The Evaluation System and Application of the Homestay Agglomeration Location Selection

doi:10.5814/j.issn.1674-764X.2019.03.011

Abstract

Abstract:

The location of the homestay agglomeration is closely related to its proximity to the resources environment and the humanities and social environments. From the macroscopic and microscopic aspects, this study uses the analytic hierarchy process and the expert consultation method to construct a relatively comprehensive evaluation system including economic and environmental factors, tourism development factors, geographical environment factors, supporting facilities and operating conditions. The evaluation index system consists of 20 evaluation indexes and 35 evaluation factors. Taking the Baileqiao in Hangzhou and Qianjiadian Town in Beijing as examples, the evaluation indexes are verified and applied. The results show that the main factors affecting the location of the homestay agglomeration are the economic and environmental factors. The evaluation index system is composed of a target layer, a comprehensive evaluation layer, a factor evaluation layer and an index layer. The target layer takes reasonable location of the homestay agglomeration as the overall objective; the comprehensive evaluation layer includes economic and environmental factors (0.4396), tourism development (0.3039), geographic and environmental factors (0.1405), and supporting facilities (0.0545). The comprehensive evaluation scores of Baileqiao and Qianjiadian homestay agglomerations are 92.644 and 88.734, respectively, indicating that both are reasonable homestay sites. This study is helpful for promoting the understanding of the homestay agglomeration location selection and the development and construction of homestay agglomeration sites.

Key words: homestay agglomeration, location selection, evaluation system, application

LONG Fei,LIU Jiaming,YU Hu,ZHU He,ZHANG Shuying. The Evaluation System and Application of the Homestay Agglomeration Location Selection[J]. Journal of Resources and Ecology, 2019, 10(3): 324-334.

