondent available. From the question of community perception if the region is developed as a tourist area; respondents seen 81.4% expressed strongly agree, 15.3% stated agreed, 1.7% said they did not know, while the remaining 1.7% said they did not agree. For statements of community willingness to be involved in tourism development plans; 45 respondents, 8% expressed strongly agree, 44.1%, agreed and 8.5% said they did not know while 1.7% respondents said they did not agree. Statement from the community in monitoring the ecotourism project location; 49.2% of respondents stated strongly agree, 40.7% stated agreed and 8.5% stated they did not know. While the other 1.7% respondents stated that they did not agree. To solicit opinions from community leaders and religious leaders in developing tourist areas; 55.9% of respondents stated strongly agree, 30.5% stated agreed and 13.6% said they did not know. There were no respondents who said they disagreed with this question. Local people are involved in working on projects such as being guides, security, restaurant employees / parking attendants, etc. Respondents' responses; 40.7% stated strongly agree, 39.0% stated agreed and 8.5% said they did not know. Whereas 11, 9 stated they did not agree. Local community as manager of accommodation / accommodation services, restaurants / kiosks, tourist attractions and transportation within the project area; 47.5% of respondents stated strongly agree, 33.9% stated agreed and 8.5% stated they did not know. While 10.2% said they did not agree. Local people become IJASTE – International Journal of Applied Sciences in Tourism and Events Vol.3 No.2 December 2019 228 marketing and promotion personnel in collaboration with tour operators; 33.9% of respondents stated strongly agree, 44.1% stated agreed and 11.9% stated they did not know. While 10.2% said they did not agree. Then the local community as a supplier / supplier of basic ecotourism projects such as food suppliers (vegetables, fruits, drinks, meat, flowers, fish, rice, etc.); 45.8% of respondents stated strongly agree, 42.4% stated agreed, and 5.1% said they did not know. While 6.8% respondents said they did not agree. Furthermore, the local community as a provider of building materials such as palm fiber, bamboo, wood and woven and carving; respondents 25.4% stated strongly agree, 45.8% stated agreed and 11.9% stated they did not know. While 16.9% of respondents said they did not agree. Local people as providers of handicrafts / souvenirs (ole-ole) such as special food, carvings, wicker, etc .; 39.0% respondents stated the same, that is, they strongly agreed and agreed, then 5.1% of respondents said they did not know. While 16.9% of respondents said they did not agree. Furthermore, the local community as a business manager supporting the ecotourism project services such as tent rentals, diving equipment, workshops, etc .; respondents 20.3% expressed strongly agree, 55.9% agreed and 10.2% said they did not know. While the other 13.6% respondents said they did not agree. Then for the statement of the community's willingness to maintain the natural environment and all animals in the Tumpa Mount People's Forest Park area; 91.5% of respondents stated strongly agree and 8.5% agreed. There is no statement that is neutral (do not know) or reject by stating disagree or strongly disagree. For statement of not going to cut wood and hunt animals / wild animals in the TAHURA region; 74.6% of respondents stated strongly agree, 20.3% stated agreed and 5.1% said they did not know. There were no respondents who refused by hunting down statements of disagreement or strongly disagreeing with the statement. Willing to remind and even urge relatives and even neighbors to not destroy (cut and hunt) plants and animals around the TAHURA region; 61.0% of respondents stated strongly agree, 32.2% stated agreed and 3.4% said they did not know. While the remaining 1.7% of respondents stated disagree, and 1.7% stated strongly disagree. For the reforestation (reforestation) of mountain parts that have been damaged; 52.5% of respondents stated strongly agree, 45.8% stated agreed and 1.7% said they did not know. There were no IJASTE – International Journal of Applied Sciences in Tourism