Journal of Tourism & Hospitality
Open Access

Impact of COVID-19 on Tour Operating Firms in Ethiopia: The Case of Addis Ababa

Author info »

Introduction

A tour operator is an organization or company that purchases individual travel components separately from their suppliers and combining them into a travel package and sell it to the users directly/through an intermediary at its own price.

Tour operating firm have a significant role to play in creating more jobs and generating foreign exchange. Tour operating firms are highly affected than other small micro enterprises currently and predict for long terms (OECD). However, tour operating firms are instrumental within the development and growth of the tourism industry through the wholesale of tourism products but at various times there are obstacles that hinder its growth. The impact of the pandemic on tourism and hospitality is unprecedented. Infected people increment leads fear of foreign tourist to go any area throughout Ethiopia and this are the factors of tour operating firms. numerous studies were conducted to deal with the impact of COVID-19 effect on different economic sectors and tiny number of tourism industry were considered but no to any extent further studies were done on tour operating firm perspective regarding with the level of social, economic impact/crises and their level of response as well as government measure. The government policies didn't make sure the long run competitiveness of tour operating firms with other economic sectors. However, efforts to prevent the disease and rehabilitate affected organizations have been significantly reduced. Tour operating firms are faced particular challenges because the sector is interdependent with other main and subsector. UNWTO shows that international tourist arrivals were declined 98% this reflect travel restriction were high due to country boarder closings. When compared to 2019 from January up to end of May more than 300 million tourists were restricted and more than US $320 billion were lost due to the outbreak and spread of COVID-19. Up to February 17, 2020 across the globe 109,310,993 confirmed cases and 2,415,352 deaths. In Africa as CDC report on 16/02/2021 confirmed cases 3,760,854, deaths 98,962 and recoveries 3,305,491. In Ethiopian health minister Feb 2020 report 148,490 confirmed cases and 2,223 death case. The above figurative COVID-19 leads the fear of international tourist and high crises of tour operating firms. So tour operating firms are one which highly impacted by the outbreak of COVID-19. The shock affects both the demand and supply side of the tourism industry like border closings and guests’ fear of infection, closure of accommodation and catering establishments as well as leisure facilities used for tourism [1,2] studies impact of COVID-19 on international tourism and concluding more tourism industry destinations are restricted movement from the fear of pandemic [3] Under COVID-19, challenges and opportunities for hospitality and tourism industry of China and concluding pandemic is a serious challenge which affect the overall tourism [4]. Describes the socio economic impact of COVID-19 in Ethiopia; under this description it lists out the major affected groups (employees in industry parks, pastoralist and front line health system) [5]. Gelaw discussion on impact of COVID-19 crises can see most of the impacts on economy as general term but not identifying the pillars of the sector and others do not address what remedial measures have been taken by the organization itself or by concerned governmental institutions. The Ethiopian tourism policy also didn’t set out the mechanisms which tourism development pitfalls happened, or don’t put the sustainability of tour operators and this firms are also one part of the sectors which benefited or affected in parallel. Therefore to fill this gap it is better to assess the impact of COVID-19 on tour operating firms including its crises management and response level of tour operating firms in Ethiopia specifically Addis Ababa.

