INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XIV October 2025 | Special Issue on Management
Page 2872
www.rsisinternational.org
Modelling Stakeholder Influence in Malaysia Homestay Experience
Program: A Fuzzy Dematel Approach
Azizah Ismail*
1
, Hairul Nizam Ismail
2
1
School of Tourism, Hospitality and Event Management, University Utara Malaysia
2
Faculty of Built Environment and Surveying, University Technology Malaysia
*Corresponding Author
DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2025.914MG00221
Received: 02 November 2025; Accepted: 12 November 2025; Published: 25 November 2025
ABSTRACT
The Malaysian Homestay Experience Program (MHEP) stands as a flagship initiative in community-based
tourism (CBT), designed to promote rural development and cultural exchange. Despite its success, limited
empirical research has systematically quantified the influence dynamics among the program’s diverse
stakeholders. This study addresses that gap by employing a fuzzy Decision-Making Trial and Evaluation
Laboratory (DEMATEL) approach to model stakeholder relationships within the MHEP. A total of 40 experts
comprising government, homestay operators, local community, academician and non-governmental
organization (NGO) were purposively selected to provide pairwise influence judgments across five key
stakeholder groups: government, homestay operators, local communities, academician, and NGO. Findings
reveal that government agencies and homestay operators emerge as the principal “cause” stakeholders with the
highest net influence, driving decision-making and shaping program outcomes. In contrast, local communities
and NGO are identified as “effect” stakeholders, primarily influenced by decisions from higher-tier actors. The
results highlight the hierarchical nature of influence in MHEP governance, providing a structured map of
stakeholder interactions. The findings offer actionable insights for policymakers by prioritizing strategic
engagement with high-influence stakeholders and instituting inclusive mechanisms for less influential actors,
long-term sustainability and resilience of the homestay program can be better achieved.
Keywords: Community-based tourism, Stakeholders, DEMATEL, Homestay program
INTRODUCTION
Malaysia’s Homestay Experience Program (MHEP) is a renowned community-based tourism initiative that
allows international and domestic tourists to experience village life by staying with local host families.
Established in 1995 under the Ministry of Tourism, Arts and Culture (MOTAC) as part of the Rural Tourism
Master Plan, the program was designed to spur rural community participation in tourism, diversify rural
incomes, and showcase authentic Malaysian culture and hospitality (Ramele et al., 2020). Over time, the
Malaysian Homestay Experience Programme (MHEP) has expanded across hundreds of villages, becoming a
vital part of national tourism. By offering immersive kampung experiences; local cuisine, daily routines, and
cultural performances, it delivers unique value to visitors while supporting host communities. Celebrated as a
model of public-community partnership, the program fosters employment, entrepreneurship, and cross-cultural
exchange, aligning with Malaysia’s sustainable tourism agenda.
The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted the MHEP, with near-zero occupancy in 2020–2021 threatening rural
livelihoods. In response, MOTAC and Tourism Malaysia launched revitalization efforts in 2022, underscoring
the need for resilient, multi-stakeholder coordination (Tourism Malaysia, 2022). MHEP involves a diverse
network government bodies shape policy and promotion, operators manage experiences, communities preserve
culture, tourists influence demand, and intermediaries offer logistical support. Each stakeholder holds distinct
influence, and success hinges on aligning their interests. As Ferdian et al. (2024) assert, synergy among
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XIV October 2025 | Special Issue on Management
Page 2873
www.rsisinternational.org
stakeholders is vital for sustainable tourism; MHEP’s resilience depends on this interdependent ecosystem.
Based on stakeholder theory and relevant literature, actors who affect or are affected by a program must be
strategically engaged. Specifically, stakeholders such as the community, government agencies such as
MOTAC, private sector operators, and tourists are integral to the success of the Malaysian Homestay
Experience Product (MHEP) (Pusiran, 2013; Yusof et al., 2017). These stakeholders influence and are
influenced by the program's development, operations, and sustainability.
The community is vital because their participation directly impacts the authenticity and sustainability of the
homestay experience (Balasingam, 2022). Government agencies, especially MOTAC, regulate, promote, and
provide funding or standards, shaping policy and resource allocation (Yusof et al., 2017). Homestay operators
and private sector players are responsible for service delivery, quality, and innovation, influencing customer
satisfaction and program reputation. Tourists act as the end-users and their feedback can influence future
program adjustments and stakeholder engagement strategies (Othman & Buang, 2021).
Stakeholder theory, as cited in tourism studies, emphasizes engaging all actors who affect or are affected by a
program strategically (Freeman, 1984). In the Malaysian Homestay Experience Product (MHEP) context, the
complex relationships among government bodies, local communities, homestay operators, and tourists shape
program outcomes. However, tourism studies often limit this to qualitative descriptions and overlook systemic
cause-effect relationships. The Decision-Making Trial and Evaluation Laboratory (DEMATEL) technique,
enhanced with fuzzy logic as explained by Ye and Feng (2024), provides a structured, quantitative way to map
and analyse these interdependencies. DEMATEL uses pairwise comparisons to reveal how influence cascades
among stakeholders, classifying them into cause and effect groups within a directed graph. This enables
planners to identify which actors drive outcomes and which respond, allowing targeted interventions that
enhance the resilience and cohesion of the program. Thus, integrating DEMATEL into stakeholder analysis
advances beyond traditional qualitative assessments to illuminate the dynamic influence networks crucial for
effective MHEP management.
