GASTRONOMÍA Y TURISMO
AN EXPLORATORY STUDY ON THE DETERMINATION OF SUPPLY INDICATORS FOR GASTRONOMY TOURISM IN TURKEY
UN ESTUDIO EXPLORATORIO SOBRE LA DETERMINACIÓN DE INDICADORES DE OFERTA PARA EL TURISMO GASTRONÓMICO
Merve Işkin
Doctor en Gestión Turística por la
Universidad de Sakarya
Ordu University
Turquía
[merveiskin@odu.edu.tr]
Mehmet Sariisik
Doctor en Gestión Turística por la
Universidad Aydin
Adnan Menderes
Sakarya University of Applied Sciences
Turquía
[msariisik@subu.edu.tr]
Para citar el artículo: Işkin, M., & Sariisik, M. (2025). An exploratory study on the dermination of supply indicators for gastronomy tourism in Turkey. Turismo y Sociedad, XXXVII, pp. 227-251. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18601/01207555.n37.09
Fecha de recepción: 29 de diciembre de 2023 Fecha de modificación: 16 de mayo de 2024 Fecha de aceptación: 25 de enero de 2025
Abstract
The main purpose of this study is to determine the main indicators of supply related to gastronomic tourism in a destination Turkey. Quantitative research methods were used in this study. The questionnaire format was preferred as a data collection tool. The research has two separate study research universes. For this reason, the data of the research were obtained via two separate questionnaires from two different samples: 1291 questionnaires collected face-to-face and online were included in the final analysis. According to the results of the research, 26 of 40 gastronomy supply sources are gastronomy tourism indicators for Turkey in line with the opinions of gastronomy experts and domestic tourists in Turkey According to the findings and results of the study, among Turkey's gastronomic tourism supply sources, the elements with the highest importance-performance degree are locality, authenticity, and culture. It is possible to reveal strong elements that will provide competitive advantages from the indicators revealed by the importance-performance analysis. Likewise, it can be determined which indicators are weak in terms of gastronomy tourism.
Keywords: Gastronomy, gastronomy tourism, gastronomy tourism indicators, gastronomy importance-performance analysis in Turkey.
Resumen
El objetivo principal de este estudio es determinar los principales indicadores de oferta relacionados con el turismo gastronómico en un destino. Se utilizaron métodos de investigación cuantitativos. Se prefirió el formato de cuestionario como herramienta de recolección de datos. La investigación tiene dos universos de estudio separados, por este motivo, los datos de la investigación se obtuvieron por medio de dos cuestionarios separados de dos muestras diferentes. En el análisis final se incluyeron 1291 cuestionarios aplicados de manera presencial y en línea. Según los resultados de la investigación, 26 de 40 fuentes de oferta gastronómica son indicadores del turismo gastronómico de Turquía, de acuerdo con las opiniones de los expertos en gastronomía y de los turistas nacionales en dicho país. Según los hallazgos del estudio, entre las fuentes de oferta de turismo gastronómico de Turquía, los elementos con mayor grado de importancia-desempeño son la localidad, la autenticidad y la cultura. Es posible revelar elementos fuertes que podrían proporcionar ventajas competitivas a partir de los indicadores evidenciados por el análisis de importancia-desempeño. Asimismo, se puede determinar cuáles indicadores son débiles en materia de turismo gastronómico.
Palabras clave: gastronomía, turismo gastronómico, indicadores de turismo gastronómico, análisis de importancia-desempeño de la gastronomía de Turquía.
1. Introduction
The concept of gastronomy and the point it has reached today have given new valences to gastronomy tourism. As alternative tourism gains traction, gastronomy has become one of the fastest developing and growing types of tourism. For this reason, all destinations now include gastronomy among their activities (World Tourism Organization [UNWTO], 2012). Countries with rich culinary cultures have been able to create new demands thanks to gastronomic tourism. Gastronomy has a significant pull, not only because food is central to the tourist experience but also because it has become an important source of identity formation in postmodern societies. Sürenkõk et al. (2010) emphasize that food has important functions such as natural resources and cultural heritage in the competition of the tourism industry. The fact that cuisine is an essential part of cultural heritage is one of the most crucial indicators of this situation. In addition, tourists make significant contributions to gastronomic mobility by creating demand for the foods they encounter abroad in their own countries (Richards, 2002).
Since the early 2000s, it has become a necessity for everyone to have more information about the gastronomy tourism market. Thus, two important issues arise. The first is the determinants of gastronomic tourism demand; the second is the importance of the general motivations of tourists in travel and the capacity of the total gastronomic experience provided by the destination (Fields, 2002). At this point, two separate issues of discussion have been raised. On the one hand, tourists who do not travel for the purpose of gastronomic tourism also engage in gastronomic activities by experiencing the food and beverages of the destinations they visit. On the other hand, tourists whose only motivation is to experience gastronomy products travel for that sole reason.
The literature on gastronomic tourism continues to get richer by the day. Scientific studies are related to different dimensions (López-Guzmán et al., 2018). One of the most concentrated areas of interest is the gastronomic motivations of tourists (Staiff & Bushell, 2013). The ability of touristic destinations to respond to tourist motivations with different gastronomic resources helps them gain a significant advantage in competition (Pérez-Priego et al., 2019).
The most significant issues of these resources, which provide competitive advantages, are locality and cultural attractiveness within the theme of regionalism (Soeroso & Susilo, 2014). In addition to cultural resources, destinations include attraction elements consisting of gastronomic tourism facilities, activities, events, and organizations (Smith & Xiao, 2008).
In an environment where gastronomy is gaining significance, the role of gastronomic tourism supply sources in tourism destinations has also become significant. In particular, the fact that supply sources can change according to the historical, traditional, social, cultural, economic, and geographical characteristics of the destinations causes the effectiveness of these resources to differ according to the destinations. The fact that destinations are aware of their current situations regarding gastronomic tourism supply sources paves the way for them to gain a competitive advantage. In light of this information, the current study aims to determine which of Turkey's gastronomic tourism supply sources can be indicators of the country's gastronomy tourism. Relevant indicators were determined as a result of the evaluations of experts and tourists. Here, the gastronomic tourism supply sources, which experts have stated as having high importance for Turkey and high performance for tourists, have been determined as gastronomic tourism destination indicators for Turkey. In addition, the determination of the supply sources, which are considered to be of importance for experts and low performance for tourists, makes this study important.