Figures/Tables 3

References 26

[1]	Bai X.2010. The thinking of location in the planning of modern service industry cluster area -- taking the modern service agglomeration area Xipu in chengdu as an example.Sichuan Architecture, 30(6): 8-10. (in Chinese)
[2]	Bao J G, Chu Y F.1999. Tourism Geography. Beijing: Higher Education Press. (in Chinese)
[3]	Bao J.1997 A systematic analysis of the influential factors to theme park development.Acta Geographica Sinica, 52(3): 237-245. (in Chinese)
[4]	Chen J J, Chen J, Lin J L.2017. A Study on B & B cluster construction influence on rural tourism destination's brand image: Based on the data of Zhejiang Province.Rural Economy and Science-Technology, 28(7): 79-82. (in Chinese)
[5]	Coltman M M.1989.Tourism Marketing.New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.
[6]	Fan Y Y.2015. The location selection of the economy hotel based on the analytic hierarchy process.Zhejiang Gongshang University, (in Chinese)
[7]	Gao J, Qiu Y S.2009. Study on the GIS-based resort siting evaluation in scenic areas——Case study of Nan Kun Mountain, Guangdong Province.Human Geography, 24(6): 82-85. (in Chinese)
[8]	Gray W S, Liguori S C.2002. Hotel and Motel Management and Opera- tions (the 4th Edition).Englewood Cliffs, N J: Prentice- Hall, 186-200.
[9]	Li C.2017. Analysis on the location factor of rural micro-tourism project -- taking Meijiagou scenic area as an example.Rural science and technology, 13(5): 23-25. (in Chinese)
[10]	Li H R, Wang X B.1995. A secret to success---An investigation report on Shenzhen’s “Splendid China”, “Chinese Ethnic Culture Village” and “the Window of the World”. Toursim Tribune, 9(5): 30-34.+61 (in Chinese)
[11]	Li Q.2017. Study on construction status and bottleneck of industry support of beautiful countryside in Chengde. Tourism Overview, 2(2). (in Chinese)
[12]	Li X J, Xie H B.2006. From the theory of industrial agglomeration, the location strategy of tourism hotel (micro) Southeast Communication——A case of Fuzhou city.Southeast Communication, 22(6): 75-77. (in Chinese)
[13]	Liu J M, Ji R J.2001. Research on selecting development sites for resorts.Human Geography,16(5): 49-52, 71. (in Chinese)
[14]	Long F, Liu J, Zhang S, et al.2018. Development characteristics and evolution mechanism of homestay agglomeration in Mogan Mountain, China.Sustainability. 10(9): 2964.
[15]	Ma K L.2016. Study on resort site selection.Journal of Sichuan Tourism University, 123(2): 47-51. (in Chinese)
[16]	Ma L H.2008. Research on location of tourism hotel based on multi-level fuzzy comprehensive evaluation.Market Modernization,560(35): 25. (in Chinese)
[17]	Qiu R D, Fu H Y.2008. Study on site selection of tourism real estate.Shanxi Architecture,34(2): 246-247. (in Chinese)
[18]	Ritchie J R B,Crouch G I,Li T Y,et al. 2006. Tourism Destination Competitiveness Management. Tianjin: Nankai University Press. (in Chinese)
[19]	Wang G X, Qian L L, Chen T, et al.2015. Evaluation of tourism environmental comfort and its spatial-temporal differentiation : a case study of West Lake in Hangzhou, China.Acta Ecologica Sinica, 35(7): 2206-2216. (in Chinese)
[20]	Wang R, Liu J M, Tian D J.2010. Research on site selection of sports& recreation tourism in islands: A case study of haitan island in Fujian Province. Tropical Geography, 30(06): 681-686, 692. (in Chinese)
[21]	Weber A.1929. On the location of industries. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
[22]	Xiong G M.2016. Thoughts on development of B&B cluster: A supply chain perspective.Logistics Technology, 35(1): 146-148. (in Chinese)
[23]	Zha A P, Xu N, Hou Z G.2017. Research on the suitability of micro-location of budget hotel: A case study on Jinjiang Inn Shanghai central city.Human Geography, 32(1): 152-160. (in Chinese)
[24]	Zha G F.2017. Reserch on Shanghai boutique hotel commercial factors of micro-location. Shanghai Normal University. (in Chinese)
[25]	Zheng C H, Chen W C.2010. Choosing sites for developing resorts.Science of Surveying and Mapping, 35(2): 180-182. (in Chinese)
[26]	Zhou Q.2014. Analysis on the development of Taiwan homestay and its enlightenment.Taiwan Agricultural Research, 126(1): 13-18. (in Chinese)