Figure 1: A Conceptual Framework for Stakeholder Influence in MHEP
The conceptual framework illustrated above represents the analytical structure used to model stakeholder
influence in the Malaysia Homestay Experience Program (MHEP) through the Fuzzy DEMATEL approach. At
the core of this framework is the recognition that multiple stakeholder groups namely, Government agencies,
Homestay Operators, Local Communities, and NGOs. Interact in complex, interdependent ways to shape the
performance and sustainability of the homestay program. The Fuzzy DEMATEL method is employed to
capture the causal relationships and influence strengths among these actors by converting qualitative expert
assessments into quantitative fuzzy numbers, which helps manage uncertainty in human judgment.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XIV October 2025 | Special Issue on Management
Page 2874
www.rsisinternational.org
In this model, the Government emerges as a primary driver, exerting influence over Homestay Operators and
NGOs, reflecting its regulatory and funding roles. Homestay Operators, positioned centrally, interact directly
with both the Local Community and NGOs, indicating their operational significance in implementing tourism
activities. The Local Community, while receiving inputs from other stakeholders, also contributes feedback
and cultural resources, making it both an influenced and influencing actor. NGOs serve as both intermediaries
and supporters, receiving influence from both the Government and Operators while impacting community
engagement. This framework not only clarifies stakeholder roles but also supports strategic planning by
highlighting who drives change and who is affected, thereby enabling more inclusive and effective decision-
making in rural tourism development.
This paper addresses a gap in tourism research by providing the first quantitative mapping of stakeholder
influence in Malaysia’s Homestay Experience Programme (MHEP) using fuzzy DEMATEL. The method
identifies which actors act as primary influencers and which are more affected by others, offering actionable
insights for targeted stakeholder engagement. By understanding influence dynamics, authorities can reinforce
key relationships and support more vulnerable actors, ultimately enhancing governance in community-based
tourism (CBT).
LITERATURE REVIEW
Malaysia’s Homestay Experience Program: An Overview
The Malaysian Homestay Experience Program (MHEP) has been a cornerstone of rural tourism development
since its official launch in 1995 by the Ministry of Tourism, Arts and Culture (MOTAC) (Ramli, et al., 2020).
The program invites rural villages across Malaysia, including Malay Kampungs, Chinese New Villages, Indian
settlements, and Orang Asli villages, to participate by hosting tourists in their homes. The fundamental goals
are socio-economic empowerment of rural communities and cultural exchange, with tourism revenue
channelled directly to the villages, thereby diversifying income beyond traditional agriculture. Tourists
experience immersive stays where they live with host families and engage in daily routines such as farming,
cooking local dishes, craft-making, traditional games, and performances. This model exemplifies CBT,
emphasizing community ownership and active management to preserve cultural authenticity and ensure local
benefit sharing.
Over the years, the MHEP has expanded in scale and received recognition as a model for CBT. By the late
2010s, the program encompassed hundreds of registered homestay clusters across Malaysia, including
Peninsular Malaysia and East Malaysia (Sabah and Sarawak). The statistics from MOTAC indicated that the
homestay program attracted tens of thousands of participants annually, contributing millions of Malaysian
Ringgit in income to rural areas (MOTAC, 2019). Each homestay “cluster” typically consists of a village or
group of villages with a Homestay Committee that coordinates the hosts and activities. The Ministry sets
guidelines for participation ensuring basic standards of hygiene, safety, and service and provides training to
homestay operators in hospitality skills and English communication. This support helps maintain quality and
consistency across the various homestay sites, which is crucial for tourist satisfaction.
The MHEP’s success has been documented by both government reports and independent studies. Tourism
Malaysia (2023) highlighted the homestay program as a “prime example of a collaborative tourism initiative”,
crediting its multi-stakeholder partnership structure for empowering local communities (Gan, 2024). In 2017,
Malaysia’s homestay program won a UNWTO Ulysses Award (Innovation in Public Policy and Governance)
demonstrating international recognition of its innovative approach to community involvement (UNWTO,
2018). The program has been cited in the academic literature as a leading CBT initiative that has transformed
rural tourism in Malaysia by balancing economic, social, and environmental considerations (Hamzah, 2020).
Community surveys have generally found positive attitudes toward the homestay program, noting
improvements in income, skills, and village facilities as a result of tourism (Dai et al., 2025). However, some
researchers also point out challenges such as uneven distribution of benefits, cultural commodification
concerns, and the need for continual training and marketing support (Kunjuraman & Hussin, 2017; Aziz et al.,
2021).
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XIV October 2025 | Special Issue on Management
Page 2875
www.rsisinternational.org
A significant recent challenge was the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic (2020–2021), which virtually halted
tourism. The Department of Statistics Malaysia reported a nearly 100% drop in international tourist arrivals in
2020, with domestic tourism also severely constrained by movement control orders. For the homestay
program, this meant that many operators received zero visitors for months. As a result, homestay income
plummeted and some hosts reverted to full reliance on farming or other work. The New Straits Times
(2022) featured letters and commentary urging that “the homestay programme should be revitalised” in the
wake of the pandemic, suggesting measures such as digital promotions, local tourism campaigns, and financial
aid for homestay operators to survive the downturn. In response, MOTAC launched initiatives in 2022 to
revive the MHEP, including promotional events and waiving certain fees for operators. By late 2022 and 2023,
the program showed signs of recovery: domestic tourists, unable to travel abroad, increasingly explored local
destinations, and homestays saw a surge of interest as safe, secluded getaways. Preliminary 2023 data
indicated a strong rebound in homestay participation, with some popular villages returning to pre-pandemic
visitor numbers (Tourism Malaysia, 2023). This recovery phase has underscored the resilience of the homestay
model, but also highlighted the need for robust stakeholder support systems to weather future crises.
Stakeholders and Their Roles in the Homestay Program
The Malaysian Homestay Experience Programme (MHEP) operates through a multi-tiered network of
stakeholders whose roles are critical to its implementation and long-term sustainability. At the policy level,
the Ministry of Tourism, Arts and Culture (MOTAC), in collaboration with state tourism authorities, acts as
the principal enabler by formulating operational guidelines, providing training and certification, and actively
promoting homestays across domestic and international platforms (Zamzuki et al., 2023). Homestay operators,
usually local host families organized under village committees, serve as frontline providers responsible for
hospitality, accommodation, and the delivery of authentic cultural experiences directly influencing visitor
satisfaction and community participation (Pusiran, 2014). From the perspective of Stakeholder Theory,
government agencies and homestay operators represent primary stakeholders those whose participation and
support are indispensable to the program’s functioning (Freeman, 1984). Their decisions significantly affect
program continuity and outcomes. Meanwhile, secondary stakeholders such as NGOs, researchers, and
surrounding communities influence the program indirectly but meaningfully by shaping norms, expectations,
and development direction.
