Driving mechanism of tourism entrepreneurial migrants’ settlement in natural sightseeing places: A case study of Tangkou
Received date: 2017-07-23
Request revised date: 2018-01-26
Online published: 2019-05-13
Copyright
With the evolution of tourism migration phenomenon and further research, scholars at home and abroad have focused on the temporary or permanent settlement of massive tourism labor migrants. Tourism labor migrants include employee migrants and entrepreneurial migrants. With a case study of Tangkou county in Huangshan, this paper mainly takes tourism entrepreneurial migrants (TEMs) as the research objects and applies multiple linear regression analysis to find supportive elements on migrants’ settlement intention. Based on this, we build a structural equation model to explore the impact of the following factors on migrants’ willingness to settle down, which are life and business satisfaction, continuous business intention, social integration intention, and overall perception on business objectives and motivations. Then we analyze the driving mechanism of settlement of tourism labor migrants in China. The main conclusions can be drawn as follows: (1) Compared with developed countries, China's migrants are much younger and the proportion of males is significantly higher. Given that the main household incomes of migrants are highly dependent on current work, economic benefit is the key precondition for their consideration of subsequent settlement. Based on regression analysis, the settlement intention of Chinese tourism labor migrants can be identified as the willingness to purchase second-home for settlement and to settle down after retirement. (2) Exploratory analysis shows that the TEMs’ settlement intentions are influenced by factors of operating satisfaction, life satisfaction and social integration. (3) The fitting process of the structural model shows that the overall perception variable can replace continuous business intention. Path analysis confirms that business satisfaction is the essential driving force of migrants’ settlement intention. (4) Both of social integration intention and overall perception are direct driving forces of willingness to purchase second-home. Besides business satisfaction, it is whether migrants are satisfied with living factors such as climate, natural environment and living conditions or not that has an indirect effect on willingness to purchase second-home. The strongest direct force for willingness to settle down after retirement is the willingness to purchase second-home. The overall perception variable is not only the relatively weak direct force for willingness to settle down after retirement but also has an indirect effect on it, while others are indirect driving forces.
