Selection of Tourism Destinations Priority using
6AsTD Framework and TOPSIS
1
st
Yunifa Miftachul Arif
Department of Electrical Engineering
Institut Teknologi Sepuluh November
Surabaya, Indonesia
Department of Informatics Engineering
Universitas Islam Negeri Maulana
Malik Ibrahim
Malang, Indonesia
yunif4@gmail.com
2
nd
Supeno Mardi Susiki Nugroho
Department of Electrical Engineering
Institut Teknologi Sepuluh November
Surabaya, Indonesia
mardi@ee.its.ac.id
3
rd
Mochamad Hariadi
Department of Electrical Engineering
Institut Teknologi Sepuluh November
Surabaya, Indonesia
mochar@ee.its.ac.id
Abstract—
Many tourist cities in developing countries,
especially in Indonesia, have exciting tourism destinations.
However, some of them do not use a good management
concept, for example, to develop tourism destinations. Early
process in the development of the destination is making
priority selection appropriately. They should consider the
success level of tourism destinations. This paper discusses
implementations of the 6AsTD framework and TOPSIS
method as a combination concept to select destinations priority
that recommended to do development. 6AsTD has six
components that reflect successful tourism destinations. All
components used in the process of the TOPSIS method as input
criteria. This research used 11 tourism destinations data
bundles in Batu City. The result is a tourism destination with
the highest priority has a score of 0.88, and the lowest priority
has a score of 0.19.
Keywords—tourism destinations, development, priority,
6AsTD framework, TOPSIS
I. I
NTRODUCTION
Indonesia is a developing country that has many cities
with potential tourism destinations. Some of them are not yet
applying the tourism management concept correctly. That is
the reason why the tourist and government unable to collect
more potential revenue from the tourism sector. Tourism
destinations are areas that have a significant influence on
improving the economy in tourism cities. If tourism is well
developed, then the economy will also run well [1].
Therefore tourist city needs to implement the concept of
good tourism development, for example using smart tourism.
Before those concepts implemented and the development
process began, the city government should do two things.
First, the government must ensure that facilities and services
in tourism destinations are available either. We can see the
success of tourism destinations through the availability of
existing support facilities and service [2]. The development
of a tourism destination is carried out by improving the
facilities and services [3]. Improving the facilities in a
balanced manner is aimed to fulfil the tourist's desires and
create comfort for them, so they will be interested in visiting
and coming back again [4]. The second is to select the
priority destinations base on its characteristics. Each tourism
destination certainly has different characteristics regarding
facilities and services [5]. The problem is how the city
government select tourist destinations priorities
appropriately. The developing destinations process will be
able to absorb the budget properly if the government does the
priority determination correctly.
To answer these problems required a framework and
method for analyzing and selecting tourism destinations.
There are only a few of the framework that is used to analyze
tourism destinations. Among them are the Premier-Ranked
Tourist Destination Framework (PRTDF) and 6As of
Tourism Destinations (6AsTD) Framework [6][7]. Between
two such frameworks, 6AsTD has a complete analysis of the
facilities and services in a tourism destination. 6AsTD also
specifically used to measure the success level of a tourism
destination. This framework consists of six components,
which include Attractions, Accessibility, Amenities,
Available Packages, Activities and Ancillary Services. Each
of these components has different characteristics. Attraction,
Available Packages, and Activities generally describe the
existing tourism services. Whereas Accessibility, Amenities,
and Ancillary Services describe the supporting facilities
provided in tourism destinations and surrounding areas [8].
This research proposes a combination of the 6AsTD and
Technique for Order Preference by Similarly to Ideal
Solution (TOPSIS). We chose this framework and method
because both are combinations that complement each other.
6AsTD is in charge of providing the criteria based on the
components, whereas TOPSIS served to process these
criteria to become a priority. TOPSIS is one of the
techniques in multiple-criteria decision-making that can
solve the problems with several attributes clearly and
systematically [9][10]. TOPSIS is useful for solving complex
problems in an operating system [11]. In this research,
TOPSIS used to select the tourism destinations that are a
priority development. For testing the accuracy of our
proposed concept, this research use 11 tourism destinations
data bundles in Batu City.