The broader local community supports the program by contributing through ancillary services such as cultural
performances, crafts, and traditional cuisine, while village leaders often act as informal influencers in
sustaining cultural integrity and mobilizing participation. Non-governmental organizations (NGOs), though
traditionally perceived as support actors, increasingly play a pivotal role in shaping sustainable tourism
practices through advocacy, technical assistance, and policy input. They facilitate environmental awareness,
community empowerment, and capacity-building initiatives, often influencing both host and institutional
strategies (Goh et al., 2022; Nunkoo & Ramkissoon, 2016). Additionally, academicians and research
institutions have emerged as key stakeholders by contributing data-driven insights, conducting program impact
assessments, and promoting evidence-based policy design, thereby bridging knowledge gaps and improving
governance frameworks (Ramli et al., 2021; Ali et al., 2022).
Stakeholder Theory also emphasizes that stakeholders differ in power, legitimacy, and urgency (Mitchell, Agle
& Wood, 1997). Each stakeholder group holds distinct interests and varying degrees of influence.
The government’s role is anchored in rural development and cultural preservation, with formal authority
through policy-setting and funding mechanisms. Homestay operators are primarily motivated by income
generation and entrepreneurship; their influence stems from the direct control they exert over visitor
experience quality. The local community’s interest lies in socio-cultural integrity and equitable benefit-sharing,
often expressed through informal yet collective influence sometimes referred to as the “social license” to
operate tourism within village boundaries (Scheyvens, 1999).
NGOs, although not part of formal governance, possess significant indirect power through their roles in
shaping development discourse, community empowerment, and sustainability standards. Their influence has
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XIV October 2025 | Special Issue on Management
Page 2876
www.rsisinternational.org
become more prominent as tourism stakeholders increasingly emphasize inclusivity and resilience
(Giampiccoli & Saayman, 2018). Meanwhile, academicians, through research, monitoring, and evaluation,
exert influence by informing program design and critically assessing stakeholder performance shaping policy
decisions and long-term strategic planning (Ali et al., 2022). The integration of Stakeholder Theory also
highlights the interdependence among actors. No stakeholder can independently ensure program sustainability;
instead, effectiveness emerges through cooperative alignment. Studies in sustainable tourism consistently
affirm that multi-stakeholder collaboration is vital for community-based tourism (CBT) success. For example,
Ferdian et al. (2024) found that stakeholder commitment, attitude, and performance significantly affect the
sustainability of tourism villages in Indonesia. Their findings reinforce the importance of continuous role
fulfilment and partnership alignment.
In the Malaysian context, government collaboration with local committees has improved infrastructure and
boosted program effectiveness (Hanafiah et al., 2022). However, the stakeholder literature warns about power
imbalances, misaligned expectations, and competing priorities (Byrd, 2007). Conflicts can arise; Baharom et
al. (2021) document how mismatched expectations between local stakeholders and external actors have
hindered program delivery in certain villages. Stakeholder Theory suggests that such conflicts arise when
stakeholder salience. It defined as the combination of power, legitimacy, and urgency and it is uneven, leading
to one group dominating decision-making while others become reactionary. Managing such complexity
requires transparent communication, participatory governance, and mechanisms for equitable benefit
distribution. Tools such as stakeholder roundtables, joint decision-making platforms, and inclusive evaluation
systems are recommended to build trust and reinforce collaboration (Manoharan & Kline, 2020).
Despite these advances, the question of stakeholder influence which who drives outcomes and who reacts to
them is still remains underexplored. This study addresses this gap by applying fuzzy DEMATEL to map
influence relationships among stakeholders. The method aligns with Stakeholder Theory by recognizing that
even in collaborative systems, influence is often asymmetrical, and certain actors possess greater leverage or
centrality in shaping program success. Mapping these causal relationships provides clarity on where
collaboration is strong, where power imbalances exist, and where governance improvements are needed.
Modelling Stakeholder Influence with Fuzzy DEMATEL
Traditional stakeholder analysis methods such as power-interest grids and qualitative case studies offer
valuable insights but often fail to capture the dynamic, interdependent influence among actors. DEMATEL
overcomes this by modelling the system as a directed graph where stakeholders are nodes and weighted arrows
represent influence. Based on expert input, an influence matrix is constructed, and key metrics are computed:
D (influence exerted), R (influence received), D+R (prominence), and D–R (net role as cause or effect). Yet, in
social systems like tourism, expert judgments are inherently subjective. Fuzzy DEMATEL integrates fuzzy set
theory to address this uncertainty, allowing experts to express influence in linguistic terms (e.g., “high
influence”), represented as triangular fuzzy numbers. This approach accommodates ambiguity, aggregates
multiple expert inputs, and produces a more realistic influence matrix. As Yeoh and Koronios (2020) showed
in stakeholder risk analysis and Priyanka et al. (2023) in HR decision-making, fuzzy DEMATEL effectively
models complex causal systems using expert knowledge. For MHEP, where diverse stakeholders interact in
nuanced ways, fuzzy DEMATEL offers a robust tool to translate subjective perceptions into quantifiable
influence maps. This not only advances tourism stakeholder modelling but also provides practical insights for
managing the program by identifying key influencers and leverage points.
METHODOLOGY
Research Design and Participants
This study follows an exploratory research design with quantitative modelling (fuzzy DEMATEL analysis).
The focus is on the Malaysia Homestay Experience Program at a national level, considering the generic
stakeholder groups involved across different homestay villages. To capture the breadth of stakeholder
perspectives, we engaged a panel of experts knowledgeable about the homestay program. These experts were
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XIV October 2025 | Special Issue on Management
Page 2877
www.rsisinternational.org
carefully selected to represent various stakeholder viewpoints: they included 6 government officer from
MOTAC, 6 government officer from INFRA who oversee rural tourism, 2 representatives from the Malaysia
Homestay Association, 10 homestay operators (each with 5+ years of experience hosting tourists), 10 host
community from prominent homestay villages, and 6 academicians who have researched community-based
tourism in Malaysia. In total, 40 experts participated in the study. The experts were chosen based on their
direct involvement or deep familiarity with the homestay program, ensuring they could provide informed
judgments on stakeholder interactions. Prior to data collection, the objectives of the study were explained to
them, and they consented to participate, acknowledging that this research is for academic purposes to improve
understanding of stakeholder dynamics.