YANG Zhao , CHENG Hao . Driving mechanism of tourism entrepreneurial migrants’ settlement in natural sightseeing places: A case study of Tangkou[J]. GEOGRAPHICAL RESEARCH, 2019 , 38(5) : 1147 -1161 . DOI: 10.11821/dlyj020170764
Tab. 1 Spatial distribution of tourism labors in Tangkou town表1 汤口旅游劳工全国空间分布 |
| 位次 | 以省/直辖市为来源地(N=3440) | 以市/州为来源地(N=3422) | 以县/区为来源地(N=3324) | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 省/直辖市 | 频数N | 百分比(%) | 市/州 | 频数N | 百分比(%) | 县/区 | 频数N | 百分比(%) | |||
| 1 | 安徽 | 3270 | 95.06 | 黄山 | 1987 | 58.07 | 屯溪 | 812 | 24.43 | ||
| 2 | 山东 | 22 | 0.64 | 宣城 | 173 | 5.06 | 歙县 | 340 | 10.23 | ||
| 3 | 吉林 | 21 | 0.61 | 安庆 | 153 | 4.47 | 黄山 | 204 | 6.14 | ||
| 4 | 江西 | 17 | 0.49 | 合肥 | 142 | 4.15 | 休宁 | 169 | 5.08 | ||
| 5 | 湖北 | 14 | 0.41 | 阜阳 | 129 | 3.77 | 徽州 | 145 | 4.36 | ||
| 6 | 浙江 | 9 | 0.26 | 滁州 | 95 | 2.78 | 祁门 | 103 | 3.10 | ||
| 7 | 广西 | 9 | 0.26 | 宿州 | 94 | 2.75 | 黟县 | 99 | 2.98 | ||
| 8 | 江苏 | 8 | 0.23 | 巢湖 | 93 | 2.72 | 包河 | 46 | 1.38 | ||
| 9 | 湖南 | 8 | 0.23 | 芜湖 | 74 | 2.16 | 宣州 | 45 | 1.35 | ||
| 10 | 河北 | 8 | 0.23 | 六安 | 65 | 1.90 | 绩溪 | 43 | 1.29 | ||
| 11 | 新疆 | 7 | 0.20 | 淮北 | 57 | 1.67 | 蜀山 | 39 | 1.17 | ||
| 12 | 四川 | 7 | 0.20 | 池州 | 52 | 1.52 | 庐江 | 30 | 0.90 | ||
| 13 | 福建 | 7 | 0.20 | 蚌埠 | 48 | 1.40 | 镜湖 | 30 | 0.90 | ||
| 14 | 陕西 | 6 | 0.17 | 淮南 | 31 | 0.91 | 无为 | 27 | 0.81 | ||
| 15 | 重庆 | 5 | 0.15 | 亳州 | 28 | 0.82 | 贵池 | 26 | 0.78 | ||
| 16 | 黑龙江 | 5 | 0.15 | 马鞍山 | 24 | 0.70 | 怀宁 | 25 | 0.75 | ||
| 17 | 河南 | 3 | 0.09 | 铜陵 | 20 | 0.58 | 定远 | 25 | 0.75 | ||
| 18 | 广东 | 3 | 0.09 | 延边 | 11 | 0.32 | 旌德 | 24 | 0.72 | ||
| 19 | 上海 | 2 | 0.06 | 长春 | 7 | 0.20 | 太和 | 23 | 0.69 | ||
| 20 | 其他 | 9 | 0.26 | 其他 | 139 | 4.06 | 其他 | 1069 | 32.16 | ||
注:旅游劳工数据来自汤口派出所(2010年4月),变量包括性别、年龄和来源地。 |
Fig. 1 Spatial distribution of tourism labors in Tangkou in 2009图1 2009年汤口镇旅游劳工空间分布 |
Tab. 2 Theoretical/hypothetical source of questionnaires of entrepreneurial migrant in Tangkou表2 汤口企业主调查问卷的指标理论/假设来源 |
| 指标大类 | 理论依据 | 测量项 | 最终模型变量测量项 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 经营满意度 | 根据Szivas等[32,44]的研究,杨钊等人在此基础上,构建了九华山旅游劳工从业感知量表(10个指标) [46,47,48]。此外,张文宏等[49]在研究城市新移民的社会认同时,分别构建了地域认同和职业认同指标,较为典型 | 收入;商业竞争;能自己做主;生意与个人生活难区分;社会地位/声望;职业本身;生意发展前景;工作时间长度;工作稳定性;淡旺季差异 | “经营总体满意度”单项指标直接测量 |