Target level	Comprehensive evaluation level	Weight	Element evaluation level	Weight of the upper level	Gross weight of the target level	Factor evaluation level	Weight of the upper level	Gross weight of the target level
A homestay agglomeration location selection	B1 Economic environment	0.4396	C1 Economic development	0.3741	0.1645	D1 GDP	1.0000	0.1645
			C2 Household disposable income	0.1475	0.0648	D2 Per capita disposable income of urban residents	1.0000	0.0648
			C3 Population size	0.1043	0.0459	D3 Resident population	1.0000	0.0459
			C4 Policy environment	0.3741	0.1645	D4 Reasonable travel & related planning	0.5000	0.0823
			C4 Policy environment	0.3741	0.1645	D5 Policy support	0.5000	0.0823
	B2 Tourism development	0.3039	C5 Tourist reception	0.3863	0.1174	D6 Domestic tourist reception	0.9728	0.1142
			C5 Tourist reception	0.3863	0.1174	D7 International tourist reception	0.0272	0.0032
			C6 Tourism income	0.1686	0.0512	D8 Total tourism revenue	1.0000	0.0512
			C7 Accommodation facilities	0.0587	0.0178	D9 Hotels	0.2500	0.0045
			C7 Accommodation facilities	0.0587	0.0178	D10 Number of homestays	0.7500	0.0134
			C8 Tourism resource enrichment	0.3863	0.1174	D11 Number of scenic area 3A above	0.3152	0.0370
						D12 Grade of scenic area	0.3678	0.0432
						D13 Ancient village & town	0.2170	0.0255
	B3 Geographical environment	0.1405	C9 Distance to central city	0.3874	0.0544	D14 Distance	1.0000	0.0544
			C10 Distance to core tourism resources	0.3874	0.0544	D15 Distance	1.0000	0.0544
			C11 Climate	0.0724	0.0102	D16 Tourism peak season	0.6667	0.0068
			C11 Climate	0.0724	0.0102	D17 Tourism climate comfort	0.3333	0.0034
			C12 Regional traffic	0.1124	0.0158	D18 Distance to airport	0.4545	0.0072
						D19 Distance to railway station	0.4545	0.0072
						D20 Distance to main highway	0.0909	0.0014
			C13 Close traffic	0.0404	0.0057	D21 Distance to bus stop/ subway station	0.3333	0.0019
			C13 Close traffic	0.0404	0.0057	D22 Traffic convenience to core tourism destination	0.6667	0.0038
	B4 Supporting Facilities	0.0545	C14 Infrastructure facilities	0.5418	0.0295	D23 Supply of water, power, internet, sewage disposal	1.0000	0.0295
			C15 Public service facilities	0.3818	0.0208	D24 Distance to large shopping & entertainment	0.2782	0.0058
						D25 Distance to large dining area	0.5489	0.0114
						D26 Distance to hospital	0.1300	0.0027
						D27 Distance to post office & other public services	0.0429	0.0009
			C16 Parking space condition	0.0764	0.0042	D28 Independent parking area & parking space	1.0000	0.0042
	B5 Operation condition	0.0615	C17 Cultural experience	0.1805	0.0111	D29 Tourist participation	0.6667	0.0074
			C17 Cultural experience	0.1805	0.0111	D30 Local cultural characteristics	0.3333	0.0037
			C18 Human resource	0.0642	0.0039	D31 Difficulty in obtaining professionals	0.4444	0.0017
			C18 Human resource	0.0642	0.0039	D32 Human cost	0.5556	0.0022
			C19 Rent cost	0.5572	0.0343	D33 Rent cost	0.6667	0.0229
			C19 Rent cost	0.5572	0.0343	D34 Community relations (residents attitude to homestay)	0.3333	0.0114
			C20 Architectural feature	0.1982	0.0122	D35 Regional feature & integrity	1.0000	0.0122