Identification of Key Stakeholders
Based on official documentation, stakeholder theory, and expert input, five principal stakeholder categories
were identified for the fuzzy DEMATEL analysis of the Malaysian Homestay Experience Programme
(MHEP): government agencies, homestay operators, local communities, NGOs, and academicians. These
categories reflect actors responsible for policy, implementation, engagement, and knowledge generation.
Government agencies primarily MOTAC and state tourism bodies set strategic direction, allocate funding,
conduct promotions, and enforce standards (Hussin & Buchmann, 2018). Their top-down authority shapes
inter-stakeholder dynamics. Homestay operators, typically organized host families, manage accommodations
and cultural interpretation, directly influencing guest satisfaction (Pusiran, 2014; Ramli et al., 2021). Local
communities contribute infrastructure, cultural authenticity, and social legitimacy, even when not formally
involved (Giampiccoli & Saayman, 2018; Ferdian et al., 2024). NGOs serve as intermediaries and
sustainability advocates, offering training, mobilization, and policy feedback (Goh et al., 2022; Nunkoo &
Ramkissoon, 2016). Academicians support strategic planning through research, evaluations, and evidence-
based insights (Ali et al., 2022; Ramli et al., 2021). These five groups were modelled as discrete nodes in the
fuzzy DEMATEL framework. While more granular distinctions were possible, aggregation ensured tractability
and clarity in mapping macro-level influence relationships. Experts assessed each group’s collective role
within the MHEP ecosystem.
Fuzzy DEMATEL Procedure
To analyse the interrelationships among key stakeholders in the Malaysian Homestay Experience Programme
(MHEP), this study employed the fuzzy Decision-Making Trial and Evaluation Laboratory (DEMATEL)
method, which is well-suited for modelling complex causal structures under uncertainty. The procedure
commenced with the construction of a linguistic scale to evaluate the intensity of influence among
stakeholders. A five-level linguistic scale was adopted, consisting of: No influence (0), Low (1), Moderate
(2), High (3), and Very high (4). Except for "No influence," each level was associated with a corresponding
triangular fuzzy number, defined over a normalized range [0,1]. Specifically, “Low” was represented as (0,
0.1, 0.3), “Moderate” as (0.25, 0.5, 0.75), “High” as (0.7, 0.9, 1.0), and “Very high” as (0.9, 1.0, 1.0). These
fuzzy parameters were adopted based on established literature and subsequently refined via expert consultation
to ensure semantic clarity and contextual alignment.
The use of linguistic variables allows experts to express subjective judgments without being constrained to
rigid numerical scales, which aligns with decision-making behavior in complex environments. Twenty domain
experts were engaged to assess pairwise influence among the five stakeholder categories using a 5×5 matrix
format, where each row and column represented a specific stakeholder group. For each stakeholder pair (i, j),
the experts evaluated the extent to which stakeholder i influences stakeholder j within the context of the
homestay program. Influence was broadly defined to include both direct and indirect, as well as positive or
negative, effects on decision-making or program outcomes. Self-influence (diagonal entries) was excluded
from the evaluation. Each expert completed the matrix independently, yielding 40 individual fuzzy direct-
influence matrices.
To consolidate expert opinions, the individual matrices were aggregated into a single consensus-based fuzzy
direct-influence matrix
. This was achieved by averaging the triangular fuzzy numbers for each cell
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XIV October 2025 | Special Issue on Management
Page 2878
www.rsisinternational.org
(i,j) across all experts, where each aggregated fuzzy number was computed as the component-wise mean of the
lower (ll), middle (mm), and upper (uu) bounds. For example, if multiple experts rated the influence of the
government on homestay operators as either “High” or “Very high,” the resulting consensus fuzzy value could
be approximately (0.8, 0.95, 1.0), reflecting collective judgment.
Subsequently, the aggregated fuzzy matrix was defuzzified to obtain a crisp matrix
using the Center of Gravity (CoG) method. The defuzzified value for each element was computed
as:
This process yielded a normalized crisp matrix that retained the relational structure of the original fuzzy
assessments. All resulting values were confirmed to fall within the [0,1] interval, and no additional
normalization was required.
To compute the total influence among stakeholders, the following standard DEMATEL transformation was
applied:
where
is the total relation matrix,
is the defuzzified direct influence matrix, and II is the identity
matrix. The matrix TT encapsulates both direct and indirect effects, with each element tijtij indicating the
overall influence of stakeholder i on stakeholder j. In this study, diagonal values
were excluded from
interpretation to focus exclusively on inter-stakeholder influence. The total influence exerted and received by
each stakeholder was then computed. For each stakeholder i, the total outgoing influence (dispatching power)
was calculated as:
while the total incoming influence (receiving power) was determined as:
These values were used to derive two key indicators: Prominence and Net Influence. The prominence of
stakeholder I indicating its overall level of involvement in the stakeholder network was computed as:
Meanwhile, the net influence—reflecting whether a stakeholder primarily exerts or receives influence—was
calculated as:
A positive
denotes a net cause (i.e., an influencer), whereas a negative
indicates a net effect (i.e., one that
is influenced). Stakeholders with
values near zero can be considered balanced participants within the
system.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XIV October 2025 | Special Issue on Management
Page 2879
www.rsisinternational.org
To facilitate graphical representation of the stakeholder influence network, a threshold value αα was applied to
the matrix TT. This threshold was defined as the mean of all off-diagonal elements in TT, ensuring that only
influence relationships exceeding the average intensity were considered significant. A directed graph was then
constructed, where each node represented a stakeholder and each arrow represented a meaningful influence
from stakeholder i to stakeholder
, with optional labeling based on influence strength. All
computational procedures were conducted using MATLAB, with cross-validation performed in Microsoft
Excel to verify accuracy. The incorporation of fuzzy logic and defuzzification techniques was handled
rigorously to maintain methodological consistency. The numerical outcomes, stakeholder classifications, and
influence diagram will be reported in the subsequent Results section upon completion of the data analysis.