2. Conceptual framework
2.1 Gastronomy and Gastronomy Tourism
While activities involving food, cuisine, and nutrition go back to the first human beings, it is very difficult to say the same for gastronomy. The word gastronomy was first used as gastronomie by the French poet Joseph Berchoux in 1800. This Latinate word has emerged by combining the words "stomach" (gaster) and "law" (nomos) and means "law of the stomach." Gastronomy, which entered the dictionary of the French Academy in 1835, is defined as "pleasure that can be enjoyed in all conditions and ages." Gastronomy, which is an element of culinary arts, deals with food production and strives to perfect food and every element related to it (Küçükşahin, 2016). According to the Turkish Language Association (Turkish Language Association [TDK, 2019]), the concept of gastronomy is used in two different senses: "the curiosity of eating well" and "healthful, well-arranged, pleasant and delicious cuisine, food order and system." The concept of gastronomy in the Oxford Advanced Student Dictionary, as cited in Crowther (1995), is "good food; the science and art of choosing, cooking and eating." The Encyclopædia Britannica defines gastronomy as "the art of choosing, preparing, serving and enjoying good food" (Kivela & Crotts, 2005).
The gastronomy literature began to mature in the early 2000s and many researchers have conducted studies on this subject. However, rather than the conceptual development of gastronomy, it is useful to examine studies that present the developing theoretical background of the concept and provide theoretical contributions in terms of their results. Indeed, De Jong et al. (2018) express the theoretical basis of gastronomy tourism as one of the three important shortcomings of this field. Putra (2021) addresses the concept with perspectives such as experience and motivation that form the purpose of travel. In this respect, he states that gastronomy, as a means of experience and motivation, emerges as a result of the psychological needs of the individual and can be explained with theories in the field of psychology in this respect. Seyitoğlu and Ivanov (2020) explain gastronomy with theoretical foundations in management and state that gastronomy assumes strategic roles in destinations in the light of parameters such as resource, process and the form of a strategy. Karakuş et al. (2020), while explaining the relations of gastronomy tourism with the public in local destinations, carried out the analysis of the concept of gastronomy and the relationship between local people with the Kano Model. This model is based on the balance in the need-satisfaction dilemma. Apart from these, there are also different studies that emphasize theoretical evaluations in studies on gastronomy tourism (Dixit & Prayag, 2022; Duman & Saçli, 2023; Güney, 2023).
Gastronomy has a feature that combines elements closely related to art, such as taste, history, culture, labor, care, taste, and harmony. Meals are prepared by taking into account the emotions that reveal this aesthetic aspect. Thus, gastronomy can be explained as the art and science of eating good food as linked to the traditions and customs of a certain region, regardless of size (Erçen, 2017). Although Brillat-Savarin (1994) associates the science of gastronomy with the good taste of food and beverages, he summarizes the main purposes of gastronomy as follows:
Gastronomy tourism is based on the recognition of the most prominent examples of local cuisines and cultures that form the core of the concept of gastronomy. Therefore, it is possible to say that there is a strong interaction between tourism, culture, and cuisine. This interaction has two dimensions: to taste local flavors while traveling for a different touristic resource and to perform touristic trips only to taste the local flavors of that region (Zengin & Işkin, 2017).
Gastronomy tourism includes visiting food producers, participating in gastronomic festivals, visiting restaurants and special places related to special local dishes, tasting special dishes, observing local production and preparation processes, tasting special dishes of famous chefs, and discovering how a particular dish is made (Hall & Mitchell, 2007). Gastronomic tourism also includes tourism excursions seeking personal experience in local food and drink, in addition to visiting classic restaurants and hotels. Gastronomic tourism encompasses all kinds of culinary experiences, including cooking schools or seminars, cookbooks, culinary travel agencies and guides, TV cooking shows, magazines and events, factories, vineyards, breweries, distilleries, agricultural producers, and wineries (Pavlidis & Markantonatou, 2020).
With an emphasis on the local food market, Björk and Kauppinen-Räisänen (2016) conducted a study aiming to measure the factors that contribute to travelers' gastronomic experiences. As a result, they revealed that local food is at the center of tourist experiences as an important attraction. It is known that gastronomy experienced in tourism destinations contributes to tourist satisfaction and affects the behavior of tourists. In this respect, although most travelers have a casual attitude toward food, they greatly appreciate the attractions the destination has to offer.
Gastronomy tourism is a tourism activity carried out to consume, prepare, and present foods that are different from the known dishes or in authentic culinary culture and to recognize the characteristics, habits, and eating styles of those cuisines (Şengül & Türkay, 2016). In addition, the meaning of gastronomic tourism is discussed from different perspectives by different researchers. Armesto and Gómez (2006) mentioned that the main motivation of gastronomic tourism is food. Hall and Sharples (2003) discussed gastronomic tourism as different and multidimensional travels related to eating and drinking. The UNWTO (2012) approached the concept a little differently and defined gastronomic tourism as a partial or full travel motivation related to eating and drinking activities. Gillespie (2001) emphasized the pleasure factor in the concept of gastronomic tourism. Enjoying food and drink is the essence of gastronomic tourism.
The gains that gastronomy provides to touristic destinations help make gastronomy tourism so significant. Because food and food-related experiences have become vital to the branding of destinations over time, food is now a crucial part of tourism activities, especially as it can create stories about the values and culture of destinations. Therefore, gastronomy is one of the most important elements of the promotion strategy for destinations, the construction of an identity based on cuisine, and the ability to exhibit local/regional values (Somos & Li, 2016).
2.2 Importance-Performance Analysis
Importance-performance analysis is a technique that reveals how critical an existing situation is and how well it performs. While determining the importance or performance values of the existing expressions in this analysis, some researchers place the values in which the participants stated the importance and performance of the expressions into a Microsoft Excel worksheet or SPSS analysis program using the statistical median or standardized beta values obtained as a result of a linear regression analysis. Such an analysis takes into account the different statistical values of the variables or features. Generally, arithmetic means are used in matrices obtained with different statistical programs. However, when data are obtained from a single sample, the values of the same variables other than the arithmetic mean are also taken into account (Albayrak & Caber, 2011; Diker et al., 2018; Hu et al., 2009; Karamustafa et al., 2010; Patiar et al., 2017; Stergiou, 2018; Tekin et al., 2014). In single samples, although the arithmetic means of importance and performance are standard variables, their time or place of application differs (Patiar et al., 2017). In addition, another importance-performance analysis of the same sample is also carried out by considering the arithmetic mean and median (Martilla & James, 1977) and arithmetic mean and beta values (Lai & Hitchcock, 2015; Matzler et al., 2004).
Studies with importance-performance analysis can be performed by taking data from a single sample or double samples. Data from double samples are evaluated over the arithmetic averages of both groups (Albayrak & Caber, 2011; Çakmak & Özkan, 2017; Tekin et al., 2014). In single samples, the arithmetic mean (Patiar et al., 2017), arithmetic mean and median (Martilla& James, 1977), and arithmetic mean and beta values (Lai & Hitchcock, 2015; Matzler et al., 2004) are taken into account.