This paper has several sections to describe the research
steps and explain the results. The section includes the
Framework and Method, Result and Discussion, and the last
is Conclusion.
II. M
ETHOD
A
ND
F
RAMEWORK
A. The Tourism Destinations Concept
The following are definitions that can explain what
tourism destinations are. According to Carlos Lampus, a
tourism destination is a place that draws the attention of
tourists to make tourist visits [12]. It is a fusion of tourism
products and services that considered a complex system [13].
Tourism destination is also an area chosen by visitors to
carry out tourism activities, covering all available facilities,
including entertainment facilities, accommodation, lodging,
restaurants, and so on [7][2].
Every visitor has a variety of goals when they are at
tourism destinations. These goals include refreshing,
working, attending activities, shopping, studying or just
visiting friends [12]. Therefore, existing facilities and
services, including public facilities, must be able to support
every visitor activity [13]. For example, tourists certainly
need accommodation when they visit a place for more than
24 hours. The tourists also want devices or transportation
routes that are easily accessible [14]. Facilities and services
included in tourism destinations are accommodation
facilities, destination utilities, communication facilities, and
destination accessibility. The references to the analysis of
accommodation facilities include quality, variety, upmarket
and value for money. Destination utilities include clean water
and electricity. Communication facilities include modern
communication facilities and internet access. Destination
accessibility includes quality of the road, traffic congestion,
car rental facilities, adequate transport network, adequate
internal transportation dan accessibility of attraction sites
[14]. We use the parts of tourism destination support services
as a reference to complete the variables of the 6AsTD
framework described in the next section.
B. 6AsTD Framework
As stated earlier, each tourist destination has different
characteristics even though it located in a nearby city. So the
government needs a reference for determining the success
rate assessment of a tourist destination. 6AsTD is a
framework that can be used to answer these problems. This
framework, first introduced by Dimitrios Buhalis, has six
main components, shown in figure 1 [7][8][2]. Each
component of 6AsTD has different variables. All of them
indicate the characteristics of tourism destinations [15].
Figure 1: Components of the 6AsTD framework
Attractions are an exciting point in tourist destinations
that make people interested in visiting. Tourist attractions are
open to the public and use for entertainment, attraction or
learning [16]. In this framework, attractions (A1) have four
variables include natural landscape (A1
1
), artificial tourism
(A1
2
), cultural tourism (A1
3
) and special events (A1
4
)
[7][8][2]. Each of these variables describes the point of
interest numbers at each tourism destinations. The following
formula is used to get the attraction's score.
1=1
+1
+1
+1
Every tourism destinations must have good access to
make it easier for visitors to come and doing tourism
activities in that place [17]. The accessibility component (A2)
has four assessment variables. These variables include
transportation routes (A2
1
), terminals (A2
3
), Public
Transportation Inside (A2
3
) and Public Transportation
Outside (A2
4
) [4] [5] [6] [15] [16]. Transportation routes are
the route available from the city centre to the destination.
The terminal variable is about distance access from the
terminal to the destination. Public Transportation Inside
shows the availability of public transportation at tourism
destinations. While Public Transportation Outside shows the
alternative transportation that can be used to go to tourism
destinations, such as taxis, car rental facilities, buses and
other public transportation such as Gojek, Grab, and others.
We can get the scores of accessibility components using the
following formula.
2=2
+2
+2
+2
Amenities are components of the 6AsTD framework that
represent available facilities at the tourism destinations.
These facilities can be available both inside and surround it
[2]. Amenities (A3) have four variables that have a direct
influence on visitors. These components can increase the
comfort level of visitors. These variables include lodging and
hotels (A3
1
), restaurants (A3
2
), public facilities (A3
3
) and
shopping centers (A3
4
) [7][8][14][16]. Lodging and hotels
describe the availability of places used by visitors to stay
overnight. Restaurants describe the availability of places for
eating. Public facilities include worship facilities, toilets, and
so on. A shopping center is a place that can be visited by
tourists to buy souvenirs. The following formula is used to
get the amenities score.