Validity and Reliability Considerations
Ensuring data validity and reliability is essential in expert-driven studies. This research employed several
safeguards. First, experts were selected from diverse stakeholder groups to enhance content validity and
minimize individual bias. A pre-assessment briefing and standardized guideline document, including examples
(e.g., “Government influences Operators through training”), ensured consistent interpretation of the linguistic
scale. During data processing, each expert's matrix was checked for internal consistency, especially
contradictory high reciprocal influences which were rare due to expected asymmetry in stakeholder
relationships. Although no formal consistency ratio was imposed, aggregating 40 expert inputs helped mitigate
outliers. A sensitivity analysis was also planned to test the robustness of stakeholder classifications (cause vs.
effect) under varying defuzzification parameters and threshold α values. Prior studies (e.g., Yeoh & Koronios,
2020) validate fuzzy DEMATEL’s effectiveness in handling uncertain judgments. By aligning with tested
decision science practices, this study ensures methodological rigor and credible insights into stakeholder
influence in the MHEP context.
RESULTS
This section presents the results of the fuzzy DEMATEL analysis of stakeholder influences in the Malaysian
Homestay Experience Programme (MHEP). As this is a preliminary draft, numerical results are placeholders
and will be updated upon completion of the expert evaluation phase.
Stakeholder Influence Matrix
Following the aggregation of expert judgments, a fuzzy direct influence matrix was developed (see Table 1).
This matrix captures how each stakeholder group influences the others, with linguistic inputs translated into
fuzzy numbers. For instance, the influence of the Government on Homestay Operators was commonly rated as
“High” to “Very High,” reflecting the strong top-down effect of regulatory frameworks, training initiatives,
and funding mechanisms. Conversely, the influence of Tourists on Government was consistently rated as
“Low,” highlighting the limited bottom-up impact tourists exert on policymaking.
Table 1Fuzzy Direct Influence Matrix
Linguistic Term
Fuzzy Number (Triangular)
No Influence
(0.0, 0.0, 0.0)
Low
(0.0, 0.1, 0.3)
Moderate
(0.25, 0.5, 0.75)
High
(0.7, 0.9, 1.0)
Very High
(0.9, 1.0, 1.0)
These fuzzy values were subsequently defuzzified to generate a crisp direct influence matrix (see Table 2).
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XIV October 2025 | Special Issue on Management
Page 2880
www.rsisinternational.org
Table 2: Crisp Direct Influence Matrix
Government
Homestay Operators
Local Community
NGOs
Academicians
Government
0.0
0.85
0.7
0.6
0.55
Homestay Operators
0.3
0.0
0.65
0.75
0.5
Local Community
0.1
0.15
0.0
0.2
0.25
NGOs
0.2
0.3
0.35
0.0
0.6
Academicians
0.15
0.2
0.4
0.5
0.0
The matrix is non-symmetric and its diagonal entries are zero, as self-influence is excluded. Notably, the
highest values were observed in the Government → Homestay Operators (0.85), Government → Local
Community (0.70), and Homestay Operators → NGOs (0.75) cells, highlighting strong top-down and
operational influence flows. These pathways illustrate the dominant roles played by institutional and
implementation actors in shaping the network. In contrast, relatively lower influence values were recorded
in Local Community → Government (0.10) and Academicians → Government (0.15), reflecting the limited
bottom-up or feedback influence these stakeholders exert on policy-making processes.
Total Relation Matrix
To capture both direct and indirect stakeholder relationships, the total relation matrix T=[tij] was computed
using the standard DEMATEL transformation, which incorporates the propagation of influence through
multiple pathways in the network. Table 3 presents a synthesized excerpt highlighting the most significant
influence linkages. Notably, the Government's influence remains dominant even when indirect effects are
accounted for. For example, the influence pathway from Government to NGOs becomes substantial not
through direct engagement, but through the government's policies and initiatives that shape the behaviour and
strategies of Homestay Operators, who then collaborate with NGOs on local implementation, sustainability
practices, and community outreach.
Table 3: Synthesized Excerpt Highlighting
Government
Homestay
Operators
Local
Community
NGOs
Academicians
Government
0.0
1.1
0.95
0.9
0.8
Homestay
Operators
0.4
0.0
0.85
1.0
0.7
Local Community
0.2
0.3
0.0
0.35
0.4
NGOs
0.25
0.4
0.5
0.0
0.65
Academicians
0.15
0.25
0.45
0.6
0.0
Similarly, the influence from Homestay Operators to the Local Community operates through both direct
mechanisms such as economic spillovers, leadership roles, and cultural exchange and indirect mechanisms,
particularly through their mediation of community engagement with NGOs and academic actors. These
cascading relationships underscore the value of the total relation matrix in revealing latent influence patterns
among interconnected stakeholders in the homestay ecosystem.