Another important path followed in this research is related to the evaluation of gastronomy supply sources according to the travel motivations of tourists. In this respect, it is aimed to determine the role of gastronomy/cuisine as the travel motivation of tourists and the evaluation forms of gastronomic tourism supply sources. As a result of these evaluations, an answer to one research question was sought within the scope of the research:
RQ: What are the most important indicators of Turkey as a gastronomic tourism destination?
2.3 The Aim and Importance of the Research
Gastronomy tourism continues to attract attention as one of the most important travel trends of recent years. People get the opportunity to experience different flavors through dishes specific to the places they travel to. In this respect, gastronomy increases tourists' interest in the destination and is effective in encouraging revisit intentions and word-of-mouth recommendations. This situation, on the one hand, provides a significant competitive advantage to the relevant destination, while on the other hand, it contributes to regional differences.
In an environment where gastronomy is gaining importance, the current position of gastronomic tourism supply sources in destinations has also become essential. In particular, the fact that supply sources can change according to the historical, traditional, social, cultural, economic, and geographical characteristics of a location causes the efficiency of the supply sources to differ according to the destinations. Knowing the destinations' current situation regarding their gastronomic tourism supply sources can help pave the way for them to gain competitive advantages. The main purpose of this research is to determine which gastronomic tourism supply sources act as indicators of Turkey's gastronomy tourism.
3. Methodology
3.1 Research Method and Measurement Tool
Quantitative research methods were used in the study, and the data were obtained via questionnaires. Due to data collection from two different participant groups, two different questionnaires were created. In the study, the same expressions were used to determine the destination indicators for both question groups. The literature on the subject was scanned to determine the indicators for a gastronomic tourism destination. The most extensive evaluation of the subject in the literature was made by Smith and Xiao (2008) as the supply sources of gastronomic tourism. All the 37 items included in this study were added to the questionnaire as gastronomic tourism destination indicators within the scope of the study. Some of the items were combined by providing semantic integrity and explanatory power, yielding a total of 35 items. However, missing elements that can be considered important in terms of gastronomic tourism, such as locality and culture, became apparent. And so, after seeking the opinion of 11 experts (four tourism professors, seven gastronomy professors), five items regarding authenticity in terms of food and beverage at the destination were added. Thus, it was aimed to determine the gastronomic tourism indicators that Turkey should have as a destination with a total of 40 statements in the questionnaire.
Both questionnaire forms consist of two parts. The first part of the first questionnaire consists of 40 statements. These statements are rated from 1 (not at all important) to 10 (very important). In this section, gastronomy tourism experts in Turkey (gastronomy and tourism academics, cooks, culinary federation officials) were asked to evaluate the importance of the statements regarding Turkey as a gastronomic tourism destination. The second part of the questionnaire contains five statements regarding the demographic information of the expert participants. The second questionnaire form also consists of two parts. In the first part, there are 40 statements consisting of the supply sources of a gastronomic tourism destination as in the first questionnaire. These statements are rated from 1 (very bad) to 10 (very good). With this questionnaire, domestic tourists in Turkey were asked to evaluate the performance of the expressions determined by gastronomic tourism destinations in Turkey. The second part of the second questionnaire consists of seven statements that determine the demographic characteristics of the participants consisting of domestic tourists.
3.2 Population and Sampling
There are two separate research universes in this study. The first research universe consists of gastronomic tourism experts in Turkey, while the second research universe is comprised of domestic tourists who have participated in at least one touristic trip in Turkey in the last two years. The basic reasons for choosing two different groups (gastronomy experts and tourists) can be explained as follows. First of all, the answers given by people who are experts on the subject will be more meaningful for this study. The answers received will be able to reveal which criteria will be more important. Secondly, the perceptions of local tourists on performance will also be able to reveal expectations in a way. Since the knowledge levels of local tourists on gastronomy may differ, they were excluded from the importance issue. Therefore, it was deemed appropriate for the importance to be evaluated by experts on the subject and the performance by tourists.
The groups that know best the level of importance of gastronomy tourism indicators for a destination are experts who carry out gastronomy-related practices in the destination. In this respect, data was collected from experts for the importance level of gastronomy indicators. Performance is an element that depends on experience. Therefore, the audience that can best determine the performance level of gastronomy indicators in a destination is the tourists who experience them. Therefore, data was collected from tourists to determine the performance levels of gastronomy indicators.
In the field research of this study, the convenience sampling technique, which is one of the non-probability sampling methods in both research universes, was preferred. Convenience sampling involves a sample that is readily available and easily accessible (Berg & Lune, 2015). In short, every participant who can be reached and volunteered is included in the data collection process, and this situation continues until the planned sample size is reached (Altunişik et al., 2012). In the first phase of the study, everyone who wanted to be a gastronomic tourism expert in Turkey and respond to the questionnaire, and in the second phase, those who were citizens of the Republic of Turkey and who had traveled domestically for touristic purposes at least once in the last two years and wanted to answer the questionnaire, were included in the data collection process. With the thought that it will have the ability to represent research universe (Altunişik et al., 2012; Can, 2014; Ceylan, 2011; Coşkun et al., 2015), the goal was to collect a total of 1000 questionnaires (400 from experts and 600 from domestic tourists). At the end of the data collection process, a total of 1291 questionnaires (437 from experts and 854 from tourists) were obtained, and the analyses were carried out on these figures.
3.3 Validity and Reliability
In the study, 37 statements used by Smith and Xiao (2008) as supply sources of gastronomy tourism were transformed into a survey form that could be evaluated as indicators of gastronomy tourism destinations. In this respect, a survey was used in the study, but no scale was used. Reliability tests (Cronbach alpha) were also conducted to test the reliability of the participants' responses to the survey statements (Tabachnick & Fidell, 2013).
The use of 35 statements used in prior research is an important reference for ensuring validity. Deciding on the other five statements as a result of the opinions of the experts on the subject added to the scale. However, the strongest point about the validity of this study is that the same questions were understood by different samples. Based on this, it can be said that the statements in the research are suitable for the purpose of the study. However, to determine the reliability of the scales used in empirical research, the alpha coefficient (Cronbach's alpha) was taken into account (Altunişik et al., 2012; Can, 2014).
SPSS 24 (Statistical Package for the Social Sciences) and Excel were used in the analysis of the data. Frequency and importance-performance analyses were used to obtain the findings. Frequency analysis with the help of the SPSS program was used to obtain the descriptive statistics of demographic variables and the arithmetic averages of the expressions in the questionnaires. Significance performance analysis was carried out according to the arithmetic averages of the expressions in the questionnaire. Excel was used for the importance-performance analysis.
