The influence of photographic safaris and game drives on tourism performance in Zimbabwe

Abstract This study analyzed the influence of the photographic safaris and game drive tourism marketing mix to tourism performance in Zimbabwe using data collected from 274 survey tourists and 137 survey stakeholders between January and June 2019. A comparison of the responses given by all tourists and stakeholders was made based on 14 research items representing the seven (7) elements of the marketing mix: product, price, place, promotion, people, physical evidence, and process of the photographic safaris and game drive tourism. A strong relationship between tourists and stakeholders regarding how they rated the photographic safaris marketing mix was recorded. Areas with consistent positive responses were granted for photographic safaris, attractiveness and availability of animals, the existence of natural water holes for capturing natural behavior of wild animals, the attractiveness of terrain and vegetation for photographic safaris, and accessibility of places of photographic safaris. Consistent negative perceptions were on the affordability of game drive viewing services, prices reflecting time and type of animals to be photographed, and support services and transportation in the photographic safaris were effective and satisfactory. In photographic safaris and game drive, the inconsistent perceptions were on the people mix, road networks, and infrastructure. The study showed that all tourists and stakeholders had a strong and significant relationship with the marketing mix elements applied. The wildlife industry and its players need to consider pricing photographic safaris and game drive products effectively and create service processes that are user friendly to both tourists and stakeholders.


PUBLIC INTEREST STATEMENT
Photographic safaris and game drive involves wildlife watching tourism that offers tourists the opportunity to observe, photograph and experience wild animals in their natural habitats and mainly in protected areas.Wildlife tourism players are advocating for the improvement of their overall tourism performance in Zimbabwe as a contribution towards meeting national economic development goals and improving the standard of living of the general populace.One way of achieving this is through adopting photographic safari and game drive on tourism performance.The study showed that there was a strong and significant relationship between the perceptions of local tourists and foreign tourists on the marketing elements applied to photographic safaris and game-viewing tourism in Zimbabwe.The study recommends that the wildlife tourism industry and its players need to consider pricing photographic safaris and game drive products robustly and create service processes that are user friendly to both tourists and stakeholders.
photographic safaris were effective and satisfactory.In photographic safaris and game drive, the inconsistent perceptions were on the people mix, road networks, and infrastructure.The study showed that all tourists and stakeholders had a strong and significant relationship with the marketing mix elements applied.The wildlife industry and its players need to consider pricing photographic safaris and game drive products effectively and create service processes that are user friendly to both tourists and stakeholders.