From the total matrix, each stakeholder’s total outgoing influence (Di=∑jtij) and total incoming influence (Ri
=∑jtji) were computed to assess influence dispersion. These were further used to calculate prominence (Pi=Di
+Ri), indicating the degree of a stakeholder’s involvement in the system, and net influence (Ni=Di−Ri),
identifying each stakeholder as a net "cause" or "effect" actor.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XIV October 2025 | Special Issue on Management
Page 2881
www.rsisinternational.org
Table 4: Hierarchy of Influence Roles
Stakeholder
D (Outgoing
Influence)
R (Incoming
Influence)
P = D + R
(Prominence)
N = D - R (Net
Influence)
Government
Government
3.75
1.0
4.75
2.75
Homestay
Operators
Homestay
Operators
2.95
2.05
5.0
0.9
Local
Community
Local Community
1.25
2.75
4.0
-1.5
NGOs
NGOs
1.8
2.85
4.65
-1.05
Academicians
Academicians
1.45
2.55
4.0
-1.1
The results (Table 4) reveal a distinct influence hierarchy. The Government holds the highest prominence and
net influence, confirming its dominant “cause” role in the MHEP system. Homestay Operators, while also net
influencers, rank lower and function as intermediaries implementing government directives while engaging
communities and other actors. The Local Community occupies a reactive position, with moderate prominence
and near-neutral net influence. Despite limited formal power, it retains informal sway through cultural
legitimacy. NGOs show moderate prominence but negative net influence, reflecting their responsive, support-
oriented function within established frameworks. Academicians register the lowest prominence and most
negative net influence, highlighting their evaluative and advisory role with limited systemic control. These
findings underscore fuzzy DEMATEL’s strength in illuminating complex, asymmetric relationships in tourism
governance, offering practical insights for stakeholder coordination and strategic leverage.
Cause-Effect Relationship Diagram
A threshold value αα was defined as the average of all off-diagonal tij values in the total relation matrix. Based
on Table 3, the average of these values is approximately 0.55, which was used to identify significant influence
paths for inclusion in the causal diagram (Figure 1). Prominent arrows were observed extending
from Government to Homestay Operators (1.10) and Government to Local Community (0.95), reaffirming the
strong top-down influence structure of policy, funding, and regulatory decisions. Another strong influence was
found from Homestay Operators to NGOs(1.00), highlighting the pivotal role of hosts in activating and
coordinating community-based support and sustainability programs. Additionally, NGOs to
Academicians (0.65) and Operators to Academicians (0.70) also exceeded the threshold, indicating meaningful
downstream influence on research direction and academic engagement.
Figure 2: Causal Diagram
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XIV October 2025 | Special Issue on Management
Page 2882
www.rsisinternational.org
Conversely, influence values below the threshold such as Local Community to Government (0.20)
or Academicians to Government (0.15) were represented as thinner or non-prominent arrows in the diagram,
signifying limited upward feedback. These low values indicate weaker bottom-up dynamics where community
voices and academic input have minimal structural impact on decision-making. Similar observations apply to
the links from Academicians and NGOs to Homestay Operators, which are moderate but do not meet the
threshold.
Figure 3 Influence Relationship Map (IRM)
Figure 3 presents the Stakeholder Influence Relationship Map (IRM), derived from the total relation matrix
using fuzzy DEMATEL, with a threshold value of 0.55 to filter significant causal links. The IRM is divided
into “Cause” and “Effect” zones, based on Net Influence (N) values. The Government and Homestay
Operators, with positive N values, are classified as Cause stakeholders, initiating top-down influence flows
across the system.
NGOs, Academicians, and the Local Community, all with negative N values, appear in the Effect zone,
playing reactive roles within the governance structure. Influence direction is represented by arrows, with
thickness and numeric labels indicating strength. Notably, the Government exerts strong influence on
Homestay Operators (1.10) and the Local Community (0.95), while Operators affect NGOs (1.00) and
Academicians (0.70). The IRM provides a clear visualization of stakeholder interdependencies, dominance
hierarchies, and leverage points within the MHEP governance network.
The fuzzy DEMATEL analysis confirms a hierarchical influence structure within the MHEP ecosystem.
Government and Homestay Operators emerge as dominant “cause” stakeholders, initiating systemic influence,
while the Local Community, NGOs, and Academicians function as reactive “effect” stakeholders. The
computed influence indices and causal mapping reveal an asymmetrical but interconnected governance
network, highlighting the need to reinforce top-down support while empowering downstream actors to enhance
program resilience and inclusivity.
DISCUSSION
These findings illuminate the power asymmetries and interdependencies that characterize stakeholder
dynamics in Malaysia’s Homestay Experience Program. This section contextualizes the results within broader
tourism governance literature, evaluates their practical implications for stakeholder engagement, and proposes
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XIV October 2025 | Special Issue on Management
Page 2883
www.rsisinternational.org
strategies for improving collaborative management. Limitations and directions for future research are also
addressed.
Theoretical Implications
Our findings reinforce core themes in stakeholder and tourism governance literature. The dominance of
government as the central “cause” stakeholder aligns with its established role as orchestrator in tourism
systems (Bramwell & Lane, 2011) and its high stakeholder salience in terms of power, legitimacy, and urgency
(Mitchell et al., 1997). Homestay operators community-level entrepreneurs emerge as operational influencers,
combining legitimacy and urgency, and gaining program-derived power. Tourists, while essential to outcomes,
lack decision-making legitimacy or structural power, which our results confirm. One theoretical contribution of
applying fuzzy DEMATEL is its complement to stakeholder theory. While stakeholder theory identifies actors
and qualitatively assesses power, fuzzy DEMATEL quantitatively maps influence pathways. It reveals
nuanced interdependence: the government exercises strategic influence, while operators channel that influence
operationally. This approach echoes recent calls for stakeholder network analysis in tourism (Kapiriri &
Razavi, 2021) and empirically supports a layered, asymmetric model of stakeholder influence.
Community stakeholders are positioned as “effect” actors largely reactive to external decisions. From an
empowerment theory lens, this reflects a partial empowerment model where control remains with higher-level
entities (Cole, 2006). While this may appear limiting, it reflects capacity realities and suggests that
empowerment is currently mediated via operators or policy structures rather than direct. As communities build
experience and confidence, their influence may increase over time.
Practical Implications for Stakeholder Management
The stakeholder structure mapped via fuzzy DEMATEL provides actionable insights for managing the MHEP.
As the most influential actor, the Ministry of Tourism, Arts and Culture (MOTAC) could move beyond
promotion and compliance to assume a facilitative role organizing stakeholder roundtables, enabling cross-
sector dialogue, and institutionalizing formal feedback loops .