and Events Vol.3 No.2 December 2019 229 respondents who refused to be involved in reforestation activities in damaged / deforested mountain areas. Furthermore, the willingness of the community not to expand the plantation area to the limit determined as the location of the Community Forest Park area; 20.3% of respondents stated strongly agree, 55.9% stated agreed and 6.8% stated they did not know. While 15.3% of respondents stated disagree and 1.7% stated strongly disagree. For farming (gardening) patterns are the legacy of parents and are still happy to maintain the habit; 32.2% of respondents stated strongly agree, 61.0% stated agreed and 5.1% said they did not know. While the other 1.7% respondents disagreed. For the life of togetherness such as mutual cooperation between people who have long been preserved and still maintained / maintained; 66.1% of respondents stated strongly agree, 32.2% stated agreed and another 1.7% said they did not know. There are no respondents who reject the statement. Furthermore, the good habits of parents / ancestors need to be maintained and maintained; 59.3% of respondents stated strongly agree, 39.0% stated agreed and another 1.7% said they did not know. There was no respondent who rejected this statement. Through the 19 questions raised by respondents, it shows a positive statement that supports the development of Community Forest Parks as an ecotourism area. This can be seen from the total overall percentage of 86.2 which states a very strong relationship (Riduwan, 2009). This means that the development of Tumpa Mount Forest Park is fully supported by the people who live in the area's location. Indeed, sometimes it is not all community supports ecotourism development in their area. But it is more due to the ignorance of the public about ecotourism, benefits and impact on the lives of local communities, (Hayombe, et.al, 2012; UKM, & Ehsan, 2012; Rodríguez & Moreno, 2015). Society needs to be given an understanding of ecotourism. There are some specific indicators in the research to get answers doubt even harder to refuse or disagree. For the people who answered a neutral or undecided, it is still easier to be approached and explained. It means that it doesn't take long to convince them. But what about people who expressly reject without rational reasons for the development of ecotourism. IJASTE – International Journal of Applied Sciences in Tourism and Events Vol.3 No.2 December 2019 230 From the 19 indicators, there are 7 indicators that show there are some people who disagree, although the majority are still dominated by positive answers (agree). For example the statement "Local people work on projects such as tour guides, accommodation service providers and promotion workers". The statement shows that there are local people who "disagree". It is very rational answer from the people who disagree considering the possibility of people do not have knowledge and skills in the field. For statement: the local community as a provider of basic necessities such as vegetables, fruits, meat, fish and also the needs of ecotourism projects such as fibers, bamboo, carving, wood and souvenirs there are some local people said did not agree. They should be given an understanding, because there is the possibility of people do not understand their role in these activities. Community ignorance of certain parts of the development of ecotourism projects must be given a clear understanding, and not allowed, (Chengcai, et.al,2012). The community is an integral part in the development of ecotourism. When they understand and engage in ecotourism project certainly they will fully support the ecotourism project, (Jalani, 2012). In addition, it is also necessary to anticipate the emergence of apathy from the local community. This attitude can arise when participation began to decline, (Holladay, & Ormsby, 2011). To prevent people who are involved in the management of ecotourism is always necessary to have assistance. The Mount Tumpa area positively has the potential of ecotourism attractions where tourist support for the area as an alternative tourism is very strong. This area is close to the provincial capital of North Sulawesi (Manado) as well as Bunaken National Park