3=3
+3
+3
+3
The available packages component shows a combination
of several services in one tour package to offer to visitors
[16]. Available packages contain unique offers that can
attract visitors' attention [2]. The tour package can be in the
form of a package of several tourist spots with special prices.
The available packages include guiding services, organized
tour packages and special interest tours [15]. The scores of
available packages (A4) is the number of all packages offered
to the visitors of a tourism destination.
Activities are components that describe all tourism
activities that can be carried out by visitors at tourism
destinations. Components of activities affect to trigger
tourists to come and visit [8][2]. Each tourism destination
may have various activities offered to visitors. These
activities example are sightseeing, swimming, outbound,
playing, taking photographs, and other activities. The scores
of activities component (A5) is the number of all activities
that allow visitors to do at a tourism destination.
The ancillary service component describes the supporting
facilities inside and around tourism destinations. These
facilities may not be directly related to tourism activities but
by some visitors need them [2]. Ancillary services (A6) have
several variables of assessment; communication channels
(A6
1
), internet services (A6
2
), ATM or bank (A6
3
), medical
services (A6
4
), and postal services (A6
5
) [7][8][14][16].
Communication channels are a means of communication
used in tourism destinations, including public telephone and
communication technology, that can be accessed by mobile
phones. Internet services include public internet services and
internet technology through providers that can be accessed
using a smartphone. ATM or bank is a supporting facility
that allows visitors to access their financial. Medical service
variables describe health services and facilities that accessed
inside and around tourism destinations. Postal service is a
(
1
)
(
2
)
(
3
)
(
6
)
facility that does not always exist in tourist attractions but
sometimes is needed, for example, to send letters and
packages. We use this formula to get the ancillary services
score.
6=6
+6
+6
+6
+6
C. TOPSIS
In this research, the Technique for Order Preference by
Similarly to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS) is an essential part of
the process of determining the priorities of which tourist
destinations that are most suitable for development. TOPSIS
is one of MCDM techniques used in decision-making
methods[11][17]. This technique is a favorite because it has a
reasonable concept, easy understanding, and a lighter
computing process. The working principle of TOPSIS is that
the chosen alternative has the closest distance-vector the
positive ideal solution, and the farthest to the negative ideal
solution [18]. The following is the TOPSIS procedure used
in this study [19][20]:
• Make a normalization of the decision matrix.
=
∑
• Make a weighted normalized decision matrix.
=
• Determine the matrix of positive ideal solutions
(A
+
) and negative ideal solutions (A
-
).
=
,
,…,
=
,
,…,
• Determine the distance between scores with the
matrix of positive and negative ideal solutions.
=
−
=
• Determine the preference score for each alternative
(V
i
).
=
+
There are several parts which are prepared to complete
this method, including:
1) Alternative
The alternative in this study are several choices of
objects to be processed; they are tourism
destinations with the lowest score.
2) Criteria
Criteria are the characteristics possessed by the
tourism destinations object. These characteristics
have obtained the component of the 6AsTD; there
are attractions, accessibility, amenities, available
packages, activities, and ancillary services.
3) Priority weight
The priority weight referred to in this study is the
same as the weight of interest possessed by each
criterion. This weight uses a scale of 1 to 5.
III. R
ESULT
A
ND
D
ISCUSSION
Two steps are guaranteed to get the results of the
research. First, define the components scores of the 6AsTD
framework as the criteria score of the TOPSIS method. The
second step is to perform the TOPSIS process to get the
priority result.
A. 6AsTD Component Scoring
The selection of tourism destinations requires parameter
scores derived from the components of the 6AsTD
framework. To get the score of each component, we
surveyed 11 popular tourism destinations in Batu City. The
survey of 6AsTD framework components carried out by :
• Go to tourism destinations and record all available
attraction spots, facilities and services provided in
ea tourism destination.
• Retrieve facilities and services data through the
analysis of website content owned by tourism
destinations.