| 生活满意度 | 在系列研究[32,44,46,47]以及九寨沟调研[34]的基础上,结合专家讨论,增加了对生活质量感知的考虑。同时,指标构建还借鉴了张文宏等人[49]的地域认同指标 | 照顾家庭;居住条件;医疗条件;教育条件;治安状况;物价水平;本地气候适应;休闲娱乐机会;日常饮食;本地居民友善 | “生活总体满意度”单项指标直接测量 |
| 社会融合意愿 | 借鉴城市新移民社会认同中文化认同和群体认同指标[49],选择交朋友、接受价值(本地节日、生活方式)、熟悉风俗、社区参与等四个维度,用5个指标衡量 | 主动了解本地风俗人情;过本地节日;认同本地人的生活方式;愿意与本地人交朋友;愿意参加社区活动 | 5项指标间接测量 |
| 继续经营意愿* | 未来职业推广性假设 | 推荐亲友来此做生意;继续在本地做生意 | 2项指标间接测量 |
注:*为继续经营意愿的测量指标是在九华山、九寨沟等案例地调研的基础上,根据同行专家的讨论建议而设计。 |
Tab. 3 Multi-regression analysis of degree of settlement intend based on motivation and job and life satisfaction表3 生活满意度、经营满意度和动力因素支持定居意愿水平的多元回归分析 |
| 定居意愿 | 指标类别 | 自变量 | 标准化回归系数 | t | p | 累计调整的R2 | 容忍度 (Tolerance) | 方差膨胀因子(VIF) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 购房定居 | 生活、经营满意度因素 | 生意发展前景 | 0.277 | 3.522 | 0.001 | 0.109 | 0.917 | 1.090 |
| 居住条件 | 0.218 | 2.763 | 0.006 | 0.147 | 0.917 | 1.090 | ||
| 动力因素 | 黄山游客多 | 0.278 | 3.577 | 0.000 | 0.077 | 0.994 | 1.006 | |
| 当老板给人印象(名声)好 | 0.156 | 2.010 | 0.046 | 0.096 | 0.994 | 1.006 | ||
| 退休定居 | 生活、经营满意度因素 | 居住条件 | 0.281 | 3.718 | 0.000 | 0.131 | 0.914 | 1.094 |
| 生意发展前景 | 0.229 | 2.931 | 0.004 | 0.194 | 0.858 | 1.165 | ||
| 淡旺季差异 | 0.165 | 2.184 | 0.031 | 0.214 | 0.918 | 1.089 | ||
| 动力因素 | 游玩/休闲机会多 | 0.264 | 3.488 | 0.001 | 0.077 | 0.930 | 1.075 | |
| 汤口镇服务功能较好 | 0.196 | 2.620 | 0.010 | 0.124 | 0.958 | 1.044 | ||
| 当老板给人印象(名声)好 | 0.172 | 2.272 | 0.025 | 0.144 | 0.936 | 1.068 | ||
| 没有工作,需要一份职业 | -0.237 | -2.993 | 0.003 | 0.169 | 0.851 | 1.175 | ||
| 想离开原居住地 | 0.183 | 2.328 | 0.021 | 0.193 | 0.867 | 1.153 |
Tab. 4 One-way ANOVA and Independent samples T test of settlement intend and samples’ characteristics表4 样本特征与定居意愿的独立样本T检验和单因素方差分析 |
| 指标 | 均值 | T/F值 | 指标 | 均值 | T/F值 | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 购房定居 | 退休定居 | 购房定居 | 退休定居 | 购房 定居 | 退休 定居 | 购房定居 | 退休定居 | ||||
| 年龄(岁)**:≤ 2425~3435~44≥ 45 | 2.2000 2.7632 3.0423 3.2647 | 2.0000 3.0000 3.3944 3.3529 | 2.521 | 3.584 | 婚否:已婚未婚 | – – | 3.2847 2.6364 | – | 1.926 | ||
| 子女数(个)**:没有1 ≥ 2 | 2.3571 2.8310 3.3269 | 2.5000 3.1831 3.4615 | 6.696 | 4.548 | |||||||
| 学历**:小学及以下初中高中/职高/中专大学专科 | 3.6250 2.9241 3.0313 2.3846 | 3.8125 3.1899 3.2813 2.6154 | 3.773 | 3.063 | |||||||
| 是否兼职:是否 | – – | 2.5000 3.2124 | – | 3.776 | |||||||
| 店铺客源(%)**:≤ 80为游客60 ~79为游客游客与本地各1/2≥ 80为本地60 ~79为本地 | 3.1461 2.8667 2.2500 2.7143 2.5000 | 3.3820 3.2667 2.3750 2.9643 2.5000 | 2.541 | 2.814 | |||||||