Materials and Methods

Based on research methodology assumption describing the operational point of view of tour operating firms from management perspective regarding with COVID-19 impacts [6]. This study considered to be analysis the private tour operating firms and tour operating firm associations which are effected by novel Coronavirus. Descriptive research design was used because to identify and analyze the perspectives, ideas/perceptions and events of private tour operating firms and associations. To achieve the overall objectives of this research five major activities (assessment of social and economic impact of COVID-19 on firms, responses level and crises management of firms and government measures for COVID-19 impact on tour operating firms) were described after gathering the data. Both primary and secondary data source were used and mixed research approach (qualitative and quantitative) were also performed. The choice of research approach also depends on the nature of the research question or the topic of discussion, the personal experience of the researcher and the research subject. In this study there have been both close ended and open ended questions, from the close ended questionaries’ perspective data were displayed quantitatively and from open indeed questionaries’ there were unlimited perceptions of tour operating firm owner/manager was present and interview mechanisms of questionaries’ to gather qualitative research approaches. Observation of the current available tool and materials for customer based on COVID-19 protection protocol was also used to qualitative data gatherings. Interview respondents coded that R1, R2….R24. The secondary data for this research have been collected from different journal articles, books, reports and looking at suggested documents. Based on MoCT there are 532 licensed tour operating firms 472 were residing in Addis Ababa and as taken total target population. From 472 populations 217 tour operating firms were taken as a sample size by Taro Yemane formula with a confidence level of 95% and the margin of error with 95% of confidence interval will be 0.05. For conducting this research both probability and non-probability sampling technique were used. The information which was gathered from the sample has been considered to be representative of the total population. From the probability sampling perspective random sampling technique was used to select the sample from the tour operating firms. From non-probability sampling technique, purposive sampling technique was used to select the owners/manager of tour operating firms rather than employee in the firms. Among 217 selected respondents 2 Ethiopian tour operator associations’ workers and 22 tour operating firm owner/managers were selected for interviewee as conveniently and 193 tours operating firm owners/manager were also select for like RT scale questionnaires randomly. To gaining the better information all the closed ended questionaries’ and open ended questionaries’ were prepared by Amharic and English version and dispatching based on their interest of the firms. Concurrent triangulation and embedded data collection method were also practiced to gather the data. The analysis procedures for the qualitative data will through writing the respondent’s perception and organizing each perception in overall. For quantitative data the questionnaire will encoded and analyze by using the SPSS V20 and presented by using SPSS procedures like frequencies, percentage, mean, figure and table. In addition to the above descriptive statistics expression were used and each dimensions reliability were analyzed by Cronbach’s alpha. Validation of the variables were done and paired sample t-test were used to analyses the tourist arrivals perspective [7].

Results and Discussion

Data reliability and validity

According to the Table 1, the Cronbach’s alpha values of the five dimensions of response or predictor variables are acceptable in statistical analysis. This value was lie in the range of 0.8-0.92 which is called better and can be proceed to work all the documents. From the five dimensions social impact of COVID-19 on tour operating firms, response level of tour operating firms for sustain from COVID-19 impact, government measure of COVID-19 for tour operating firms perspective have an excellent Cronbach’s alpha tests which have value of .900, .921, .921 respectively. The validity of all the variables under each dimension were tested by factor analysis and discussed in point number 3.4.

Table 1: Cronbach’s alpha test.

Background of the respondents

From the Table 2 item number 1 gender of respondents 152 (79.2%) were male and 40 (20.8%) were female. From this perspective the ratio of male and female tour operating owner or manager was unbalanced. This indicates female tour operating firm entrepreneurs were rare.

Regarding with item number 2, age of respondents 15 (7.8%) were below 30, 59 (30.7%) were from 31-45, 71 (37.0%) were from 46-55 and 47 (24.5%) were 56 and above. While looking the range of tour operating firm owners age under the category of below 30 or adulthood one is rare. From item number 3 educational background of the respondents 22 (11.5%) high school complete, 52 (27.1%) were diploma holders, 89 (46.4%) were 1^st degree holders, 29 (15.1%) were master and above. According to the respondents response shows that higher number of tour operating firms owner were degree holders. Based on item number 4, work experience of the respondents 52 (27.1%) were 1-5 years, 50 (26.0%) were 6-10 years, 38 (19.8 were 11-15 years, 52 (27.1%) were 16 and above years’ work experience. The duration of company starts perspective above half of the targeted firms were below 10 years duration, 58 firms are below 5 years, 60 ranges 6-10 years, 33 lies 11-15 years and 41 were above 16 year duration.

Table 2: Characteristics of respondent.