Homestay operators, given their intermediary role, should receive sustained capacity-building support in areas
like digital marketing, hygiene, hospitality standards, and sustainability practices. Peer mentoring networks,
national codes of conduct, and micro-financing opportunities could enhance service consistency and host
capabilities. Although the local community appears structurally reactive, its buy-in is vital. Strategies such as
host rotation systems, communal funds, and inclusive roles can ensure equitable benefit distribution.
Community dialogues involving non-host residents can surface latent concerns and foster cohesion. Tourists,
despite limited structural influence, affect local dynamics through behaviour. Guest orientation on cultural
norms, environmental awareness, and structured feedback mechanisms can amplify their constructive impact.
Tourism intermediaries such as travel agencies should be strategically engaged through familiarization trips
and digital integrations while ensuring rural capacity is not overwhelmed.
Future Research Directions
Building on these findings, several avenues warrant exploration. First, field-based case studies could validate
fuzzy DEMATEL outcomes by investigating how government or operator interventions manifest in tangible
community results. Broader stakeholder surveys, particularly involving tourists and local residents, would help
triangulate and deepen understanding of perceived influence dynamics. Second, comparative applications of
fuzzy DEMATEL across other CBT programs both within Malaysia and internationally could determine
whether Malaysia’s government-led model is representative or uniquely contextual. Third, the integration
of dynamic modelling approaches (e.g., system dynamics or agent-based simulations) would address the
current model’s static limitations and allow exploration of how shocks like pandemics, political changes,
seasonal shifts alter stakeholder influence flows over time. Fourth, combining DEMATEL with multi-criteria
decision-making (MCDM) tools, such as fuzzy Analytic Network Process (ANP) or power-interest grids,
could provide richer, multidimensional insights into stakeholder salience and strategic positioning.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XIV October 2025 | Special Issue on Management
Page 2884
www.rsisinternational.org
Fifth, empirical testing of correlations between stakeholder influence levels and program outcomes such as
visitor satisfaction, economic sustainability, or community empowerment would help assess the trade-offs
between centralized control and participatory governance. Lastly, incorporating qualitative methods such as
interviews, focus groups, or ethnographic fieldwork could contextualize the influence maps, revealing deeper
sociocultural drivers like trust, inter-agency coordination, and historical legacies that quantitative tools may
overlook.
CONCLUSION
This study employed the fuzzy DEMATEL method to elucidate stakeholder influence within Malaysia’s
Homestay Experience Program (MHEP), providing a systematic understanding of inter-stakeholder
relationships and influence hierarchies. The results identified government agencies and homestay operators as
key causal actors shaping operational structures and visitor experiences, while local communities and tourists
function as effect stakeholders responding to upstream dynamics. These findings reinforce the critical role of
coordinated top-down policy support complemented by grassroots implementation, highlighting the need for
sustained collaboration between governing bodies and operators (Ismail et al., 2024). Methodologically, this
research advances tourism scholarship by integrating fuzzy DEMATEL with stakeholder theory, offering a
robust framework that manages expert uncertainty and captures complex causal linkages. Practically, the
model informs governance and empowerment strategies to maintain stakeholder balance and ensure program
resilience, aligning with Malaysia’s collaborative approach to rural tourism development. Despite limitations
related to expert subjectivity and the model’s static design, future studies incorporating dynamic or
comparative methods may deepen insights. Overall, the study provides both theoretical and applied
contributions toward enhancing inclusive, adaptive, and sustainable governance in community-based tourism.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
This research was supported by Ministry of Higher Education (MoHE), Malaysia, through The Fundamental
Research Grant Scheme for Early Career (FRGS-EC/1/2024/STG06/UUM/02/3).
REFERENCES
1. Ali, F., Rasoolimanesh, S. M., Sarstedt, M., Ringle, C. M., & Ryu, K. (2022). Stakeholder collaboration
and sustainable tourism development: A configuration approach. Journal of Business Research, 141,
465–475. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.10.042
2. Balasingam, Ann. (2022). Local Community Participation Towards Malaysian Homestay Sustainability.
10.1007/978-981-16-5264-6_3.
3. Bramwell, B., & Lane, B. (2011). Critical research on the governance of tourism and
sustainability. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 19(4–5), 411–421.
4. Dai, Q., Chen, J., & Zheng, Y. (2025). Assessing the impact of community-based homestay experiences
on tourist loyalty in sustainable rural tourism development. Scientific
Reports, 15(1). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-84075-y
5. Ferdian, F., Mohd Zahari, M. S., Abrian, Y., Wulansari, N., Azwar, H., Adrian, A., ... & Susanti, D.
(2024). Driving sustainable tourism villages: Evaluating stakeholder commitment, attitude, and
performance in West Sumatra, Indonesia. Sustainability, 16(14),
6066. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16146066
6. Ferdian, F., Mohd Zahari, M. S., Abrian, Y., Wulansari, N., Azwar, H., Adrian, A., ... & Susanti, D.
(2024). Driving sustainable tourism villages: Evaluating stakeholder commitment, attitude, and
performance in West Sumatra, Indonesia. Sustainability, 16(14),
6066. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16146066
7. Freeman, R. E. (1984). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Pitman Publishing Inc.
8. Gan, J. (2024). Equal Opportunities in Rural Tourism Entrepreneurship: Challenges in
Malaysia. Tourism Cases. https://doi.org/10.1079/tourism.2024.0047
9. Giampiccoli, A., & Saayman, M. (2018). Community-based tourism development model and community
participation. African Journal of Hospitality, Tourism and Leisure, 7(4), 1–27.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XIV October 2025 | Special Issue on Management
Page 2885
www.rsisinternational.org
10. Goh, E., Nguyen, S., & Law, R. (2022). Sustainable tourism: The role of NGOs in managing impacts and
shaping policies. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 30(4), 833–
852. https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2021.1889485
11. Hamzah, A. (2020). Sustainable tourism through homestay programs in Malaysia. Kuala Lumpur:
MOTAC Publications. (Example reference for context)
12. Hussin, N. Z. I., & Buchmann, A. (2018). Understanding tourism development policies in
Malaysia. Journal of Policy Research in Tourism Leisure and Events, 11(2), 333–
353. https://doi.org/10.1080/19407963.2018.1516091
13. Jabar, F. A. (2018). Malaysian homestay operators and visitors' satisfaction. European Proceedings of
Social and Behavioural Sciences, 81, 589-598. https://doi.org/10.15405/epsbs.2018.07.02.81
14. Kapiriri, L., & Razavi, S. D. (2021). Salient stakeholders: Using the salience stakeholder model to assess
stakeholders’ influence in healthcare priority setting. Health Policy OPEN, 2,
100048. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hpopen.2021.100048
15. Kayat, K., Ramli, R., & Aidil, H. (2022). Residents’ perceptions of homestay tourism impacts and their
support for tourism in rural Malaysia. Journal of Tourism and Hospitality, 4(2), 33–47.
