Research contributions The research provides the examination of the international tourists’ perception and acceptance on ethnic food in Indonesia. Since there has been no study like this present study ever conducted before in Yogyakarta, Indonesia, the researcher expects the findings to be beneficial in providing a deeper understanding about ethnic food attributes on tourists’ perception and acceptance, and about the difference of personal information variables towards perception and acceptance on ethnic food in Yogyakarta. It is expected that the study can be used as empirical contribution as well as a comparison with previous ethnic food researches from neighboring countries. The significances of the study are expected to be in two ways. For business practitioners, there are at least two benefits that can be obtained from the study. Firstly, it supports the local economy, as the increased consumption of ethnic food will empower local producers such as farmers to boost the sustainability of traditional farming and society, which in turn promote the regional economic development as well. Secondly, it provides a new sight on tourism practitioners, especially ethnic food providers in Yogyakarta, about how to maintain and improve the ethnic food quality in the restaurants. As ethnic décor of food environment increases acceptability, thus the ethnic restaurants should enhance the service circumstances in desirable condition. Healthiness related issues should be also taken into consideration as it might be an obstacle of international tourists to dine Indonesian ethnic food. Thus, nutritional information as well as food ingredients information should be declared on the food menu to increase the willingness to consume and accept the ethnic food. For government party, the research is expected to be able to show the evidence of the destination’s potential. Therefore there are two suggestions which might be taken into account. Firstly, the government should take into consideration on how to promote and expand Indonesian ethnic food familiarity throughout the world. Secondly, the government needs to differentiate Yogyakarta’s image
Green, G. P., & Dougherty, M. L. (2009). Localizing linkages for food and tourism as a community development strategy. Journal of Community Development, 39(3), 148-158. Grunert, K. G. (2010). European consumers’ acceptance of functional foods. Annals of The New York Academy of Sciences 1990, 166-173. doi: 10.1111/j.1749-6632.2009.05260.x Hansen, T. (2005). Understanding consumer perception of food quality: the cases of shrimps and cheese. British Food Journal,107(7), 500-525. Hein, K. A., Jaeger, S. R., Carr, B. T., & Delahunty, C. M. (2008).Comparison of five common acceptance and preference methods. Food Quality and Preference, 19, 651-661. Hjalager, A. (2004). What do tourist eat and why? Towards a sociology of gastronomy and tourism. Research Note, Tourism, 52(2), 195-201. Kalvianen, N. (2002). Texture modifications in semisolid and solid foods: Sensory characterization and acceptance in different age groups. EKT series 1313. University of Helsinki, Department of Food Technology. Karen, B., Fjord, T. A., & Grunert, K. G. (2002). Consumer’s food choice and quality perception. Working Paper 77 ISSN 0907-2101. The Aorhos School of Business. King, S. C., Meiselman, H. L., Hottenstein, A. W., Work, T. M., & Cronk, V. (2005).The effects of contextual variables on food acceptability: A confirmatory study. Food Quality and Preference, 18,58-65. Kivela, J. J., & Crotts, J. C. (2005). Gastronomy tourism: A meaningful travel market segment. Journal of Culinary Science and Technology,4(2/3), 39-55. doi: Lusk, J. L. & Coble, K. H. (2005). Risk perception, risk preference, and acceptance of risky food. American Journal Agriculture Economics, 87(2), 393-405.