Comparison of tourist arrival to Ethiopia in 2019 vs. 2020

Based on the Table 3 displayed the descriptive statistics for the two variables. From this it was mainly interested the mean and standard deviation. As shown from Table 3 the participant’s responded number of foreign tourist received 2019 have a mean score value of 114.18 than number of tourist received in 2020 of mean score value 1.75. From the standard deviation perspective that scores has also different dispersions with in the two, which. has value of 105.492 as number of foreign tourist received in 2019 and 3.918 value of foreign tourist received in 2020. From the table the same participants were taken as represented by N which accounts 192 respondents. As in general there is a significance difference in heavily decreasing the number of foreign tourist received in 2020 (mean=1.75, SD=3.918) as compared from 2019 (mean=114.18, SD=105.492).

Table 3: Paired sample statistics of foreign tourist arrivals in 2020 vs. 2019.

Table 4 shows the mean difference of the two is 112.432. The test statistic were found 14.991, degree of freedom were 191, the two sided p-value (sig 2-tailed) that corresponds to a t-values of 14.991 with degree of freedom 191. However the p-value of the test is (0.000) which is less than 0.05 so we have to reject the null hypothesis. Therefore we have enough evidence to say that the true mean tourist received different between foreign tourist received in 2019 and number of foreign tourist received in 2020.

Table 4: Paired sample test of foreign tourist arrival in 2019 vs. 2020.

As shown from the result in generally a paired sample t-test was conducted on 192 tour operating firms to determine the number of foreign tourist arrivals in 2019 as compared to 2020. Results shown that the mean of foreign tourist received were statistically significance difference between the two groups (at t=191, p=0.000) at a significance level of less than 0.05.

Based on Table 5 above displayed the descriptive statistics for the two variables it was mainly interested the mean and standard deviation. As shown from the two means that are participants made number of domestic tourist received 2019 have a mean value of 15.47 than number of tourist received in 2020 of mean value 0.32. From the standard deviation perspective that scores has also different dispersions with in the two, which has value of 81.907 as number of domestic tourist received in 2019 and 3.668 value of domestic tourist received in 2020.

From the Table 5 the same participants were taken as represented by N which accounts 192 respondents. Generally there is a significance difference in decreasing the number of domestic tourist received in 2020 (mean=0.32, SD=3.668) as compared from 2019 (mean=15.47, SD=81.907).

Table 5: Paired sample statistics of domestic tourist arrival in 2019 vs. 2020.

From the Table 6 the mean difference of the two is 15.151. The test statistic were found t=2.569, degree of freedom were 191, the two sided p-value (sig 2-tailed) that corresponds to a t-values of 2.569 with degree of freedom 191. However the p-value of the test is (0.011) which is less than 0.05 so we have to reject the null hypothesis. Therefore we have balanced evidence to say that the true mean tourist received different between domestic tourist received in 2019 and number of domestic tourist received in 2020. As generalized that there is a significant difference in the number of visitors in 2019 and 2020 for both foreign and domestics. As shown from the tourist arrival perspectives in 2019 is greater than in 2020 in both domestic and foreign tourists.

Table 6: Paired sample test of foreign tourist arrival in 2019 vs. 2020.

From this Table 7, the tour operating firms which are not received any domestic tourist in 2019 accounts 158 (82.3%) and the rest number of operators have gained 1 and above tourists. Regarding with foreign tourist recipient in 2019 all the tour operating firms had received. From the domestic tourist receive in 2020, only 3 respondents were receive the guests and the rest 98.4% were not gaining any domestic tourist. From the perspective of foreign tourist recipient in 2020 issue, 138 (71.9%) were not receive any tourist and 54 (28.1%) were gaining a tourist starting from one and above. The result indicates that workings on domestic tourist were very low and declined. As Talak Ethiopia tour operators association interviewee reflection “the outlook of tour operating firms towards domestic tourists were not adapted, while we comparing to western and European countries domestic tourist awareness is very low in Ethiopia”.