A reliability analysis was carried out separately for the questionnaires, which had two different evaluation styles and included a total of 40 statements taken from two different samples. The reliability (Cronbach's alpha) coefficient for the first survey, which determines the importance of statements about gastronomic tourism destinations and collects data from experts, was determined to be 0.948. The reliability (Cronbach's alpha) coefficient for the questionnaire, which determines the performance of the statements about gastronomic tourism destinations and collects data from domestic tourists, was determined to be 0. 977. Since data were taken from two different samples, arithmetic means were used for both the horizontal and vertical axes in the importance-performance analysis (Albayrak & Caber, 2011; Phadermrod et al., 2019; Tekin et al., 2014).
4. Findings
The findings regarding the demographic characteristics of the experts are reported in Table 1. Most of the experts consist of male participants (60.9%). It is understood from the findings of income status that 3/4 of the participants are in the income group above $501 per month. In addition, 67% of the participants are public employees. These rates of income and employment status are in accordance with the profiles of the experts participating in the research. Among the expert participants, 43.5% are in the 31-40 age group and 66% are married.
The ways in which experts evaluate the importance of gastronomic tourism supply sources are presented in Table 2. The arithmetic mean and standard deviation of the expressions are given in the frequency analysis table. The arithmetic means given in the table constitute the "importance" dimension of the importance-performance analysis. According to the results, the most important sources of gastronomy supply are listed as "food and beverages made with locally grown products," "local/traditional restaurants," "regional products," "local (regional) cuisine," "food and beverage in the destination," and "authenticity (consistent with the original, preserved)."
The five indicators with the lowest arithmetic average in the table are "having wine routes," "picnic organizations with local products," "having wine regions," "having alcoholic beverage factories (beer, wine, etc.)," and "having non-alcoholic beverage factories."
Table 4 presents the explanations of the expressions in this matrix (Figure 2).
In Figure 2, the matrix formed as a result of the importance-performance analysis is presented to obtain the gastronomic tourism indicators of Turkey. There are four regions in the matrix. While placing the expressions in the regions, the arithmetic averages of the expressions were taken into account. The horizontal and vertical axes of the matrix are formed depending on the arithmetic mean of the expressions. Since the lowest value seen in the significance arithmetic averages was 4.92, the x-axis of the matrix started from 4.5. Since the highest value was 9.09, it ended at 9.5. Likewise, the performance values on the y-axis started from 5.5 due to the lowest arithmetic average being 5.98 and ended at 9.00 due to the highest value being 8.63. It has been determined that the evaluation interval of the experts' indicators is wider than the evaluation interval of the tourists. The region with high importance and performance needs to be protected, the region with low importance and high performance is named as possible extremes, the region with high importance and low performance is named as those that need to be concentrated, and the region with low importance and performance is named as low priority. Indicators in the regions that need to be protected (high importance, high performance) in this study constitute Turkey's gastronomic tourism destination indicators. Evaluations and suggestions were made so that the indicators in other regions could also turn into indicators for Turkey. When the distribution of the expressions in the matrix is examined, it is seen that two of the 40 expressions are possible extremes, 12 expressions are low priorities, and there is no expression in the field of the need to concentrate. The 26 expressions within the scope of the research are included in the first region of the matrix, which should be protected. As mentioned in the whole setup of the research, these 26 expressions have been determined as Turkey's gastronomic tourism indicators.
Table 5 shows the statistics of the tourists' evaluation of Turkey's gastronomic tourism supply sources. In the importance-performance analysis of each statement, performance ratings were taken into account. In the table, the arithmetic averages of each indicator in the survey are listed from the highest to the lowest. It is understood from the arithmetic averages that the performance of these resources is very good. Locality is at the forefront of the expressions.
5. Discussion
In the research, the statements that the experts find to be of high importance among Turkey's gastronomic tourism supply sources address issues of locality, authenticity, and culture. The importance of these cultural and regional elements in terms of gastronomic tourism is also emphasized in related studies in the literature (Okumus et al., 2007; Quan & Wang, 2004; Say & Balli, 2012). Food and beverage products, local cuisine, and authenticity in terms of food and beverage in the destination are the expressions with the highest frequency. On the other hand, the existence of wine routes, picnic organizations with local products, wine regions, and the presence of alcoholic (and non-alcoholic) beverage factories are the sources of gastronomic tourism with the lowest frequency. It can be said that experts consider the importance of gastronomic tourism supply sources, especially related to beverages, to be low. The fact that the majority of the population is Muslim and that winemaking is not considered important in the national sense legitimizes this result. In other words, the high sensitivity of Muslims to halal food consumption supports this result (Soesilowati, 2010; Vanany et al., 2020). The fact that the research was conducted on domestic tourists is another important factor to consider. Sormaz et al. (2017), for example, discussed the expectations of domestic tourists for halal food consumption in their study. In this context, it seems possible to evaluate the performance of domestic tourists and supply sources that can encourage alcohol consumption as low in Turkey.
Although the way tourists evaluate the performance of gastronomic tourism supply sources overlaps fairly well with expert opinions, there are some differences. It is also very important for tourists to evaluate the performance of a destination in terms of tourism in the larger sense because performance affects tourists' evaluations of a destination and their preference for that destination over others (Aydoğdu & Duman, 2017; Bucak & Ateş, 2014; Çolak, 2009; Du Rand & Heath, 2006; Haven-Tang & Jones, 2005; Sandikçi et al., 2015). For example, although the statement of authenticity in terms of food and beverage in the destination is among the top five statements with high importance, it is not among the top five statements with high performance. A destination's rich culinary culture is among the five high-performing supply sources. The situation is different for expressions with low performance. Four of the last five poor-performing statements relate to alcoholic beverages: having wine routes, wine regions, alcoholic beverage factories, and alcoholic/non-alcoholic beverage tasting/training courses. The other underperforming statements are more remarkable. Food museums are a source of supply whose performance has been evaluated as poor by tourists in Turkey. Although the potential of gastronomy museums in Turkey is high, it can be said that these museums do not have a performance that will satisfy the tourists. Ağcakaya and Can (2019) revealed the potential of Turkey's gastronomy tourism museums. For this reason, increasing the performance of gastronomy museums where all the equipment and elements related to gastronomy culture are exhibited can be a source for the country to gain a larger share of the gastronomy tourism market. Because gastronomy museums can be related to traditional resources such as cultural heritage (Gačnik, 2012) as well as modern resources (Garibaldi & Pozzi, 2021), they would do well to respond to different consumer demands accordingly (Seyitoğlu & Alphan, 2021).