Target level	Comprehensive evaluation level	Weight	Element evaluation level	Weight of the upper level	Gross weight of the target level	Factor evaluation level	Weight of the upper level	Gross weight of the target level
A homestay agglomeration location selection	B1 Economic environment	0.4396	C1 Economic development	0.3741	0.1645	D1 GDP	1.0000	0.1645
			C2 Household disposable income	0.1475	0.0648	D2 Per capita disposable income of urban residents	1.0000	0.0648
			C3 Population size	0.1043	0.0459	D3 Resident population	1.0000	0.0459
			C4 Policy environment	0.3741	0.1645	D4 Reasonable travel & related planning	0.5000	0.0823
			C4 Policy environment	0.3741	0.1645	D5 Policy support	0.5000	0.0823
	B2 Tourism development	0.3039	C5 Tourist reception	0.3863	0.1174	D6 Domestic tourist reception	0.9728	0.1142
			C5 Tourist reception	0.3863	0.1174	D7 International tourist reception	0.0272	0.0032
			C6 Tourism income	0.1686	0.0512	D8 Total tourism revenue	1.0000	0.0512
			C7 Accommodation facilities	0.0587	0.0178	D9 Hotels	0.2500	0.0045
			C7 Accommodation facilities	0.0587	0.0178	D10 Number of homestays	0.7500	0.0134
			C8 Tourism resource enrichment	0.3863	0.1174	D11 Number of scenic area 3A above	0.3152	0.0370
						D12 Grade of scenic area	0.3678	0.0432
						D13 Ancient village & town	0.2170	0.0255
	B3 Geographical environment	0.1405	C9 Distance to central city	0.3874	0.0544	D14 Distance	1.0000	0.0544
			C10 Distance to core tourism resources	0.3874	0.0544	D15 Distance	1.0000	0.0544
			C11 Climate	0.0724	0.0102	D16 Tourism peak season	0.6667	0.0068
			C11 Climate	0.0724	0.0102	D17 Tourism climate comfort	0.3333	0.0034
			C12 Regional traffic	0.1124	0.0158	D18 Distance to airport	0.4545	0.0072
						D19 Distance to railway station	0.4545	0.0072
						D20 Distance to main highway	0.0909	0.0014
			C13 Close traffic	0.0404	0.0057	D21 Distance to bus stop/ subway station	0.3333	0.0019
			C13 Close traffic	0.0404	0.0057	D22 Traffic convenience to core tourism destination	0.6667	0.0038
	B4 Supporting Facilities	0.0545	C14 Infrastructure facilities	0.5418	0.0295	D23 Supply of water, power, internet, sewage disposal	1.0000	0.0295
			C15 Public service facilities	0.3818	0.0208	D24 Distance to large shopping & entertainment	0.2782	0.0058
						D25 Distance to large dining area	0.5489	0.0114
						D26 Distance to hospital	0.1300	0.0027
						D27 Distance to post office & other public services	0.0429	0.0009
			C16 Parking space condition	0.0764	0.0042	D28 Independent parking area & parking space	1.0000	0.0042
	B5 Operation condition	0.0615	C17 Cultural experience	0.1805	0.0111	D29 Tourist participation	0.6667	0.0074
			C17 Cultural experience	0.1805	0.0111	D30 Local cultural characteristics	0.3333	0.0037
			C18 Human resource	0.0642	0.0039	D31 Difficulty in obtaining professionals	0.4444	0.0017
			C18 Human resource	0.0642	0.0039	D32 Human cost	0.5556	0.0022
			C19 Rent cost	0.5572	0.0343	D33 Rent cost	0.6667	0.0229
			C19 Rent cost	0.5572	0.0343	D34 Community relations (residents attitude to homestay)	0.3333	0.0114
			C20 Architectural feature	0.1982	0.0122	D35 Regional feature & integrity	1.0000	0.0122