Based on the survey result of Batu City tourism
destinations, all of the components have scores that shown
through the following tables.
TABLE I. A
TTRACTIONS
S
CORES
Tourism
Destinations
Attractions Variables
A1
Score
A1
1
A1
2
A1
3
A1
4
Cangar 2 3 0 0 5
Coban Talun 2 5 0 4 11
Selecta 1 6 0 0 7
Alun-alun 1 5 0 0 6
Museum Angkut 0 13 0 8 21
Coban Rais 4 6 2 0 12
Jatim Park 1 1 12 1 5 19
Jatim Park 2 0 4 0 0 4
Eco Green Park 2 30 0 1 33
BNS 0 35 0 1 36
Jatim Park 3 1 13 0 0 14
TABLE II. S
CORE OF
A
CCESSIBILITY
C
OMPONENT
Tourism
Destinations
Accessibility Variables
A2
Score
A2
1
A2
2
A2
3
A2
4
Cangar 0 3 1 0 4
Coban Talun 0 5 1 2 8
Selecta 1 4 0 4 9
Alun-alun 0 5 1 4 10
Museum Angkut 1 5 1 5 12
Coban Rais 0 2 1 2 5
Jatim Park 1 1 4 2 5 12
Jatim Park 2 1 2 2 5 10
Eco Green Park 3 2 1 4 10
BNS 0 7 1 4 12
Jatim Park 3 1 5 2 4 12
(
7
)
(
8
)
(
9
)
(
10
)
(
5
)
(
4
)
TABLE III. S
CORE OF
A
MENITIES
C
OMPONENT
Tourism
Destinations
Amenities Variables
A3
Score
A3
1
A3
2
A3
3
A3
4
Cangar 0 1 4 0 5
Coban Talun 0 1 4 0 5
Selecta 2 4 7 2 15
Alun-alun 5 5 5 9 24
Museum Angkut 4 4 14 7 29
Coban Rais 1 3 3 0 7
Jatim Park 1 3 7 12 3 25
Jatim Park 2 4 4 7 3 18
Eco Green Park 3 4 8 2 17
BNS 2 4 9 2 17
Jatim Park 3 4 4 4 1 13
TABLE IV. S
CORE OF
A
VALIABLE
P
ACKAGES
A
ND
A
CTIVITIES
C
OMPONENT
Tourism
Destinations
Components
Scores
A4 A5
Cangar 1 4
Coban Talun 1 3
Selecta 1 7
Alun-alun 2 3
Museum Angkut 2 6
Coban Rais 1 3
Jatim Park 1 5 5
Jatim Park 2 2 6
Eco Green Park 1 5
BNS 2 3
Jatim Park 3 2 5
TABLE V. S
CORE OF
A
NCILLARY
C
OMPONENT
Tourism
Destinations
Ancillary Services Variables
A6
Score
A6
1
A6
2
A6
3
A6
4
A6
5
Cangar 0 1 0 1 0 2
Coban Talun 0 1 0 1 1 3
Selecta 0 1 0 3 2 6
Alun-alun 4 4 3 3 2 16
Museum Angkut 4 2 3 3 2 14
Coban Rais 0 2 0 2 1 5
Jatim Park 1 2 3 4 3 2 14
Jatim Park 2 2 3 4 3 2 14
Eco Green Park 3 3 1 3 2 12
BNS 2 2 1 3 2 10
Jatim Park 3 3 1 0 3 2 9
Table 1 describes the results of attractions component
scoring. This score represents the number of available tourist
spots based on the natural landscape, artificial tourism,
cultural tourism, and special events. BNS has the highest
score, while the lowest is Jatim Park 2. It shows that BNS
had a more interesting tourism spot than other tourism
destinations in Batu. Table 2 shows the results of the
accessibility component assessment. This score is obtained
by considering the four variables that belong to the
accessibility component. The table also describes the
assessment of transportation routes and facilities that can be
used to reach tourism destinations. Table 3 shows the results
of the amenities evaluation. The table also shows the
completeness of supporting facilities that are directly related
to tourism activities, for example, the availability of lodging,
restaurants, shopping centers and public facilities provided at
the tourism destinations area. In this component, Museum
Angkut, Jatim Park 1, and Alun-Alun have the highest score.