| 收入实现**:是否才开业,不清楚 | 2.7727 3.2308 3.0000 | 2.9545 3.5897 3.0000 | 2.415 | 4.336 | |||||||
| 所居房屋**:自有租赁自己店里 | 2.3810 3.3636 3.0396 | 2.5714 3.3168 3.3636 | 4.618 | 4.333 | 预期收入***满意一般/不清楚不满意 | 2.6842 2.9048 3.2679 | 2.8947 3.0000 3.5714 | 4.705 | 6.095 | ||
注:**、***分别表示在0.05、0.01水平上统计差异具有显著性。 |
Fig. 2 Theory assumption mode of settlement intention SEM图2 定居意愿假设模型 |
Tab. 5 Before and after comparison of fitting indexes with SEM表5 模型修正前后的拟合指标对比 |
| 参数 | 绝对拟合指数 | 相对拟合指数 | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CMIN | P | RMR | GFI | AGFI | RMSEA | NFI | RFI | IFI | TLI | CFI | ||
| 初始模型 | 96.381 | 0.016 | 0.040 | 0.918 | 0.875 | 0.051 | 0.907 | 0.878 | 0.972 | 0.962 | 0.971 | |
| 删除F3后 | 95.386 | 0.000 | 0.047 | 0.912 | 0.860 | 0.079 | 0.895 | 0.859 | 0.946 | 0.926 | 0.945 | |
| 最终修正 | 54.558 | 0.239 | 0.033 | 0.946 | 0.912 | 0.030 | 0.940 | 0.918 | 0.992 | 0.989 | 0.992 | |
Fig. 3 Theory assumption of settlement intend SEM after deleting latent variable F3图3 删除F3后的定居意愿模型假设 |
Tab. 6 Result of questionnaire’s reliability analysis表6 信度分析结果 |
| 潜变量 | 观测变量 | Alpha系数 | 组合信度 |
|---|---|---|---|
| F1:社会融合意愿 | 过本地节日;交本地朋友;主动了解本地风俗人情;愿意参加社区活动;认同本地人生活方式 | 0.839 | 0.8427 |
| F2:总体感知 | 满足了自己的动机愿望;达到了我的经营目标;您在本地总体感觉 | 0.744 | 0.7505 |
| 总量表 | — | 0.857 | — |
Tab. 7 Factor loadings of latent variables表 7 潜变量的因子负荷 |
| 变量 | F1:社会融合意愿 | F2:总体感知 | R2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 交本地朋友 | 0.718 | 0.515 | |
| 主动了解本地风俗人情 | 0.765 | 0.586 | |
| 过本地节日 | 0.755 | 0.570 | |
| 愿意参加社区活动 | 0.660 | 0.435 | |
| 认同本地人生活方式 | 0.696 | 0.484 | |
| 在本地总体感觉 | 0.626 | 0.392 | |
| 达到了我的经营目标 | 0.729 | 0.532 | |
| 满足了自己的动机愿望 | 0.764 | 0.584 |
Fig. 4 Settlement intend SEM of tourism entrepreneurial migrants in Tangkou town图4 旅游企业主移民定居意愿结构方程模型 |
The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
| [1] |
|
| [2] |
|
| [3] |
|
| [4] |
|
| [5] |
|
| [6] |
|
| [7] |
|
| [8] |
|
| [9] |
|
| [10] |
|
| [11] |
|
| [12] |
|
| [13] |
|
| [14] |
|
| [15] |
|
| [16] |
[
|
| [17] |
[
|
| [18] |
[
|
| [19] |
|
| [20] |
[
|
| [21] |
|
| [22] |
|
| [23] |
|
| [24] |
|
| [25] |
|
| [26] |
|
| [27] |
|
| [28] |
|
| [29] |
|
| [30] |
|
| [31] |
|
| [32] |
|
| [33] |
|
| [34] |
[
|
| [35] |
[
|
| [36] |
|
| [37] |
|
| [38] |
|
| [39] |
[
|
| [40] |
[
|
| [41] |
[
|
| [42] |
[
|
| [43] |
[
|
| [44] |
|
| [45] |
|
| [46] |
[
|
| [47] |
[
|
| [48] |
[
|
| [49] |
[
|
| [50] |
[
|
| [51] |
|
| [52] |
[
|
/
| 〈 |
|
〉 |