Table 7: Tour operating firms hosting and not hosting tourists.

As shown from Table 8 the mean score values of the employees in 2019 were 9.74 but in 2020 mean value of employees 4.67. From this perspective we concluding that there is a significance decrease of employees in 2020 compared to 2019.

Table 8: Comparison of employee in 2019 vs. 2020

The p value of the employees is less than 0.05. There is a significance difference between the number of employees in 2019 and 2020. As shown Table 9 the t-statistic value is 12.270, df=191. P-value=.000.

Table 9: Mean difference of employees.

Validation of variables

In this study the data were categorized in to five dimensions this are: Economic impact of COVID-19 on tour operating firms (have six loaded variables), social impact of COVID-19 on tour operating firms (loaded seven variables), response level of tour operating firms to sustaining the impact of COVID-19 (loaded eight variables), crises management of tour operating firms on COVID-19 impacts (loaded seven variables) and government measures for impact of COVID-19 on tour operating firms (loaded six variables) are those dimensions which were tasted the reliability and validity. The value of Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) in the six dimension under table number eight has ranged under the recommended value which is greater than 0.6 and the Bartlett’s test of Sphericity, which is P<0.0001 has the possibility of factorability of the five dimensions item. The normality test of all the variables were tested and significance.

This five dimension supports the factorability of the data and the principal components of analysis were prevailed. As displayed Table 10, there is statistically significance difference of each dimension with them.

Table 10: KMO and Bartlett's Test of the five dimension.

Economic impact of COVID-19 on tour operating firms

From Table 11 item number 1: The respondent’s response from the perspective unable to pay monthly salary for employees moderately agree which accounts 57 (29.7%), 70 (36.5%) were agree, 58 (30.2%) were strongly agree and the rest rare number were disagree. “As R1 interviewee respondents told me to that the current tour operating business is fail by hundred percent due to the COVID-19 impact on my firms was very high, there is no any income rather than expenses so unable to pay monthly salary for employee”. From the Table 11, item number two Bankruptcy of the tour operating firm due to extended tension of COVID-19, 67 (34.9%) were strongly agree, 89(46.4%) respondents were agree, 32 (16.7%) were moderately agree, 4 (2.1%) were disagree. From this general point of view more than 95percent of respondents on average were agree. Thus, the feedback from the respondents in the Table 11 shows that most of the tour operating firms has incurred significant losses.

Table 11: Economic impact of COVID-19 on tour operating firms.

Interview respondents R2 told to me that. “I was saving as much as I could because I had been in the tour business before the outbreak of the novel Coronavirus, but this was a year after the outbreak happened, starting from last year there was no work, but I was paying the workers for a few months from the start of COVID-19 pandemic but this virus was not stop its pandemicity and i interrupting salary for employee. Currently I plan to close my company because I did not have enough savings after using the deposited because this pandemic had not stopped”. As R1 interview respondents said that, “the reason for terminating my employees is not only was unable to pay my monthly salary, but most of the workers were able to support themselves and their families on a daily basis allowance rather than on a monthly basis. Hence, the loss of daily allowance is one of the reasons why they are releasing more on their own” [8].

From the last item Table 11, due to COVID increasing the firm is highly hitted perspective 9 (4.7%) were disagree, 37 (19.3%) were moderately agree, 83 (43.2) were agree, 63 (32.8%) were strongly agree. On average it concluding that most of the respondents were agreed on COVID-19 is highly affected the declining but we say that stopped since the outbreak happened, this is not an exaggeration it is really based on my firms. And I'm afraid not only for our income decline, but we may have close down the organization. Currently, which we have not yet closed with the hope that something better will happen in the future”.

Social impact of COVID-19 on tour operating firms

Based on Table 12 as discussed five variables from seven variables, item number one 43.2% were agree, 31.3% were strongly agree on Increasing family disturbance of tour operating firm owners and their employee. Issue was also supported by interviewee and concluding that “not only permanent employees and firm owners but the freelance workers in remote tourism destinations and different language tour guides were highly disturbed and very susceptible to crises”. Many of interview responded that COVID-19 crises pulled them outside their comfort zone and some of them had steps that required courage”.