Introduction
Wildlife watching is defined as an organized tourism expedition undertaken to view and watch various wildlife species (Workplace for Gender Equality Agency, 2013).This broad definition considers the interest of tourists in viewing, interacting, and experiencing the diversity of fauna and flora, including botanical gardens, recreational parks, bird watching, and large-animal viewing.Valentine and Birtles (2004) considered unguided encounters with wildlife in natural areas, specialized wildlife tours, nature-based tours that include wildlife, research and education tours involving wildlife, and other tourism facilities that feature surrounding wildlife as various dimensions for describing photographic safaris and game viewing.The United Nations World Tourism Organization (United Nation World Tourism Organisation (UNWTO), 2018) defined photographic safaris (Safari-Swahili for the journey) as wildlife watching tourism that offers tourists the opportunity to observe, photograph, and experience wild animals in their natural habitats, mainly in protected areas.In other countries, such as Australia and South Africa, photographic safari takes specialized animal-related names such as whale watching, dolphin watching, and the Zimbabwe's versions of wildlife are usually the Big Five animals watching, bird watching, and unique vegetation watching.Although some authors suggest that bird watching is not part of wildlife watching (e.g., Tapper, 2006), many authors assert that viewing fauna and flora is part of wildlife watching (Kuguyo & Gandiwa, 2022b;Valentine & Birtles, 2004;Workplace for Gender Equality Agency, 2013).Fredline and Faulkner (2001) defined wildlife watching as an intersection and overlapping of nature-based tourism products and wildlife tourism products that provide nature-based wildlife experiences in the form of deliberate and accidental animal encounters in natural settings.Wildlife encounters and experiences provide visitors with opportunities to touch, hold, see, feed, and photograph animals in their natural environments (Fredline & Faulkner, 2001).Higginbottom (2004) asserted that photographic safaris and game viewing are associated with encounters with non-domesticated animals in their natural environment or captivity, through viewing photography, touching, and feeding for recreational and leisure purposes.In Zimbabwe, touching and feeding wild animals in gazetted state protected area is prohibited (Government of Zimbabwe, 1996).The common position of the above definitions is that photographic safaris and game viewing involve tourists interacting with wild animals, birds, and marine and/or freshwater life through touching, handling photography, and feeding as a source of excitement, relaxation, pleasure, and education for fees in a captive or natural habitat.
The impact of wildlife watching tourism marketing on overall tourism sector performance is closely linked and moderated by the typology and classifications of how tourists interact with wildlife (Kuguyo & Gandiwa, 2022b;Mutanga et al., 2017;Valentine & Birtles, 2004).Photographic safaris can be classified in terms of the nature of the interaction with wild animals, types of animals viewed, nature of the animal environment, location of the place of watching, danger posed by the animal, mode of travel, time of viewing, and motivation by visitors.Fredline and Faulkner (2001) defined the nature of wildlife encounters as ranging from passive to active encounters.A passive encounter is where tourists view wild animals from a distance and watch others interact with animals.Active interactions involve touching, feeding, and holding wild animals in close contact with each other.The nature of the encounter might determine the level of tourist satisfaction and another matrix (Mutanga et al., 2017).Some active interactions can also be dangerous and even forbidden in some countries.
Regarding the type of animals, photographic safaris could be described using the animal or wildlife being watched by the tourist in that place in time.In Australia, tourists are involved in watching whales, dolphins, kangaroos, dingos, and crocodiles.In Zimbabwe, there is elephant, lion, buffalo, eland, leopard, kudu, and bird watching.Such divisions of photographic safaris and game viewing assist in defining the attractiveness of a destination and tourism experiences (Fredline & Faulkner, 2001).
The nature of the environment ranges from 'captive' to 'free range' continuum.Common captive habitats include zoos, aquaria, and theme parks.Free-range wildlife habitats include Safari Parks, National Parks, and unprotected natural habitats.Some tourists prefer and enjoy viewing wild animals in a natural setup, such as the Communal Areas Management Programme for Indigenous Resources (CAMPFIRE), National Parks, and Conservancies in Zimbabwe.While wildlife encounters in captive areas allow touching, feeding, and holding with some level of safety, they do not allow visitors to observe the natural behaviour of wild animals (Gandiwa et al., 2013;Mutanga et al., 2017).
Photographic safaris, game drives, and viewing vary in marine and/or freshwater, terrestrial, and aerial places.Freshwater wildlife viewing in Zimbabwe includes crocodile, hippopotamus, fish watching, and water birds in lakes, dams, and rivers.Terrestrial photographic safaris involve game driving and viewing wild animals at watering points, plain areas, bushes, and thickets.The Big Five animals are considered in terrestrial landscape ecosystems.The aerial photographic safaris allow tourists to enjoy viewing a variety of birds in the lower and upper skies of Zimbabwe.In the lower skies, visitors view birds in their day-to-day life routines, while the upper skies usually contain eagles such as the butler eagle and migrating birds.Belicia and Islam (2018) presented some places that facilitate the commodification of animals and their habitat to current and potential animal tourists in the form of wildlife watching safaris, wildlife interactions, wildlife photography, animal shows, and animals in captive sites.
Labelling photographic safaris and game viewing based on the mode of transport considers air transport, use of safari motor vehicles, walking, swimming, and boating.The use of air transport and motor vehicles in photographic safaris is conducted mainly to capture good and quality photographs, to save time and ensure safe encounters with dangerous wild animals.Walking safaris allows for in-depth experiences with wild animals and their habitats, although it might pose some danger to visitors.Boating and swimming have been applied to marine and/or freshwater wildlife watching tourism expeditions.In Australia, divers interact with whales and dolphins in swimming mode.Boating is mainly used for viewing fish, crocodiles, and hippopotamus in Zimbabwe.The duration of photographic safaris and game viewing can also be used to classify wildlife watching experiences.In a twenty-four-hour (24-hour) period, tourists also watch nocturnal and diurnal wildlife.Dry seasons allow viewing a variety of wild animals, as some will seek watering points and will be more visible in bushes without much level.Night game drives are performed to interact, capture, and experience wild animals with nocturnal life patterns and hence provide a unique encounter in the same area.There is a knowledge dearth regarding photographic safaris and game drives tourism impact on overall tourism performance especially in southern Africa.Therefore, this study aimed to analyse the influence of the photographic safaris and game drive tourism marketing mix on overall tourism performance in a bid to improve tourism performance in Zimbabwe.The specific objectives were to: (i) establish the relationship between local tourists and foreign tourists on their perception of photographic safaris and game drive tourism marketing mix, (ii) determine the relationship between tourists and stakeholders on photographic safaris and game drive tourism marketing mix, (iii) determine the relationship between photographic safaris and game drive marketing mix and overall tourism performance, and (iv) establish the major reasons for photographic safaris and game drive tourism in Zimbabwe.