5.1 Theoretical Contributions
In this study, data from two different samples were used since expectation performance was not measured from a consumer perspective. First of all, the importance levels of Turkey's gastronomic tourism supply sources were determined with the data obtained from the experts consisting of tourism and gastronomy academicians, chefs, managers of cook associations, and tourists. At the next stage, the performance of the gastronomic tourism supply sources, whose importance was confirmed, was determined in line with the opinions of the tourists. Oğuz and Onur (2018) made performance-based evaluations in their study of tourists, examining the development indicators of gastronomy tourism, and similarly to this study, they received data from tourists. In this study, the opinions of experts and tourists were analyzed jointly, and gastronomy tourism indicators were determined as a result of the evaluations of two different important stakeholder groups. The study makes an important contribution to the related literature in this aspect. As a result of this study, Turkey's gastronomic tourism indicators were determined. In the relevant literature, the number of studies in which the importance and performance levels are determined by data obtained from two different target groups is quite limited (Azzopardi & Nash, 2013; Ogunmokun et al., 2020). Therefore, taking separate data from two different samples related to the subject in the calculation of importance and performance values makes this study different. The results of this study reveal that the gastronomic tourism supply sources suggested by Smith and Xiao (2008) can be the gastronomic tourism supply source of a destination.
Determining which of the supply sources will become a more effective indicator may vary according to some social, economic, cultural, and geographical characteristics of the destinations. As a result of this study, it has been determined that belief is an important negative social factor in determining gastronomic tourism indicators. Culture, on the other hand, has been shown to be an important positive factor for authenticity, geographical work, and the question of being local or local. The rating issue, which Richards (2002) considers an important criterion when considering gastronomic tourism indicators, bears similarities with the factors of different nature expressed here.
5.2 Practical Contributions
Within the scope of the present research, Turkey's gastronomic tourism supply sources, both in terms of importance and performance, and in the regions that need to be protected, have been determined as Turkey's gastronomic tourism indicators. The gastronomic tourism supply sources (Turkey's gastronomic tourism indicators) with a high degree of importance and performance are generally related to the culture and locality of the region/destination. Rich culinary culture, local cuisine, local products, local food stores, local restaurants, eating local dishes in restaurants, and making food and drinks from products grown in the region draw attention as the most important indicators that need to be protected. López-Guzmán et al. (2018) found similar supply sources in their research. In the study of Soeroso and Susilo (2014), cuisine and gastronomy as a part of culture are explained and supported as significantly related to tourism. One of the most interesting results in the process of being an indicator of Turkey's gastronomic tourism supply sources is the expression of "authenticity in terms of food and beverage at the destination." While experts in Turkey consider authenticity to be very important, performance evaluations by tourists are relatively low. It is vital to protect these elements. As a matter of fact, Bjork and Kauppinen-Räisänen (2016) stated that destinations could be used in promotional activities by providing product differentiation thanks to their strong supply sources, thus giving them a competitive advantage.
There are also indicators with relatively low levels of importance and performance that fall into the category of indicators that Turkey needs to be protected. Particular attention should be paid when trying to protect these indicators. Gastronomic values, which consist of indicators that need to be protected, with a relatively low level of importance and performance, are concentrated in certain categories. The first category is local production-oriented indicators such as the presence of farmers' markets, farms, orchards, agricultural regions, and traditional viticulture. The second category consists of indicators related to gastronomic events and activities such as the presence of gourmet routes, food routes, beverage festivals, vintage festivals, and local product exhibitions. Street delicacies and geographically marked products, which have an important place for Turkey, have also come to the fore as indicators that need to be protected. All stakeholders related to gastronomy should pay attention to all categories other than locality and culture that need to be protected. Frost et al. (2016) have emphasized the importance of the resources mentioned here regarding gastronomic tourism in their research.
Turkey's supply sources, which are not gastronomic indicators, are spread over two regions. Although the density is in the low priority region, two supply sources are in the category of possible excess. These are the existence of food processing facilities and chef competitions. Although these two indicators are not considered to be very important by experts, tourists find the performance of these resources partially successful. Hall and Mitchell (2007) stated that chef competitions are an important tool for the establishment of a gastronomic culture in society and the development of gastronomic tourism activities. The high-performance value of chef competitions in the results of this research can be explained by the TV cooking programs that have increased in Turkey in recent years and have been encouraged by the public. The fact that chef competitions have become popular in many visual media can be interpreted as an indicator of this. When these indicators, which are evaluated with high performance by the tourists, are validated by the experts, they can be deemed worthy of protection, thus rendering them gastronomic tourism indicators of Turkey. Aldemir et al. (2020) stated that chef competitions stem from popular culture perceptions in Turkey and that the use of visual media as a medium for these competitions will strengthen such connections. The present study provides some predictions about the low importance of these gastronomic resources in Turkey. Although it is surprising that there is no source of gastronomic tourism supply in the low priority region, it can be explained as a positive situation in terms of gastronomy tourism in Turkey.
The supply sources, which are located in the low priority region and are not gastronomic tourism indicators for Turkey, exhibit a wider and different distribution. Expressions about alcoholic or non-alcoholic beverages were mostly found in this region. In the categorical context, alcoholic beverages are the sources of supply that are both low in importance and performance (Asero & Patti, 2009). The gastronomic value with the lowest importance and performance is alcoholic beverage factories (beer, wine, etc.). Although the existence of wine regions and wine routes is considered relatively important by experts, its performance is evaluated as low by tourists. In international studies, the opposite results are obtained (Sánchez-Cañizares & López-Guzmán, 2012). Therefore, it can be said that the socio-cultural structure of Turkey affects the results of this research. A rather interesting result was found for an expression in the low priority region. Although the existence of non-alcoholic beverage factories is considered by tourists as a gastronomic value with high performance, this expression is the gastronomic value experts evaluate as being the lowest in importance among all supply sources. It is possible to say that the presence of the phrase "non-alcoholic" affects the positive evaluation of the performance of domestic tourists, while the fact that non-alcoholic beverage factories are not very effective in international gastronomy brings about the low importance of evaluation by experts. Pavlidis and Markantonatou (2020) explain each attraction factor in the low priority group as an important source of gastronomic tourism supply in Turkey's gastronomic tourism indicator evaluation. In this sense, Turkey needs to implement plans suitable for strategies that increase the importance and performance of all supply sources in this region for international competition.