Table 12: Social impact of COVID-19 on tour operating firms.

Regarding with item number 2 from the Table 12 above 64 (33.3%) were strongly agree, 86 (44.8%) were agree, 33 (17.2%) were moderately agree on the ideas of COVID-19 impact Leads psychological crises on contract terminated of employee on the firm. As I hear from most of interview respondents agree that “contract terminated employee were susceptible for unbelievable psychological crises and unable to sustain for a long in the city. Due to this crises most of the employee which have families in remote area were turn to back to their family in order to survive their living situation” Related with issues high social stress of employees from the above table 99 (51.6%) were agree, 65 (33.9%) were strongly agree, 24 (12.5) were moderately agree, 3 (1.6) were disagree. From this point it concluding that COVID-19 has high impact not only agreement terminated employees but also employee which are not terminated their contract. According to respondents response from Table 12 item number five on the issues of Fear of tourist due to COVID-19 outbreak and pandemics 71 (37.2%) were strongly agree, 98 (51.3%) were agree and 21 (11%) were moderately agree. R7 interviewee said that “almost all countries across the world were exercised travel restriction, our country also one that regulates stay home principles I am also one of them that retain me in my home, but latter the outbreak was not ended up and we try to communicate my customers that have been reserved tentatively to come back and visit our countries based on COVID protection protocol, but their response was asking to return back the paid money while they are terrifying to move abroad”.

Response level of tour operating firms to sustain from COVID-19 impact

As the first item has shown on the above Table 13 from total respondents of 192, 59 (30.7%) were agree, 72 (37.5%) were moderately agree, 42 (21.9%) were disagree for the idea that ensuring safety for guests and employees based on COVID-19 protocol, as more than above half of the respondents agree on the idea implies that there was protection mechanisms accessibility while customers are available. To support the idea by observation and interviews the current availability of COVID-19 protection materials based on protocol was very rare while I observe.

From Table 13 item number 2 creating flexible work environment 29 (15.1%) were strongly disagree, 83 (43.2%) were disagree, 40 (20.8%) were moderately agree, 36 (18.8%) were agree and 4 (2.1%) were strongly agree from total sample population of 192 respondents. Most of the respondents which reflected on the open ended questionnaires which expressed their opinions more than 110 respondents were waiting the end of novel Coronavirus without any other additional business but if it sustaining by this they terminated with their employees. On the other hand around 40 respondents were have an additional business like travel, and some of them were not terminated from the whole employees and the rest respondents from 192 were totally changed their business to sustaining and lead their life’s.

Regarding with exercising virtual marketing of tourism products, point 43 (22.4) were strongly disagree, 93 (48%) were disagree, 43 (22.4%) were moderately agree and 12 (6.3%) were agree from 192 total respondents. Some respondents from interview they believe that tourism product is not exercised by virtual market it is the only product which is providing services. From Table 13 item number four making partnership with government for recover point 47 (24.5%), 94 (49%), 31 (16.1) 18 (9.4%) and 2 (1%) were strongly disagree, disagree, moderately agree, agree and strongly agree respectively. This point indicated that most of the tour operating firms was not create smooth relationships with governments. Some other respondents agreed that the government were not including us to discuss on the issues and only includes some selective tour operating firm owners.

From item number 5 indication making partnership to developing a cooperative marketing 45 (23.4%) were strongly agree, 99 (51.6%) were disagree and 32 (16.7) were moderately agree. The idea shows that partnerships with in industry were not are exercised as a tool to escaping from the impact and sustaining of them.

On the other point from Table 13 item number 6, prefer domestic consumers or tourists, 47 (24%) were strongly disagree, 96 (50%) were disagree, 39 (20.3%) were moderately agree. As shown in the response level most of the tour operating firms were focus on inbound tourists rather than domestic tourists.

