THIS past week, the Department of Tourism (DOT) released its Philippine Travel Survey Report Survey, which it had commissioned the Asian Institute of Management and Guide to the Philippines, a tour operator, to do.
The survey was conducted from May 15 to 24, via “various online platforms” with respondents numbering 12,732 across 81 provinces. They were either Filipinos or foreign residents in the Philippines, with the largest number of respondents, as far as I can tell from the map the pollsters provided, coming from Central Luzon, the National Capital Region, and the Calabarzon.
Among the main findings of the survey was that the respondents said they were going to reduce their budget for their next trips. They foresaw a possible income cut due to the prolonged Covid-19 lockdown, which naturally affects any travel plans they may have in the future. (See “Poll: Pinoys to trim travel budgets with lower wages” in BusinessMirror, June 29, 2020)
What I found problematic in the survey, though, were the lack of details on the respondents, like how many respondents actually came from which province, and what were their ages or their monthly/annual net income.
During the webinar, the Guide to the Philippines’s rep said the survey was sent out online…but how exactly? Are the respondents clients of Guide To? If these details on methodology were included in the published report, these may explain some survey results that I found disturbing, like:
- The respondents found “shared tours” unsafe, and that they would rather travel solo or go on private tours;
- They also had issues with traveling by air; and
- Among their top choices of destinations in their next trip included Boracay, Siargao, El Nido, Cebu and Manila—even by respondents who had to take plane trips to get there.
I discussed these issues with some of my friends in the travel industry, who agreed that there indeed seemed to be some disconnect in the findings.
As any experienced bakasyonista can tell you, taking private guided tours cost more money than shared tours. So if one were on a limited budget, why take a private tour at all? Budget travelers will do the tour themselves, with paper map in hand or Google Maps on their phones, and take public transportation to get where they need to go. No tour guides needed.
While the pollsters tried to show that local tourists would choose destinations nearer to their place of residence for their next travel, their published table of data almost disputes this. Only respondents from the Bicol region, Central Visayas and Western Visayas had as their top choice for their next trip other provinces within their region.
The rest of the respondents either chose destinations that were located in an adjacent region (e.g., Ilocanos wanting to visit Baguio), or chose destinations where they had to fly to. For instance, Zamboangeño respondents chose Metro Manila and Cebu as their top two destinations, with Cagayan de Oro only in third place, while those in the National Capital Region/Metro Manila had Boracay as their top choice destination, followed by Baguio, and with Siargao in third place.
So if respondents intended to cut their travel budgets, why did most choose destinations that were quite distant from their residences? Even those destinations are accessible via land transportation, did respondents forget that gasoline is still expensive these days? Also, why did many others select destinations that can be reached only by flights?
Perhaps my travel industry friends, who shall remain unnamed, were correct in their assessment, that the questions asked by the pollsters should have been more specific to get a more accurate travel sentiment. Or there was “something wrong in the assumptions” made by the pollsters, said one of them.
“Maybe questions should have forced them to make choices. Not just what they want…understandable…but what they may be forced to get if their budgets are indeed lower,” said another.
So were these destinations just “wishes” on the part of the respondents, but not actually grounded in reality? For instance, my family and I missed our annual Boracay holiday trip this year because of the lockdown and travel restrictions by the island itself, so we really want to take that trip next year.
But the travel promo of a popular airline for Holy Week came and went, without anyone of us having made a booking. I, for one, have budget issues and safety concerns. Maybe it’s too soon to travel outside Metro Manila despite Holy Week being a good eight months away. (I can’t even bring myself to travel to Big Sister’s home in the south despite the general community quarantine. Why take chances with one’s health?)
The thing with surveys is that in these desperate times, companies are forced to study them and make business plans based on the survey results. If the data, however, are inaccurate, companies will likely draw up blueprints for their future, as my friend pointed out, based on “wishful thinking,” or dreams of the travelers. Nevertheless, I commend the DOT for its efforts in constantly seeking out the public’s opinions on their travel plans, as well as views of tourism stakeholders. It has a tough job overlooking an industry that has helped lift the economy in the past, but now, because of Covid-19, is in extreme pain.
As more destinations in the country shift to Modified GCQ or Low-Risk MGCQ, here’s hoping more local residents start traveling again and get away from their lockdown stress, even for just a few days. It will not just help spur the economy, but also save a lot of tourism jobs.
Image credits: Infograph courtesy DOT-AIM/Guide to the Philippines