5.3 Limitations and Recommendations for Future Research
The most important limitations of the study were time and cost. For example, this study required collecting data from two research universes, and the sample group was taken from these two research universes and spread over a wide area. The COVID-19 outbreak that emerged in the data collection process among tourists is another important limitation. This situation caused the data collection process at the end of the study to be done via the internet. However, the fact that data from foreign tourists could not be obtained in the determination of gastronomic tourism indicators can also be seen as a limitation. In this context, the performance level of gastronomy supply sources for Turkey could also be determined by a study on foreign tourists. With the help of the 26 indicators determined by this study, the status of a destination or region in Turkey as a gastronomic tourism destination could be tested. Indicator determination studies could be carried out in different countries that come to the fore in gastronomy tourism. Thus, comparative studies could determine whether the same indicators function similarly across socio-economic and socio-cultural contexts. The performance of these indicators could be evaluated by conducting qualitative research with different data collection methods, especially participatory observation.
6. Conclusion
The results of the study reveal that there may be indicators that will stand out in gastronomy tourism for a destination and gain competitive advantage. Here, it has been observed that some of the supply sources that can be a source for gastronomy tourism are likely to stand out depending on the social, cultural, political, geographical, economic or demographic elements of the destination. One of the most important conditions for these resources to be meaningful for the destination is that they have a high level of importance for the destination. While the cultural resources of gastronomy stand out in a destination that stands out with its traditional cuisine, gastronomy activities may stand out in destinations where viticulture and similar rituals are common.
One of the most important aspects of this study is the use of supply and demand perspectives together in the process of determining the strong gastronomy tourism resources in the destination. In this respect, the performances of the indicators whose importance was revealed with the supply perspective were determined with the demand perspective. In this sense, the prominent gastronomy indicators of the destinations should show high performance depending on the experience of the tourists. Because resources that do not contribute positively to tourist satisfaction as a result of experiences carry the risk of losing their importance for the destinations.
References
Ağcakaya, H., & Can, İ. İ. (2019). Somut olmayan kültürel miras kapsaminda mutfak kültürünün sürdürülebilirliği: Türkiye'deki gastronomi müzeleri örneği. Gastroia: Journal of Gastronomy and Travel Research, 3(4), 788-804. https://doi.org/10.32958/gastoria.582778
Albayrak, T., & Caber, M. (2011). Önem-performans analizi: Destinasyon yönetimine dair bir örnek [Importance-Performance Analysis: A sample about destination management]. Ege Akademik Bakis, 11(4), 627-638. https://acortar.link/RN6GQb
Aldemir, T., Işkin, M., & Şengel, Ü. (2020). TV yemek programlarinin popüler kültür algisi ve gençlerin eğitim-meslek seçimlerine etkileri. Sosyal, Beşeri ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, 3(12), 971-986. https://doi.org/10.26677/TR1010.2020.623
Altunişik, R., Coşkun, R., Bayraktaroğlu, S., & Yildirim, E. (2012). Sosyal bilimlerde araştirma yöntemleri: SPSS uygulamali. Sakarya Yayincilik.
Armesto, Z., & Gómez, B. (2006). Tourism and quality agrofood products: An opportunity for the Spanish countryside. Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie, 97(2), 166-177. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9663.2006.00510.x
Asero, V., & Patti, S. (2009). From wine production to wine tourism experience: The case of Italy [AAWE Working Paper No. 52. Business]. American Association of Wine Economists. https://acortar.link/sZsws0
Aydoğdu, A., & Duman, S. (2017). Destinasyon çekicilik unsuru olarak gastronomi turizmi: Kastamonu örneği. Turar: Turizm and Araştirma Dergisi, 6(1), 4-23. https://acortar.link/3k3hgO
Azzopardi, E., & Nash, R. (2013). A critical evaluation of importance-performance analysis. Tourism Management, 35, 222-233. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2012.07.007
Berg, B. L., & Howard, L. (2015). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştirma yöntemleri, H. Aydin (Çev. Ed.), Eğitim Yayinevi.
Björk, P., & Kauppinen-Räisänen, H. (2016). Local food: A source for destination attraction. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 28(1), 177-194. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCHM-05-2014-0214
Brillat-Savarin, J.-A. (1994). The physiology of taste. Penguin Classics Books.
Bucak, T., & Ateş, U. (2014). Gastronomi turizminin il turizmine etkisi: Çanakkale örneği. The Journal of Academic Social Sciences, (28), 315-328. https://dx.doi.org/10.9761/JASSS2528
Can, A. (2014). SPSS ile bilimsel araştirma sürecinde nicel veri analizi (3rd ed.). Pegem Akademi Yayinlari.
Ceylan, S. (2011). Destinasyon marka imaji ve Pamukkale yöresinde bir uygulama. International Journal of Economic and Administrative Studies, (7), 89-102. https://kutuphane.dogus.edu.tr/mvt/pdf.php
Coşkun, R., Altunişik, R., Bayraktaroğlu, S., & Yildirim, E. (2015). Sosyal bilimlerde araştirma yöntemleri SPSS uygulamali. Sakarya Yayincilik.
Crowther, J. (Ed.). (1995). Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary. Oxford University Press.
Çakmak, A., & Özkan, B. (2017). Kargo kullanicilarinin önem verdikleri faktörlerin, kargo firmalari tarafindan başarim düzeylerinin incelenmesi. Journal of History Culture and Art Research, 6(4), 1010-1028.
Çolak, O. (2009). Turistik ürün çeşitlendirme kapsaminda kirsal turizm ve kirsal turizm işletmeciliği: Şirince örneği [Yüksek lisans Tezi, Aydin Adnan Menderes Üniversitesi]. eArşiv@Adu. http://hdl.handle.net/11607/847
De Jong, A., Palladino, M., Puig, R. G., Romeo, G., Fava, N., Cafiero, C., Skoglund, W., Varley, P., Marcianò, C., Laven, D.,& Sjölander-Lindqvist, A. (2018). Gastronomy tourism: An interdisciplinary literature review of research areas, disciplines, and dynamics. Gastronomy and Tourism, 3(2), 131-146. https://doi.org/10.3727/216929718X15281329212243
Diker, O., Yildirim, H. M., & Aksu, M. (2018). The use of importance-performance analysis (IPA) in evaluating Bozcaada destination's service quality. Yönetim ve Ekonomi Araştirmalari Dergisi, 16(4), 36-53. https://doi.org/10.11611/yead.413545
Dixit, S. K., & Prayag, G. (2022). Gastronomic tourism experiences and experiential marketing. Tourism Recreation Research, 47(3), 217-220. https://doi.org/10.1080/02508281.2022.2065089
Du Rand, G., & Heath, E. (2006). Towards a framework for food tourism as an element of destination marketing. Current Issues in Tourism, 9(3), 206-234. https://doi.org/10.2164/cit/226.0
Duman, D., & Saçli, Ç. (2023). The mediation effect of destination image on the relationship between local cuisine elements and destination selection: The case of Hatay. Journal of Multidisciplinary Academic Tourism, 8(1), 51-66. https://doi.org/10.31822/jomat.2023-8-1-51
Erşen, G. (2017). İzmir Karaburun Yarimadasi gastronomi turizmi ürününe yönelik rotalarinin coğrafi bilgi sistemleri ile belirlenmesi [Yükseklisans Tezi, Anadolu Üniversitesi]. Kurumsal Akademik Arşiv. https://acortar.link/Wlf3jG
Fields, K. (2002). Demand for the gastronomy tourism product: Motivational factors. In A.-M. Hjalager & G. Richards (Eds.), Tourism and gastronomy (pp. 36-49). Routledge Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203218617
Frost, W., Laing, J., Best, G., Williams, K., Strickland, P., & Lade, C. (2016). Gastronomy, tourism and the media. Channel View Publications.