As interview number R11 said that “my preference were foreign tourists rather than domestic tourists due to different reasons, first one is the local resident of the people were not be aware about the tour firms which are responsible to sell the package, secondly they try to visit by themselves rather than using tour firms, thirdly they need cheap price due to rare awareness of additional expenses (local guide, car rent……), some other new tourist attraction were also handling by governments itself (like unity park) due to this and other reasons I was not try to practice the domestic tourists”.

Based on financial support from government and aid providers organization perspective of tour operating firms more than 120 respondents were not agree. It means that there is no any financial support from any organizations that helps them to sustaining. Some other interview respondents said there is no any financial support rather than small amount of loan based on our employee.

From item number 8 indications almost all respondents were agreed that there is no enough tourists’ availability and currently they are unable to sustain. As shown from the number 32.8% were strongly disagree, 47.4% were disagree and 16.1% were neither nor to deciding because they are on the way to leave the tour operating business as they said on the open ended question.

In generally the response level of tour operating firm was very rare and the sustainability of the firm in the industry was incredulity. According to other interviewees said that “we are in dire straits to ensure sustainability, which is why some are rapidly shifting to other professions and others are doing more work side by side so that they can continue to support the tour operating firm sector and ensure their sustainability but firms which were works only in tour operator business have been gone at risks due to the extended time of COVID-19.

Crises management of tour operating firms for COVID-19 influence

From the Table 14 below how the tour operating firm were assure their crises that were hitted by COVID-19 pandemics and what type of mechanisms are taken by firm owner were targeted by researchers. Therefore based on the different options that are listed item number one issues of business change of firms for increase income opportunity 30.7% were strongly disagree, 38.5% were disagree and 17.7% were moderately agree or on average the response rate were laid on disagree. From these perspective most of the firms were not change their business to manage crises.

Table 14: Tour operating firm crises management system from the impact of COVID-19.

From Table 14 item number two reduce management overhead cost has a mean value of 3.12 of the total 192 respondents. This indicates above half of the respondents were agree on the issues that reducing the overhead cost by using different mechanisms. As item number three indication using firm employees in the changed business 86 (44.8%) were disagree, 48 (25%) were strongly disagree, 34 (17.7%) were moderately agree and 21 (10.9%) were agree. On the other hand small number of tour operating firms was using the employees in the changed business by reducing their number from previous amount.

From the Table 14 above item number 4, I was earning money using a variety of digital experiences have accounted with a mean value of 1.98. From this point of description the variables were sited from strongly agree scaled 1 up to strongly agree rated 5. Based on the variables which were rated the mean value 1.98 is nearly rated to 2 or disagrees. So almost all of the respondents were not do any digitally supported work to earn money. Since the outbreak of COVID-19, a new business model has been created to increase one's income through the help of digital business. But the tour operating firms shows that there have not been able to increase their revenue by focusing on digital experiences. Based on interviewee in addition to Table Item 6 showed respondents were said that they work on outbound tourists before the nobel Coronavirus happened but later there is small number of domestic tourists were buy their package while they return to back their home country. Based on the current situation in our country, it shows that most tour operators operate their tourism businesses in abroad and this indicates that tour operators have little understanding of domestic tourists.

Based on the last item that is listed from Table 14 practicing domestic tours operating were related with the above item number 6. Therefore 91 (47.4%) were strongly disagree, 65 (33.9%) were disagree and 29 (15.1%) were moderately agree on the variables that were forwarded. This indicates that the domestic tourism practice were very rare and unusual. In generally the management system of the crises of tour operating firms were rarely practiced and any other technical mechanisms escaping and sustain from the impact were not done.

The interview believe that crises management of their company is reducing office rent, terminated with employee agreements etc. were the things that reduce their expenses. But this is the paradoxical ideology from governmental view and employers view on the employees.