Study area
The study focused on photographic safaris and game viewing, which are conducted in various tourist attraction centres in Zimbabwe, including the Parks and Wildlife Estate, Forest Areas, CAMPFIRE Areas, and Conservancies (Figure 1).The study considered wildlife attraction areas, as these are the most appropriate places for conducting photographic safaris and game drive activities.Positivism was applied in this study because of its generalization, prediction, validity, and reliability (Cohen et al., 2011;Kuguyo & Gandiwa, 2022a;Morrison, 2013).In this study, because laws and rules were set to be followed, there was minimal room for error.This structure also gave little room for variance and drastic variable changes, thus making the study more appropriate (Saunders et al., 2009), when it comes to applications as it tries to follow specific rules using objective mathematical and scientific tools.Since this paradigm is objective, it is transparent to personal prejudice.This study adopted a quantitative cross-sectional survey to collect and analyse data on the influence of the photographic safaris and game drive tourism marketing mix performance of Zimbabwe.

Data collection and analysis
The study followed the sample sizes used for similar studies.For a population greater than 100,000 subjects, at ± 5% significance level, Israel (1992) recommended a minimum sample size of 400.Cohen et al. (2011) recommended a sample size of 384 for a population of 250,000 or more for a 5% confidence interval or 95% confidence level.Krejcie and Morgan (1970) also accepted a minimum sample size of 384 individuals for large populations.However, a sample size of 411 was considered satisfactory for the quantitative strand.This study used the quota sampling technique to establish research subjects for a cross-sectional survey.Quota sampling is a subjective form of stratification, suitable for large populations (Cohen et al., 2011), and appropriate for quantitative designs.Cooper and Schindler (2010) also support the application of quota sampling in this type of study.
On measuring the tourism performance of Zimbabwe, the study used the following key performance indicators, length of stay by tourists, diversity of attractions visited by tourists, satisfaction with visits by tourists, repeat visits by tourists, expenditure per visit by each tourist, number of inquiries by potential tourists, accommodation bookings by tourists, revenue generated by players, positive word of mouth by tourists and higher tourist volumes.Further, in measuring the relationship between all tourists and stakeholders on their perceptions of photographic safaris and game drive tourism marketing mix in Zimbabwe, a Pearson correlation test was carried out at a significance level of 0.05, as well as for measuring the relationship between local tourists and foreign tourists on their perceptions of photographic safaris and game drive tourism marketing mix in Zimbabwe, on the seven Ps of marketing mix elements, that is to say product, place, physical evidence, people, promotion, process, and price.A Pearson correlation test was also carried out at a significance level of 0.05, between local tourists and foreign tourists.
A comparison of the responses given by all tourists and stakeholders was made, and a correlation analysis between tourists' (n = 274) and stakeholders' (n = 137) mean values on fourteen (14) research items representing the seven (7) elements on the photographic safaris and game drive tourism marketing mix: product, place, physical evidence, people, promotion, process, and price, and measuring the value creation capacity of linking photographic safaris and game drive tourism marketing mix.All respondents had their fourteen ( 14) mean values that were subjected to the one-sample mean test.The study measured whether the given perceptions of the photographic safaris and game drive tourism marketing mix by all respondents who had a total of (n = 411) performed above the average level using a benchmark of 3.00 mean value and a significance level of 0.05, in one-sample mean test analysis.
The Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) software version 21 for Windows was used to analyse the quantitative data.The generalization of the results on photographic safaris and game drives was supported by the following themes: (i) photographic safaris and game drive tourism marketing mix performance, (ii) relationship between local tourists and foreign tourists on their perceptions of photographic safaris and game drive tourism marketing mix, (iii) relationship between tourists and stakeholders on photographic safaris and game drive tourism marketing mix, (iv) overall performance between photographic safaris and game drive for all respondents, (v) relationship between photographic safaris and game drive marketing mix and overall tourism performance of Zimbabwe, and (vi) major reasons for photographic safaris and game drive tourism in Zimbabwe.
Accordingly, the following hypotheses were tested as part of the data analysis: H 1: There is a strong relationship between local tourists and foreign tourists regarding their perceptions of the photographic safaris and game drive tourism marketing mix, H 2: There is a strong relationship between tourists and stakeholders regarding their perceptions of the photographic safaris and game drive tourism marketing mix, H 3 : There is a significant positive performance of the photographic safaris and game drive tourism marketing mix of Zimbabwe, and H 4 : There is a strong relationship between photographic safaris and the game drive tourism marketing mix and the overall tourism performance of Zimbabwe.