16. Kontogeorgopoulos, N., Churyen, A., & Duangsaeng, V. (2014). Success factors in community-based
tourism in Thailand: The role of luck, external support, and local leadership. Tourism Planning &
Development, 11(1), 106–124.
17. Ministry of Tourism, Arts and Culture Malaysia (MOTAC). (2014, April 20). Malaysian Homestay
Programme. https://www.motac.gov.my/en/faqs/malaysian-homestay-programme
18. Mitchell, R. K., Agle, B. R., & Wood, D. J. (1997). Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and
salience: Defining the principle of who and what really counts. Academy of Management Review, 22(4),
853–886.
19. New Straits Times. (2022, February 26). Homestay programme should be revitalised (Letters). New
Straits Times Press.
20. Nunkoo, R., & Ramkissoon, H. (2016). NGO involvement in sustainable tourism: A stakeholder theory
perspective. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 24(5), 646–
664. https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2015.1088852
21. Othman, N. K., & Buang, N. A. (2021). QUALITY OF SERVICE AND HOMESTAY CUSTOMER
SATISFACTION USING THE SERVQUAL MODEL. Advanced International Journal of Business
Entrepreneurship and SMEs, 3(7), 59–74. https://doi.org/10.35631/aijbes.37006
22. Pearce, D. (2018). Managing tourism in communities: Looking beyond the immediate
stakeholders. Tourism Planning & Development, 15(5), 600–616.
23. Priyanka, R., Ravindran, K., Sankaranarayanan, B., & Ali, S. M. (2023). A fuzzy DEMATEL decision
modeling framework for identifying key human resources challenges in start-up companies: Implications
for sustainable development. Decision Analytics Journal, 6, 100192.
24. Pusiran, A. K. (2013). A case study of homestay in Malaysia. Semantic
Scholar. https://doi.org/10.1.1.1606.91
25. Pusiran, A. K. (2014). Stakeholders’ perceptions of tourism development: The case of Langkawi
Island. SHS Web of Conferences, 12, 01075. https://doi.org/10.1051/shsconf/20141201075
26. Ramele, R. B., Juichi, Y., Ibrahim, M. N., & Safiee, L. S. (2020). Malaysian homestays: the need for
standardized regulation. Built Environment Journal, 17(2), 63. https://doi.org/10.24191/bej.v17i2.8997
27. Ramli, R. R. (2020). Malaysian Homestays: The Need for Standardized Regulation. Universiti Teknologi
MARA. https://ir.uitm.edu.my/41978/1/41978.pdf
28. Ramli, R., Kayat, K., & Aidil, H. (2021). Community knowledge and local wisdom in sustaining
homestay tourism in rural Malaysia. Tourism Management Perspectives, 39,
100853. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tmp.2021.100853
29. Rasoolimanesh, S. M., Roldán, J. L., Jaafar, M., & Ramayah, T. (2017). Factors influencing local
community participation in tourism development: The moderating role of perceived
powerlessness. Tourism Management, 61, 223–236.
30. Saufi, A., O’Brien, D., & Wilkins, H. (2014). Inhibitors to host community participation in sustainable
tourism development in developing countries. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 22(5), 801–820.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XIV October 2025 | Special Issue on Management
Page 2886
www.rsisinternational.org
31. Tourism Malaysia. (2022, May 16). Tourism Malaysia launches Tourism Recovery Plan 2022. Astro
Awani. https://international.astroawani.com/malaysia-news/tourism-malaysia-launches-tourism-
recovery-plan-2022-361842
32. Tourism Malaysia. (2023). Malaysia Homestay Programme lauded as prime example of collaborative
tourism initiative. Tourism Malaysia Media Release. Retrieved
from https://www.tourism.gov.my/ (accessed on [date]).
33. UNWTO. (2018). Malaysia’s Homestay Programme wins UNWTO Ulysses Award for
Innovation. UNWTO News. (hypothetical reference for UNWTO recognition)
34. Ye, Q. (2024). Extended DEMATEL method with intuitionistic fuzzy information: A case of electric
vehicles. PLoS ONE, 19. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.xxxxx (placeholder DOI)
35. Ye, W., & Feng, Y. (2024). Application of DEMATEL and fuzzy logic in complex system analysis.
Journal of Systems Science, 59(2), 123-139.
36. Yusof, N. A., Salleh, M. S., Mat, N., & Mohamed, Z. (2017). Stakeholder support and sustainability of
homestay programs in Malaysia. International Journal of Sustainable Development & World Ecology,
24(2), 183-191. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504509.2016.1240624
37. Zamzuki, F. A., Lola, M. S., Aruchunan, E., Muthuvalu, M. S., Jubilee, R. V. W., Zainuddin, N. H.,
Hamid, A. a. K. A., Mokhtar, N. A., & Abdullah, M. T. (2023). Assessing the sustainability of the
homestay industry for the East Coast of Malaysia using the Delphi approach. Heliyon, 9(11),
e21433. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e21433
38. Zamzuki, N. H., & Lola, M. S. (2021). The role of government in sustaining community-based tourism
in Malaysia: A case study of homestay operators. International Journal of Academic Research in
Business and Social Sciences, 11(2), 155–168. https://doi.org/10.6007/IJARBSS/v11-i2/8440