Government measures for COVID-19 impact on tour operating firms

Regarding with the governments measures for tour operating firms to survive the impact of COVID-19 that site different items by researcher as shown from the above Table 15 item number one providing incentive for tour operating firms 101 (52.6%) were strongly disagree, 57 (29.7) were disagree, 31 (16.1) were moderately agree.

Table 15: Measure of the government taken of COVID-19 impacts on tour operating firms.

From Table 15 item number 2 reducing taxes perspective 108 (56.3%) were strongly disagree. From the item shows almost all responds were disagree on it. According to R13 tour operating firm managers who participated in the interview “government did not reduce the tax, but extended the payment date was not more than 3 months. However, since the nature of the pandemic is increasing, not declining, we cannot say that the government has done anything different in reducing taxes”. Based on most interview respondents reflected that “So far, we are not expecting the government to repeal the tax, but we are planning to revoke the permit because tourism is related to movement activity and on the other side moving from place to place contributes significantly to the spread of the disease. So we believe that it is better to close our will than to seize it, as we will not be able to pay taxes or anything else without working”.

From interview respondents R3 said that “if the government gives us as much credit as we need to get out of the crisis and we can take it over a long period of time loan and we can move on to other fields, but in the current situation, I believe it is better to avoid borrowing money from the government because it leads me to a worse crisis, i say this without any reason 1^st the loan is very small 2^nd it will be repaid in one year starting from 6 months due to this the loan I gain is unable to start any other business, so I believe that it is better to avoid taking it because government will confiscate my fixed assets after a year due to no income to pay it and finance constraints ”. Most also agree that around 3 hundred million birr loan were permitted by 5.5 interest, but this money should be only for employees salary and the criteria also heavy to gain it and most tour operating firm were not take it due to collateral risks as Talak Ethiopia tour operator associations presidents explanation. Item number 5 from Table 15 providing skill development trainings to manage the crises, strongly disagree 91 (47.4%), 60 (31.3%) disagree 26 (13.5%) moderately agree, 14 (7.3%) agree and 1 (0.5%) strongly agree. As it indicating from the issue more than 75% of respondents was close to disagree on skill development trainings. Managers or owner of the firm have a load of responsibility and they are constantly dealing with different situations but one thing is certain and every managers have encounter a crises at some point in their duty and they need to be equipped with the skills necessary to handle it.

From the government tour operating firms different capacity buildings were expected these are institutional development, human resource improvement and the sustainability mechanisms. While we look on the ground very small number of firm owners or managers were participated capacity building trainings by Ethiopian tourism organizations program.

Most of the respondents were also agree on points as follows “there is two dialogue that raised by governments, the first one is employees lay off are prohibited and the second one is renting off tax free import cars were prohibited. Due to this two trajectory ideas we are unable to sustaining our firms with holding of employee”.

Conclusion

Regarding with the finding on the impact of COVID-19 on tour operating firms reside in Addis Ababa overview economic and social impact were in circulated in the discussion and the result shows that there is unbelievable impact on the firms rather than other industries. In addition to these female participations in tour operating firms were very low. To doing the research the validity and reliability test were conducted by SPSS version 20, and the scale that ranged reliability by Cronbach’s alphas were above the normalization of 0.60. All the dimensions were laid above 0.80 (Table 1). The validity were analyzed by factor analysis of the principal component methods and all the dimensions were valid that were not validated before and above 0.5. The number of foreign tourist arrivals in 2019 and 2020 were declining and have mean difference of 112.432, P<0.001 which have statistically significance difference. As in general there is a significance difference in heavily decreasing the number of foreign tourist received in 2020 (mean=1.75, SD=3.918) as compared from 2019 (mean=114.18, SD=105.492). There is a significance difference in decreasing the number of domestic tourist received in 2020 (mean=0.32, SD=3.668) as compared from 2019 (mean=15.47, SD=81.907). There is also a significance decrease of employees in 2020 compared to 2019. 138 (71.9%) tour operating firms were not receive any tourist and 54 (28.1%) were gaining a tourist starting from one and above in 2020.