Photographic safaris and game drive tourism marketing mix performance
The ranking of the 14 research items representing the seven (7) elements on the photographic safaris and game drive tourism marketing mix performance in Zimbabwe revealed that the product was ranked number 1, followed by place (No.2), physical evidence (No.3), people (No.4), promotion (No.5), process (No.6), and price (No.7).The PRODUCT had a mean value of 3.84 (Table 1) for marketing mix element performance.For instance, the period granted for photographic safaris is satisfactory and adequate, and for animals that are attractive for taking photographs and videos are available, followed by PLACE with a mean value of 3.78 for Safari Operators, Travel Booking Agents and Tour Operators who are active in facilitation of photographic safaris and game drive tourism marketing, and for Tour Operators and Safari Operators who are key players for collecting data on the natural behaviour of animals sited on and around natural water bodies and pans, for photographic safaris and game tourism marketing.PHYSICAL EVIDENCE had a mean value of 3.46 for terrain and vegetation are attractive for photographic safaris, and road networks and infrastructure have sufficient signage, instructions, and rules that are clearly labelled to guide photographic safaris.The PEOPLE had a mean value of 3.18 for tour guides and travel agents' hospitality and outstanding service during photographic safaris and for travel and tour agents can engage, train, and assist tourists in photographic safaris, PROMOTION also had a mean value of 3.08 for places and centers for photographic safaris are promoted effectively to tourists, and tour operators and travel agents create brochures and pamphlets that encourage photographic safaris, PROCESS with a mean value of 3.02 for support services and transportation involved in photographic safaris are effective and satisfactory, and for photographic safaris and game drives are highly coordinated and planned, and the PRICE had a mean value of 2.59 for pricing for game drive/viewing services are affordable in Zimbabwe, and for price reflect time and types of animals captured and photographed (George, 2015;Higginbottom, 2004;Kotler & Armstrong, 2018;Matura & Mapira, 2018;Morrison, 2013).

Relationship between local tourists and foreign tourists on their perceptions of photographic safaris and game drive tourism marketing mix
The results showed a correlation coefficient of r-value of +0.573 and a p-value of 0.032 (Table 2), indicating that there was a strong and significant relationship between perceptions of local tourists and foreign tourists on the marketing mix elements applied to photographic safaris and game viewing tourism in Zimbabwe (Kotler & Armstrong, 2018;Morrison, 2013).

Relationship between tourists and stakeholders on photographic safaris and game drive tourism marketing mix
The relationship between tourists and stakeholders regarding how they rated the photographic safaris marketing mix produced an r-value of +0.624 at a p-value of 0.017, as shown in Table 2(b).
The areas with consistent positive responses were period granted for photographic safaris, attractiveness and availability of animals, existence of natural water holes for capturing natural behavior of wild animals, attractiveness of terrain and vegetation for photographic safaris, and accessibility of places of photographic safaris.Consistent negative perceptions were on the affordability of game drive viewing services, prices reflecting time and type of animals to be photographed, and support services and transportation in the photographic safaris were effective and satisfactory.The inconsistent perception was on the people mix, road networks, and infrastructure (Morrison, 2013)

Overall difference between the performance of photographic safaris and game drive for all respondents
This study results shows that the photographic safaris performed better than the minimum basic level of 3.00 mean value.The 7Ps of the marketing mix elements on photographic safaris and game viewing of Zimbabwe were also ranked, starting with high-performance levels using the mean values.The order started with the product mix (mean = 3.84), place mix (mean = 3. 78), physical evidence (mean = 3.46), people mix (mean = 3.18), promotion (mean = 3.08), process (mean = 3.02), and price mix (mean = 2.59) (Page & Connell, 2009).