Table 4 illustrates the difference score of available tour
packages owned by available packages components. Every
tourism destinations in Batu city generally already have a
tour package that is offered by the management or by travel
agents. However, the variation of packages is different, so it
assesses available packages also becomes unequal. Table 4
also describes a variety of activities that visitors can do. Each
tourism destination has a more evenly distributed score of
activity components. This score indicates that the
destinations have almost the same score. Table 5 shows the
completeness of supporting facilities in the tourism
destinations that are not directly related to tourism activities.
Jatim Park 1 is the complete tourism destination compared to
the others.
B. TOPSIS Implementations Result
Table 6 shows the scores of 6AsTD framework
components as the criteria for selecting priorities. Each
component has a different weight, as shown in Table 7. The
components of accessibility, amenities, and activities have
the highest weight because the three components are directly
related to the convenience of tourism activities. The table
shows that available packages weight 4, and the ancillary
service weights 3. Attractions have the least weight because
the development of the components of the attraction limited
by the initial theme of the tourism destinations.
TABLE VI. T
HE SCORES OF
6A
S
TD
C
OMPONENTS
A
S
T
HE
TOPSIS
C
RITERIA
Tourism
Destinations
6AsTD Component
A1 A2 A3 A4 A5 A6
Cangar 5 4 5 1 4 2
Coban Talun 11 8 5 1 3 3
Selecta 7 9 15 1 7 6
Alun-alun 6 10 24 2 3 16
Museum Angkut 21 12 29 2 6 14
Coban Rais 12 5 7 1 3 5
Jatim Park 1 19 12 25 5 5 14
Jatim Park 2 4 10 18 2 6 14
Eco Green Park 33 10 17 1 5 12
BNS 36 12 17 2 3 10
Jatim Park 3 14 12 13 2 5 9
TABLE VII. P
RIORITY
W
EIGHTING OF
6A
S
TD
C
OMPONENT
6AsTD Component
Priority
Weighting
Attractions (A1)2
Accessibility (A2) 5
Amenities (A3)5
Available Packages (A4) 4
Activities (A5)5
Ancillary Service (A
6
) 3
Figure 14: The score of priority for developing tourism
destinations
Figure 14 shows the ranking results of prioritizing tourist
destinations using TOPSIS. Based on these figures,
destinations with the highest score also has the highest
priority than others. Cangar was ranked first in the priority of
tourism development, followed by CobanRais and
CobanTalun. Cangar has a score of 0.88, while CobanRais is
0.85, and CobanTalun is 0.78. Tourism destination in Batu
City, which has the lowest development priority, is Museum
Angkut with a score of 0.19.
IV. C
ONCLUSIONS
The development of tourism destinations, especially in
developing countries, requires accuracy in determining the
destination priority. This research offers a concept in
prioritizing the development of tourist destinations by
combining the 6AsTD framework and the TOPSIS method.
Each component of the framework has variables with
different scores and characteristics. The components scores
illustrate the success level of tourism destinations as the
TOPSIS criteria. We use the TOPSIS method to select the
priority of tourism destination development. Based on the
process results of 11 tourism destinations in Batu City,
Cangar has top priority with the highest score, followed by
CobanRais, CobanTalun, BNS, Jatim Park 3, Selecta, Eco
Green Park, Alun-Alun, Jatim Park 1, Jatim Park 2 and the
last is BNS.
A
CKNOWLEDGMENT
This research supported by the Telematic Engineering
Laboratory of Institut Teknologi Sepuluh November
Surabaya and Multimedia Laboratory of Universitas Islam
Negeri Maulana Malik Ibrahim Malang.
R
EFERENCES
[1] P. J. Cárdenas-García, M. Sánchez-Rivero, and J. I.
Pulido-Fernández, “Does Tourism Growth Influence
Economic Development?,” J. Travel Res., vol. 54, no.