From economic and social impact variables as shown that the virus has unwittingly attacked tour operating firms in a way that is different from other tourism sectors and has affected them in a way that leads most tour operating firms are out of the tour market or going to ease. The mechanisms of firms to response the covid-19 impact while happened for survival were very low and most tour operating firms are preferring to be waiting rather than developing creativity mechanisms to sustain and survive the effects.

On the other hand, when we look at the government's remedial measures, they are just insignificant activities. 5.5 percent interest loan only rearrange for the tour operating firms for one year length of return back, this is also not enough to cover their expense due to inadequate loan. Government-sponsored loans can be repaid within a year and these loans are meant for work or retention and also small amount of money and did not gain any permission to start other business.

Recommendations

Based on the findings and conclusion above the following suggestions were recommended. The COVID-19 pandemic was far reached consequences that laid the tour operating firms for high economic and social risk. Therefor categorical recommendations were as follows:

For government: The consequence of the impacts was circulated firstly by employees and secondly by tour operating firms owners and its family. Therefore to escaping from the economic crises the government facilitates and converts heavily affected tour operating firms by providing loans into production processes or trading business. In addition to owners the terminated workers are citizens and there is a great moral breakdown for them and their families due to lose of jobs, therefore the government should also organize in to a new business of them. Female tour operating entrepreneurs should be promoted by government.

More than half of the tour operating firms were importing the car without tax before the novel Coronavirus happened and while they are looking on the straightway. But now the car also a live without any work and owners also needed to work by renting the cars and gaining any money to survive. Therefore the government must be evaluating the rule and regulation of duty free cars related with the current crises and permitted for each individual to rent the cars and supporting their tour operating firms. To overcoming of the shortcut or crises of the tourism governments must be sure by providing stable countries. There are tour operating firms who are requesting a debt transfer deadline, but have not yet responded there for government understands the current situation and should be prolongs this debt period.

For tour operating firms: Individual who have any startup money they must be creating flexible work environment, collaboration work with different stakeholders must be taken as a culture and practice for along. They try to take their own responsibility regarding with attracting the domestic tourists be dual way followers rather than one way. Now is the time of globalization there for digital tourism product marketing experiences must be expected by the tour operating firms as much as possible not only products they must be also providing services by virtual. Internal crises management should be adapted and takes as a habit for long term situation.

For other researchers: I strongly advice other researcher while coming later they must be focus recovery mechanisms not only COVID but also the other pandemics that will happen.

References

1. Ugur NG, Akbiyik A. Impacts of COVID-19 on global tourism industry: A cross-regional comparison. Tour Manag Perspect. 2020;36:100744.

   [Crossref] [Google Scholar]

2. Ghose DDS. Impact of COVID-19 on International Tourism. Tourism J. 2020
3. Nan J. Under COVID-19, challenges and opportunities for hospitality and tourism industry of China. J Tourism Hospit. 2020;9(5):1-3.

   [Crossref] [Google Scholar]

4. Engidaw AE. Small businesses and their challenges during COVID-19 pandemic in developing countries: In the case of Ethiopia. J Innovation Entrep. 2022;11(1):1.

   [Crossref] [Google Scholar] [PubMed]

5. Gelaw AT. COVID-19 crisis: What impact on the well-being of Ethiopian? Int Tourism J. 2020;13

   [Crossref] [Google Scholar]

6. Kothari C. Research methodology. New age international limited. Brit J Psychol. 226 2004;226

   [Google Scholar]

7. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). Coronavirus (COVID-19): SME Policy Responses. 2020;1-169.
8. Yigezu A, Zewdie SA, Mirkuzie AH, Abera A, Hailu A, Agachew M, et al. Cost-analysis of COVID-19 sample collection, diagnosis, and contact tracing in low resource setting: The case of Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. Plos One. 2022;17(6):e0269458.

   [Crossref] [Google Scholar] [PubMed]