Relationship between photographic safaris and game drive marketing mix and overall tourism performance of Zimbabwe
The overall tourism performance in Zimbabwe was 0.293 on the photographic safaris and game drive marketing mix and overall tourism performance in Zimbabwe, with a t-value of 5.057 and a p-value of 0.000, and the stakeholders' performance was 0.286 with a t-value of 3.473 and a p-value of 0. 001.Both tourists and stakeholders have p-values less than 0.05 (Table 3).This showed that there was a strong regression between photographic safaris and game drive and overall tourism performance in Zimbabwe (Ultimate Guide to Safari, 2019; UNWTO, 2018).
Both tourists' (Adj R 2 = 0.005) and stakeholders' (Adj R 2 = 0.029) (Table 4) adjusted R-Squares were below 0.1, and hence reported some poor fit between photographic safaris and game drive interests, and overall tourism performance of Zimbabwe.Tourists' p-value of 0.135 was above 0.05, and generally insignificant in the model, while the stakeholders' p-value of 0.025 was below 0.05, and hence was significant in the regression model.Tourists' responses indicated a Beta Coefficient of 0.091 for linking photographic safaris and game drive interests of tourists to the overall tourism performance of Zimbabwe, while that of stakeholders was 0.191 (Table 4).
The smaller beta coefficient and insignificant p-values on the tourists' regression model indicate that photographic safaris and game drive interests tested in the study were not fully relevant to the needs of photographic safari.There is a need for detailed marketing research to identify the changing expectations of both customers and stakeholders regarding issues defining photographic safaris and game-driven tourism experiences.An in-depth understanding of the dynamics of tourists' tastes and expectations for the Zimbabwe's wildlife tourism market will strengthen both tourists' and stakeholders' regression equations to estimate the relationship between photographic safaris and game drive interests and the overall tourism performance of Zimbabwe (UNWTO, 2018).

Major reasons for photographic safaris and game drive tourism by tourists in Zimbabwe
Tourists rated their motivation for photographic safaris in Zimbabwe starting with seeing the Big Five wild animals (mean = 4.42); seeing and taking photographs of a variety of unique and large groups of wild animal species (mean = 4.42); relaxation, excitement, adventure, and escaping the day-to-day routine (mean = 4.15); being close to nature and experiencing the naturalness of the environment (mean = 3.95); game drive and viewing with friends, colleagues, and family members (mean = 3.70); and learning about wild animals (mean = 3.15; Table 5).Stakeholders, on the other hand, rated seeing and taking photographs of a variety, unique, and large groups of wild animal species (mean = 4.09); seeing the Big Five animals (mean = 4.07); relaxation, excitement, adventure, and escaping day-to-day routines (mean = 4.06); game drive and viewing with friends, colleagues, and family members (mean = 3.99); being close to nature and experiencing the naturalness of the environment (mean = 3.88); and learning about wild animals (mean = 3.69) in order of preference.
The top four reasons for game viewing were found to be seeing the Big Five animals (No. 1) with a mean value of 4.25, seeing and photographing a variety, unique, and large groups of wild animal species (No. 2), mean value = 4.15, relaxation, excitement, adventure, and escaping day-to-day routines (No. 3), mean value = 4.11, being close to nature and experiencing the naturalness of the environment (No.4), mean value = 3.90, game drive and viewing with friends, colleagues, and family members (No. 5), mean value = 3.85, learning about wild animals (No. 6), and mean value = 3.42.Morrison (2013), Mutanga et al. (2017), and Page and Connell (2009) have asserted that push factors for photographic safaris and game viewing include the need for adventure, prestige, escape, rest, social interaction, and relaxation.The major interests highlighted were appreciating live animals, price levels, love of nature, engaging in filming, enjoying biodiversity, watching dangerous animals, seeing the Big Five animals, and observing animals in large numbers.

Conclusion
The study recorded fourteen (14) research items representing the seven (7) elements of the photographic safaris and game drive tourism marketing mix.In photographic safaris and game drive, product, place, physical evidence and people mix had the best performance.The results revealed that product was ranked number one.The study showed that there was a strong and significant relationship between the perceptions of local tourists and foreign tourists on the marketing elements applied to photographic safaris and game-viewing tourism in Zimbabwe.The study concludes that (i) there was a strong relationship between tourists and stakeholders on how they rated the photographic safaris marketing mix; (ii) all respondents performed above the average level, and photographic safaris also performed higher than the minimum basic level of 3.00 mean value, and (iii) there was a strong relationship between photographic safaris, game drive, and overall tourism performance in Zimbabwe.If all these parties continue with the same collaboration, sustainability of photographic safaris game drive is guaranteed in the now and future.

A
Figure 1.The distribution areas of conservation areas which offers opportunities for photographic safaris and game viewing in Zimbabwe.(Source: Zimbabwe Parks and Wildlife Management Authority, 2017)