Evaluation indicators	Gross weight of the target level	Evaluation Standard / Score
Evaluation indicators	Gross weight of the target level	0	20	40	60	80	100
D1 GDP	0.1645	Below national ranking 60%	National ranking 60%	National ranking 50%	National ranking 40%	National ranking 30%	National ranking 20%
D2 Per capita disposable income of urban residents (Y/Y)	0.0648	-	<20000	>22000	>25000	>28000	>30000
D3 Resident population (ten thousand)	0.0459	<10	10-50	50-100	100-500	500-1000	>1000
D4 Reasonable travel & related plan	0.0823	-	Relatively detailed and scientific tour programming designed by one administrative level	Detailed and scientific tour programming designed by one administrative level	Relatively detailed and scientific tour programming designed by two administrative levels	Detailed and scientific tour programming designed by two administrative levels	Detailed and scientific tour programming designed by all three administrative levels
D5 Policy support	0.0823	-	Relatively detailed and scientific homestay industry policy designed by one administrative level	Detailed and scientific homestay industry policy designed by one administrative level	Relatively detailed and scientific homestay industry policy designed by two administrative levels	Detailed and scientific homestay industry policy designed by two administrative levels	Detailed and scientific homestay industry policy designed by all three administrative levels
D6 Domestic tourist reception	0.1142	Below national ranking 60%	National ranking 60%	National ranking 50%	National ranking 40%	National ranking 30%	National ranking 20%
D7 International tourist reception	0.0032	Below national ranking 60%	National ranking 60%	National ranking 50%	National ranking 40%	National ranking 30%	National ranking 20%
D8 Total tourism revenue	0.0512	Below provincial ranking 50%	Provincial ranking 50%	Provincial ranking 40%	Provincial ranking 30%	Provincial ranking 20%	Provincial ranking 10%
D9 Hotels	0.0045	-	The number of rooms is insufficient and the grade is single	The number of rooms can meet the basic accommodation needs, no star hotels	There are plenty of rooms, a variety of grades and 3-star hotels	There are plenty of rooms, a variety of grades and 4-star hotels	There are plenty of rooms, a variety of grades and 5-star hotels
D10 Number of homestay	0.0134	0	<500	>500	>1000	>1500	>2000
D11 Number of scenic area 3A above	0.0370	0	>10	>20	>30	>40	>50
D12 Grade of scenic area	0.0432	-	There are other tourist attractions	There are scenic spots.	There are 3A and above scenic spots	There are 4A and above scenic spots	There are 5A scenic spots
D13 Ancient village & town	0.0255	0	<5	>5	>10	>15	>20
D14 Distance	0.0544	>300 km	<300 km	<250 km	<200 km	<150 km	<100 km
D15 Distance	0.0544	-	﹥20 km	﹤20 km	﹤15 km	﹤10 km	﹤5 km
D16 Tourism peak season	0.0068	-	2 months or more	4 months or more	6 months or more	8 months or more	10 months or more
D17 Tourism climate comfort	0.0034	-	Suitable travel period more than 2 months	Suitable travel period more than 4 months	Suitable travel period more than 6 months	Suitable travel period more than 8 months	Suitable travel period more than 10 months
D18 Distance to airport	0.0072	-	<75 km	<65 km	<55 km	<45 km	<35 km
D19 Distance to railway station	0.0072	-	<40 km	<30 km	<20 km	<15 km	<10 km
D20 Distance to main highway	0.0014	-	<40 km	<30 km	<20 km	<15 km	<10 km
Evaluation indicators	Gross weight of the target level	Evaluation Standard / Score
Evaluation indicators	Gross weight of the target level	0	20	40	60	80	100
D21 Distance to bus stop/ subway station	0.0019	-	<5 km	<4 km	<3 km	<2 km	<1 km
D22 Traffic convenience to core tourism destination	0.0038	Arrival is relatively difficult	There are few modes of transportation to choose from, which is not convenient enough	There is a choice of modes of transportation, which is relatively convenient	There is a choice of modes of transportation, which is more convenient	There are many modes of transportation available, which are convenient	There are many modes of transportation available, which are very convenient
D23 Supply of water, power, internet, sewage disposal	0.0295	Not complete	Not quite complete	Generally complete	Relatively complete	Very complete	Extremely complete
D24 Distance to large shopping& entertainment	0.0058	-	<20 km	<15 km	<10 km	<8 km	<5 km
D25 Distance to large dining area	0.0114	-	<15 km	<10 km	<8 km	<5 km	<3 km
D26 Distance to hospital	0.0027	-	<10 km	<8 km	<5 km	<3 km	<2 km
D27 Distance to post office & other public service	0.0009	-	<15 km	<10 km	<8 km	<5 km	<3 km
D28 Independent parking area & parking space	0.0042	No separate parking lot, no parking space	No separate parking lot, generally adequate parking space	No separate parking lot, plenty of parking space	There is an independent parking lot with generally adequate parking space	There is a separate parking lot with adequate parking space	There is a separate parking lot and plenty of parking spaces
D29 Tourist participation	0.0074	-	Very low	Low	Moderate	High	Very high
D30 Local cultural characteristics	0.0037	-	Relatively distinctive	General distinctive	Distinctive	Very distinctive	Extremely distinctive
D31 Difficulty in obtaining professionals	0.0017	Difficult to obtain	More difficult to obtain	Not easy to obtain	Generally easy to obtain	Easy to obtain	Very easy to obtain
D32 Human cost	0.0022	-	Very high	High	Moderate	Low	Very low
D33 Rent cost	0.0229	Difficult to obtain housing sources	Far higher than the rental price of the local house	Higher than the rental price of the local house	The same as the rental price of the local house	Lower than the rental price of the local house	Far lower than the rental price of the local house
D34 Community relations (residents’ attitudes to homestay)	0.0114	Oppose the operation of homestay	No attitude	Get along relatively well with homestay operators	Get along well with homestay operators	Get along very well with homestay operators	Get along extremely well with homestay operators
D35 Regional features & integrity	0.0122	-	With certain regional characteristics, the architecture is not preserved well enough	With certain regional characteristics, the architecture is not well preserved	With certain regional characteristics, the architecture is relatively well preserved	With regional characteristics, the architecture is well preserved	With special regional characteristics, the architecture is extremely well preserved