2, pp. 206–221, 2015.
[2] D. Buhalis and A. Amaranggana, “Smart Tourism
Destinations,” Inf. Commun. Technol. Tour. 2014, pp.
553–564, 2014.
[3] A. Presenza, “the Performance of a Tourism
Destination. Who Manages the Destination ? Who
Plays the Audit Role ?,” Soc. Sci., no. February, pp. 1–
14, 2016.
[4] L. Medeiros, C. Falcão de Oliveira, and C. Rezende,
“Competitiveness of tourist destinations: the study of
65 key destinations for the development of regional
tourism,” Rev. Adm. Pública, vol. 44, no. 5, pp. 1067–
1095, 2010.
[5] I. Ebrahimzadeh, “Analysis of Tourism Facilities’
Distribution and its Optimization Based upon
Ashworth-Tunbridge and Getz Models Using GIS;
Case Study: Semnan in Historical Silk Route,”
Humanity. Soc. Sci., vol. 2, no. 3, p. 47, 2014.
[6] Ontario’s Highlands Tourism Organization, “Premier
Ranked Tourist Destination Framework.” 2011.
[7] D. Buhalis, “Buhalis Marketing the competitive
destination of the future,” Tour. Manag., vol. 21, no.
January 1999, pp. 97–116, 2000.
[8] W. Put-van den Beemt and R. Smith, “Smart tourism
tools: linking technology to the touristic resources of a
city,” Smart Tour. Congr. Barcelona, pp. 1–12, 2016.
[9] G. S. Da, “Selection of a Communication Satellite
Manufacturer using MCDM methods,” pp. 347–351,
2015.
[10] M. Tavana and A. Hatami-Marbini, “A group AHP-
TOPSIS framework for human spaceflight mission
planning at NASA,” Expert Syst. Appl., vol. 38, no. 11,
pp. 13588–13603, 2011.
[11] Z. U. Rehman, O. K. Hussain, and F. K. Hussain, “Iaas
cloud selection using MCDM methods,” Proc. - 9th
IEEE Int. Conf. E-bus. Eng. ICEBE 2012, pp. 246–
251, 2012.
[12] C. Lamsfus, D. Martin, and A. Alzua-Sorzabal, “Smart
Tourism Destinations : An Extended Conception of
Smart Cities Focusing on Human Mobility,” Inf.
Commun. Technol. Tour. 2015, pp. 363–375, 2015.
[13] C. Koo, S. Shin, U. Gretzel, W. C. Hunter, and N.
Chung, “Conceptualization of Smart Tourism
Destination Competitiveness,” Asia Pacific J. Inf.
Syst., vol. 26, no. 4, pp. 561–576, 2016.
[14] S. Vengesayi, F. T. Mavondo, and Y. Reisinger,
“Tourism Destination Attractiveness: Attractions,
Facilities, and People as Predictors,” Tour. Anal., vol.
14, no. 5, pp. 621–636, 2009.
[15] S. Harman, “Importance of Destination Attributes
Affecting Destination Choice of,” Education, pp. 131–
145, 2007.
[16] H. M. Tran, A. Huertas, and A. Moreno, “(SA)6: A
new framework for the analysis of smart tourism
destinations. A comparative case study of two Spanish
destinations,” Congr. - Semin. Destin. Tur. Intel. 2017
- Libr. Actas, vol. 320470350, no. February 2018, pp.
190–214, 2017.
[17] F. Kurniawan, A. P. Wibawa, Munir, S. M. S.
Nugroho, and M. Hariadi, “Makassar smart city
operation center priority optimization using fuzzy
multi-criteria decision-making,” Int. Conf. Electr. Eng.
Comput. Sci. Informatics, vol. 4, no. September, pp.
289–293, 2017.
[18] X. Xie, Q. Zhu, and Z. Chang, “Performance
evaluation of automobile ASPs using TOPSIS,” Proc. -
2013 4th Int. Conf. Digit. Manuf. Autom. ICDMA
2013, pp. 910–913, 2013.
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