area. Thus, with the support of tourists and local community, this becomes a strong opportunity for the Manado city government to organize the region. CONCLUSION The issue of marginalization of local communities in a tourist area, shows that tourism does not provide a broad role for the welfare of the community. The results of this study indicate that when local communities are given the opportunity from the start of planning to project involvement, the implementation of ecotourism can show success, IJASTE – International Journal of Applied Sciences in Tourism and Events Vol.3 No.2 December 2019 231 it is proven that the community fully supports the development of the Tumpa Mount Manado Forest Park (TAHURA) as an ecotourism attraction. In the future it will be easier to develop the ecotourism model. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT The authors regards to State Polytechnic of Manado which supported this research. REFERENCES Antara, M. 2009. Metodologi Penelitian Pariwisata Bali. Denpasar: Program Pascasarjana Universitas Udayana. Ashley, C., Ashley, C., Goodwin, H., & Roe, D. (2001). Pro‐ poor tourism strategies: Expanding opportunities for the poor. London: ODI. Basuki & Sulistyo.2006. metode Penelitian. Bandung: WedatamaWidya Sastra & Fakultas Ilmu Pengetahuan Budaya UI. Chengcai, T., Linsheng, Z., & Shengkui, C. (2012). Tibetan attitudes towards community participation and ecotourism. Journal of Resources and Ecology, 3(1), 8-16. Damanik J & Weber, H. 2006. Perencanaan Ekowisata dari teori ke Praktik. Pusat Studi Pariwisata (PUSPAR) UGM & ANDI. Yogyakarta EAA.2000. What is Ecotourism? http://www.ecotourism.org.au/ About_ecotourism. htm. Fennell, D.1999. Ecotourism: An Introdusction. London: Routledge. Goodwin, H. 1996.’In Pursuit of Ecotourism’. Biodiversity and Conservation 5: 277-91. Hermantoro Hengky. 2010. Pariwisata Mengikis Kemiskinan.Pusat Penelitian dan Pengembangan Pariwisata. Jakarta Hayombe, P. O., AGONG, S. G., Nystrom, M., Mossberg, L., Malbert, B., & Odede, F. (2012). Upscaling ecotourism in Kisumu city and its environs: Local community perspective Authors. International Journal of Business and Social Research, 2(7), 158-174. Holladay, P. J., & Ormsby, A. A. (2011). A comparative study of local perceptions of ecotourism and conservation at Five Blues Lake National Park, Belize. Journal of Ecotourism, 10(2), 118-134. Jalani, J. O. (2012). Local people's perception on the impacts and importance of ecotourism in Sabang, Palawan, Philippines. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 57, 247-254. Lindberg, K & Hawkins, D. (Eds) 1993. Ecotourism: A Guide for Planners and Managers. Volume 1. North Bennington,VT: The Ecotourism Society. http://www.ecotourism.org.au/ IJASTE – International Journal of Applied Sciences in Tourism and Events Vol.3 No.2 December 2019 232 Paturusi, S. A. (2008). Perencanaan kawasan pariwisata. Denpasar: Universitas Udayana. Permanasari Ika. 2010. Pariwisata Mengikis Kemiskinan.Pusat Penelitian dan Pengembangan Pariwisata. Jakarta. Riduwan.2009. Skala Pengukuran Variabel-Variabel Penelitian. Bandung. ALFABETA. Rodríguez-Piñeros, S., & Mayett-Moreno, Y. (2015). Forest owners’ perceptions of ecotourism: Integrating community values and forest conservation. Ambio, 44(2), 99-109. Towoliu, B. I., & Takaendengan, M. E. (2015). Perception of Tourist towards the Potential Development of Tumpa Mountain Area as Integrated Ecotourism, Manado, North Sulawesi Province. Journal of Indonesian Tourism and Development Studies, 3(1), 1-10. Towoliu, B. I., Permana, D. E., Gahung, M. D., & Lumettu, A. (2018). Ecotourism Village Feasibility Assessment Analysis: The Case of Bahoi Village, in North Minahasa Regency, Indonesia. Almatourism-Journal of Tourism, Culture and Territorial Development, 9(17), 137-152. UKM, B., & Ehsan, D. (2012). Environmental ecotourism for sustainable development in Sekayu Recreational Forest, Malaysia: Perception from the local communities. Advances in Environmental Biology, 6(9), 2553-2557. ------------2012.Rencana Induk Pengembangan Pariwisata Daerah (RIPPDA) Kota Manado. Dinas Pariwisata- Pemerintah Kota Manado. ------------Pro-poor Tourism Info-Sheets: Sheet No 11:Key terms. Downloaded from: www.propoortourism.org.uk