Evaluation indicators	Gross weight of the target level	Evaluation Standard / Score
Evaluation indicators	Gross weight of the target level	0	20	40	60	80	100
D1 GDP	0.1645	Below national ranking 60%	National ranking 60%	National ranking 50%	National ranking 40%	National ranking 30%	National ranking 20%
D2 Per capita disposable income of urban residents (Y/Y)	0.0648	-	<20000	>22000	>25000	>28000	>30000
D3 Resident population (ten thousand)	0.0459	<10	10-50	50-100	100-500	500-1000	>1000
D4 Reasonable travel & related plan	0.0823	-	Relatively detailed and scientific tour programming designed by one administrative level	Detailed and scientific tour programming designed by one administrative level	Relatively detailed and scientific tour programming designed by two administrative levels	Detailed and scientific tour programming designed by two administrative levels	Detailed and scientific tour programming designed by all three administrative levels
D5 Policy support	0.0823	-	Relatively detailed and scientific homestay industry policy designed by one administrative level	Detailed and scientific homestay industry policy designed by one administrative level	Relatively detailed and scientific homestay industry policy designed by two administrative levels	Detailed and scientific homestay industry policy designed by two administrative levels	Detailed and scientific homestay industry policy designed by all three administrative levels
D6 Domestic tourist reception	0.1142	Below national ranking 60%	National ranking 60%	National ranking 50%	National ranking 40%	National ranking 30%	National ranking 20%
D7 International tourist reception	0.0032	Below national ranking 60%	National ranking 60%	National ranking 50%	National ranking 40%	National ranking 30%	National ranking 20%
D8 Total tourism revenue	0.0512	Below provincial ranking 50%	Provincial ranking 50%	Provincial ranking 40%	Provincial ranking 30%	Provincial ranking 20%	Provincial ranking 10%
D9 Hotels	0.0045	-	The number of rooms is insufficient and the grade is single	The number of rooms can meet the basic accommodation needs, no star hotels	There are plenty of rooms, a variety of grades and 3-star hotels	There are plenty of rooms, a variety of grades and 4-star hotels	There are plenty of rooms, a variety of grades and 5-star hotels
D10 Number of homestay	0.0134	0	<500	>500	>1000	>1500	>2000
D11 Number of scenic area 3A above	0.0370	0	>10	>20	>30	>40	>50
D12 Grade of scenic area	0.0432	-	There are other tourist attractions	There are scenic spots.	There are 3A and above scenic spots	There are 4A and above scenic spots	There are 5A scenic spots
D13 Ancient village & town	0.0255	0	<5	>5	>10	>15	>20
D14 Distance	0.0544	>300 km	<300 km	<250 km	<200 km	<150 km	<100 km
D15 Distance	0.0544	-	﹥20 km	﹤20 km	﹤15 km	﹤10 km	﹤5 km
D16 Tourism peak season	0.0068	-	2 months or more	4 months or more	6 months or more	8 months or more	10 months or more
D17 Tourism climate comfort	0.0034	-	Suitable travel period more than 2 months	Suitable travel period more than 4 months	Suitable travel period more than 6 months	Suitable travel period more than 8 months	Suitable travel period more than 10 months
D18 Distance to airport	0.0072	-	<75 km	<65 km	<55 km	<45 km	<35 km
D19 Distance to railway station	0.0072	-	<40 km	<30 km	<20 km	<15 km	<10 km
D20 Distance to main highway	0.0014	-	<40 km	<30 km	<20 km	<15 km	<10 km
Evaluation indicators	Gross weight of the target level	Evaluation Standard / Score