Gačnik, A. (2012). Gastronomy heritage as a source of development for gastronomy tourism and as a means of increasing Slovenia's tourism visibility. Academia Turistica, 5(2), 39-60. https://acortar.link/9JjK7D
Garibaldi, R., &Pozzi, A. (2021). Food museums as cultural institutions and tourist attractions: Evidence from Italy. Gastronomy and Tourism, 5(2), 83-94. https://doi.org/10.3727/216929720X15968961037935
Gillespie, C. (2001). European gastronomy into the 21st century. Butterworth- Heinemann. https://acortar.link/qRKaEH
Güney, S. (2023). Foods spreading from Turkish cuisine to the world. Journal of Multidisciplinary Academic Tourism, 8(2), 159-169. https://doi.org/10.31822/jomat.2023-8-2-159
Hall, C. M., & Sharples, L. (2003). The consumption of experiences or the experience of consumption. In C. M. Hall, L. Sharples, R. Mitchell, N. Macionis, & B. Cambourne (Eds.), Food tourism around the world: Development, management, markets (pp. 1-25). Butterworth-Heinemann. https://acortar.link/9ueA4D
Hall, C. M., & Mitchell, R. (2007). Gastronomic tourism: Comparing food and wine tourism experiences. In Niche tourism (pp. 87-102). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780080492926
Haven-Tang, C., & Jones, E. (2006). Using local food and drink to differentiate tourism destinations through a sense of place: A story from Wales-dining at Monmouthshire's great table. Journal of Culinary Science and Technology, 4(4), 69-86. https://doi.org/10.1300/J385v04n04_07
Hu, H.-Y., Lee, Y.-C., Yen, T.-M., & Tsai, C.-H. (2009). Using BPNN and DEMATEL to modify importance-performance analysis model - A study of the computer industry. Expert Systems with Applications, 36(6), 9969-9979. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2009.01.062
Karakuş, Y., Onat, G., & Güneren Özdemir, E. (2020). Yerel halkin gastronomi turizmi çağrişimlan ve beklentileri: Göreme kasabasi örneği (Connotations and expectations of local people's gastronomic tourism: Case of Göreme town). Journal of Tourism and Gastronomy Studies, 8(3), 2179-2201. https://doi.org/10.21325/jotags.2020.655
Karamustafa, K., Güllü, K., & Acar, N. (2010). Kayseri'nin pazarlanabilirliğinin şehir yaşam kalitesi açisindan önem-başarim analizi ile değerlendirilmesi. Pazarlama ve Pazarlama Araştirmalari Dergisi, 5, 1-26. https://acortar.link/979K4r
Kivela, J., & Crotts, J. (2005). Gastronomy tourism: A meaningful travel market segment. Journal of Culinary Science and Technology, 4(2-3), 39-55. https://doi.org/10.1300/J385v04n02_03
Küçükşahin, E. (2016). Gastronomi ve medya ilişkisi. İçinde H. Yilmaz (Ed.), Gastronomi ve medya (pp. 3-25). Anadolu Üniversitesi Yayinlari.
Lai, I. K. W., & Hitchcock, M. (2015). Importance-performance analysis in tourism: A framework for researchers. Tourism Management, 48, 242-267. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2014.11.008
López-Guzmán, T., Torres Naranjo, M., Pérez-Gálvez, J. C., & Carvache Franco, W. (2018). Gastronomic perception and motivation of a touristic destination: The city of Quito, Ecuador. GeoJournal of Tourism and Geosites, 21(1), 61-73. https://acortar.link/p3TYWf
Martilla, J. A., & James, J. C. (1977). Importance-performance analysis. Journal of Marketing, 41(1), 77-79. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224297704100112
Matzler, K., Bailom, F., Hinterhuber, H. H., Renzl, B., & Pichler, J. (2004). The asymmetric relationship between attribute-level performance and overall customer satisfaction: A reconsideration of the importance-performance analysis. Industrial Marketing Management, 33(4), 271-277. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0019-8501(03)00055-5
Ogunmokun, O. A., Eluwole, K. K., Avci, T., Lasisi, T. T., & Ikhide, J. E. (2020). Propensity to trust and knowledge sharing behavior: An evaluation of importance-performance analysis among Nigerian restaurant employees. Tourism Management Perspectives, 33, 100590. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tmp.2019.100590
Oğuz, S., & Unur, K. (2018). Gastronomi Turizminde Gelişmişlik Göstergeleri Ölçeği: Geliştirilmesi, geçerliliği ve güvenilirliği. Journal of Tourism and Gastronomy Studies, 6(1), 409-429. https://doi.org/10.21325/jotags.2018.195
Okumus, B., Okumus, F., & McKercher, B. (2007). Incorporating local and international cuisines in the marketing of tourism destinations: The cases of Hong Kong and Turkey. Tourism Management, 28(1), 253-261. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2005.12.020
Öztürk, L. S. (2019). Tekstil sektöründe önem performans analizi uygulamasi ile üretime dayali stratejik öncelik alanlarinin belirlenmesi [Yükseklisans Tezi, Pamukkale Üniversitesi]. YÖK AÇIK BILIM. https://acikbilim.yok.gov.tr/handle/20.500.12812/230035
Patiar, A., Ma, E., Kensbock, S., & Cox, R. (2017). Hospitality management students' expectation and perception of a virtual field trip web site: An Australian case study using importance-Performance analysis. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Education, 29(1), 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1080/10963758.2016.1266941
Pavlidis, G., & Markantonatou, S. (2020). Gastronomic tourism in Greece and beyond: A thorough review. International Journal of Gastronomy and Food Science, 21, 100229. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijgfs.2020.100229
Pérez-Priego, M. A., García-Moreno, M., Gómez-Casero, G., & Caridad y López del Río, L. (2019). Segmentation based on the gastronomic motivations of tourists: The case of the Costa del Sol (Spain). Sustainability, 11(2), 409. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11020409