Evaluation indicators	Gross weight of the target level	0	20	40	60	80	100
D21 Distance to bus stop/ subway station	0.0019	-	<5 km	<4 km	<3 km	<2 km	<1 km
D22 Traffic convenience to core tourism destination	0.0038	Arrival is relatively difficult	There are few modes of transportation to choose from, which is not convenient enough	There is a choice of modes of transportation, which is relatively convenient	There is a choice of modes of transportation, which is more convenient	There are many modes of transportation available, which are convenient	There are many modes of transportation available, which are very convenient
D23 Supply of water, power, internet, sewage disposal	0.0295	Not complete	Not quite complete	Generally complete	Relatively complete	Very complete	Extremely complete
D24 Distance to large shopping& entertainment	0.0058	-	<20 km	<15 km	<10 km	<8 km	<5 km
D25 Distance to large dining area	0.0114	-	<15 km	<10 km	<8 km	<5 km	<3 km
D26 Distance to hospital	0.0027	-	<10 km	<8 km	<5 km	<3 km	<2 km
D27 Distance to post office & other public service	0.0009	-	<15 km	<10 km	<8 km	<5 km	<3 km
D28 Independent parking area & parking space	0.0042	No separate parking lot, no parking space	No separate parking lot, generally adequate parking space	No separate parking lot, plenty of parking space	There is an independent parking lot with generally adequate parking space	There is a separate parking lot with adequate parking space	There is a separate parking lot and plenty of parking spaces
D29 Tourist participation	0.0074	-	Very low	Low	Moderate	High	Very high
D30 Local cultural characteristics	0.0037	-	Relatively distinctive	General distinctive	Distinctive	Very distinctive	Extremely distinctive
D31 Difficulty in obtaining professionals	0.0017	Difficult to obtain	More difficult to obtain	Not easy to obtain	Generally easy to obtain	Easy to obtain	Very easy to obtain
D32 Human cost	0.0022	-	Very high	High	Moderate	Low	Very low
D33 Rent cost	0.0229	Difficult to obtain housing sources	Far higher than the rental price of the local house	Higher than the rental price of the local house	The same as the rental price of the local house	Lower than the rental price of the local house	Far lower than the rental price of the local house
D34 Community relations (residents’ attitudes to homestay)	0.0114	Oppose the operation of homestay	No attitude	Get along relatively well with homestay operators	Get along well with homestay operators	Get along very well with homestay operators	Get along extremely well with homestay operators
D35 Regional features & integrity	0.0122	-	With certain regional characteristics, the architecture is not preserved well enough	With certain regional characteristics, the architecture is not well preserved	With certain regional characteristics, the architecture is relatively well preserved	With regional characteristics, the architecture is well preserved	With special regional characteristics, the architecture is extremely well preserved

Location selection of the homestay agglomeration	Economic environment	Tourism development	Geographical environment	Supporting facilities	Operating condition	W_i	CR
Economic environment	1.0000	0.5445	0.4335	0.2631	0.4667	0.4396	0.095
Tourism development	0.2451	1.0000	0.4335	0.3684	0.2	0.3039
Geographical environment	0.0980	0.0544	1.0000	0.2631	0.2	0.1405
Supporting facilities	0.0980	0.0381	0.0173	1.0000	0.0667	0.0545
Operating condition	0.0686	0.0907	0.0288	0.0526	1.0000	0.0615