Phadermrod, B., Crowder, R. M., & Wills, G. B. (2019). Importance-performance analysis-based SWOT analysis. International Journal of Information Management, 44, 194-203. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2016.03.009
Putra, A. N. (2021). Literature review of food tourism, culinary tourism and gastronomy tourism. Journal of Innovation Research and Knowledge, 1(4), 517-526. https://doi.org/10.53625/jirk.v1i4.319
Quan, S., & Wang, N. (2004). Towards a structural model of the tourist experience: An illustration from food experiences in tourism. Tourism Management, 25(3), 297-305. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0261-5177(03)00130-4
Richards, G. (2002). Gastronomy: An essential ingredient in tourism production and consumption? In A. M. Hjalager & G. Richards (Eds.), Tourism and gastronomy (pp. 3-20). Routledge Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203218617
Sánchez-Cañizares, S. M., & López-Guzmán, T. (2012). Gastronomy as a tourism resource: Profile of the culinary tourist. Current Issues in Tourism, 15(3), 229-245. https://doi.org/10.1080/13683500.2011.589895
Sandikçi, M., Aydoğdu, A., & Pamukçu, H. (2015). Yöresel yemeklerin menülerde yer alma düzeyi: Kastamonu konaklari örneği. İçinde K. Oktay, M. Avci, C. Tanrisever, A. Aydoğdu, & H. Amukçu (Eds.), 1. Uluslararasi Türk Dünyasi Turizm Sempozyumu. 19-21 Kasim, Kastamonu. Bildiriler kitabi (pp. 773-785). Kastamonu Üniversitesi. https://acortar.link/TKmKHZ
Say, D., & Balli, E. (2012). Şalgam suyunun (şalgam) özellikleri ve Adana bölgesi'nin gastronomi turizmindeki önemi. İçinde N. Kozak & B. Özdemir (Eds.), II. Disiplinlerarasi Turizm Araştirmalari Kongresi. Bildiriler kitabi, Antalya (pp. 612-620). Akdeniz Üniversitesi and Anatolia: Turizm Araştirmalari Dergisi. https://acortar.link/iWJALc
Seyitoğlu, F., & Alphan, E. (2021). Gastronomy tourism through tea and coffee: travellers' museum experience. International Journal of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality Research, 15(3), 413-427. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCTHR-10-2020-0243
Seyitoğlu, F., & Ivanov, S. (2020). A conceptual study of the strategic role of gastronomy in tourism destinations. International Journal of Gastronomy and Food Science, 21, 100230. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijgfs.2020.100230
Smith, S. L., & Xiao, H. (2008). Culinary tourism supply chains: A preliminary examination. Journal of Travel Research, 46(3), 289-299. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047287506303981
Soeroso, A., & Susilo, Y. S. (2014). Traditional Indonesian gastronomy as a cultural tourism attraction. Journal of Applied Economics in Developing Countries, 1(1), 29-43. https://acortar.link/ifS6Pc
Soesilowati, E. S. (2010). Business opportunities for halal products in the global market: Muslim consumer behaviour and halal food consumption. Journal of Indonesian Social Sciences and Humanities, 3, 151-160. https://doi.org/10.14203/jissh.v3i1.50
Somos, F., & Li, S. Y. R. (2016). Implementing food tourism in destination branding-a case study of Copenhagen [Master" s dissertation, Aalborg Universtat). AAU Students Projects. https://acortar.link/HNeEZL.
Sormaz, Ü., Onur, N., Yilmaz, M., Güneş, E., & Akdağ, G. (2017). Helal otelleri tercih eden turistlerin yiyecek içecek hizmetlerinden beklentileri ve memnuniyet düzeyleri. Turizm Akademik Dergisi, 4(1), 81-93. https://acortar.link/mEJEzv
Staiff, R., & Bushell, R. (2013). The rhetoric of Lao/French fusion: Beyond the representation of the Western tourist experience of cuisine in the world heritage city of Luang Prabang, Laos. Journal of Heritage Tourism, 8(2-3), 133-144. https://doi.org/10.1080/1743873X.2013.767808
Stergiou, D. P. (2018). An importance-performance analysis of young people's response to a wine tourism situation in Greece. Journal of Wine Research, 29(4), 229-242. https://doi.org/10.1080/09571264.2018.1532878
Sürenkök, A., Baggio, R., & Antonioli, M. (2010). Gastronomy and tourism in Turkey: The role of ICTs. In U. Gretzel, R. Law, & M. Fuchs (Eds.), Information and Communication Technologies in Tourism 2010 (pp. 567-578). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-211-99407-8_47
Şengül, S., & Türkay, O. (2016). Akdeniz mutfak kültürünün gastronomi turizmi bağlaminda değerlendirilmesi. Journal of Tourism and Gastronomy Studies, 4(Özel Sayi). 86-99.
Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2013). Using multivariate statistics (6th ed.). Pearson Education Inc. Publishing.
Tekin, Ö. A., Kalkan, G., & Duman, H. (2014). Hizmet kalitesinin önem-performans analizi ile ölçülmesi: Üniversite sosyal tesislerinin konaklama üniteleri üzerinde bir uygulama. The Journal of International Social Research, 7(31), 751-770. https://acortar.link/WzgCTe
Turkish Language Association (TDK). (2019). Gastronomi. https://sozluk.gov.tr/. (Accessed 2019, April 19).
Vanany, I., Soon, J. M., Maryani, A., & Wibawa, B. M. (2020). Determinants of halal-food consumption in Indonesia. Journal of Islamic Marketing, 11(2), 507-521. https://doi.org/10.1108/JIMA-09-2018-0177
World Tourism Organization. (2012). Global report on food tourism (AM Reports. Vol. 4). UNWTO. https://acortar.link/6z7ip5 (Accessed 2019, October 18).
Yildirim, H. M. (2019). Ziyaretçi memnuniyetinin ölçülmesinde önem performans analizinin (öpa) kullanilmasi: Çanakkale savaşlari Gelibolu tarihi alani örneği. Seyahat ve Otel İşletmeciliği Dergisi, 16(1), 154-166. https://doi.org/10.24010/soid.512251
Zengin, B., & Işkin, M. (2017). Yerel mutfaklarin gastronomi turizmi açisindan değerlendirilmesi: Sivas Örneği. ASOS Journal. Akademik Sosyal Araştirmalar Dergisi, 5(40), 404-415. https://doi.org/10.16992/ASOS.11916