Chapter III : RESEARCH METHODOLOGY AND RESEARCH DESIGN The research aimed to investigate into the perceptions of the visitors and local communities and understand the factors affecting the perceptions and further explores the commonalities and differences in perceptions of local communities and visitors; and tries to understand how these would affect conservation and development of heritage sites. The purpose of this chapter is to describe the Research Methodology and Research Methods used to achieve the research objectives of this study. This section discusses the nature of research, research hypothesis,research methodology and research design case – selection, delineation of study area, sampling strategy,interview scheduledesign and data analysis tools. 3.1 NATURE OF RESEARCH Primarily the research is deductive using quantitative method of face to face interviews using structured interview schedule. But to get in-depth understanding of the setting and phenomenon, qualitative methods such as focused group discussions, interview with key informants and experts and direct observations are used in exploratory phase of the study. The exploratory study helped in formulating the interview schedule and also getting accustomed with the setting. In order to accomplish the objectives of the study, a model is designed, as shown in Fig. 3.1 64 Fig. No.3.1 : Dependent and Independent variables 3.2 WORKING RESEARCH HYPOTHESIS Commonalities and differences in perceptions of visitors and local communities can be understood through following 4 variables – 1. Heritage components and striking features 2. State of tourism Infrastructure and development 3. Development Preferences 65 4. Visual preferences for architectural development. Four important aspects of development are identified – 1. Landscape setting 2. Lighting inside heritage buildings 3. Architectural vocabulary of the buildings 4. Material of street furniture. Based on the above, Four hypotheses are formulated These hypotheses are expressed in null- form as follow: H1 : There is no difference in perceptions of local communities and visitors with reference to the heritage components and striking features H2: There is no difference in perceptions of local communities and visitors with reference to State of Heritage buildings and tourism infrastructure development H3: There is no difference in perceptions of local communities and visitors with reference to Development Preferences H4a: There is no difference in perceptions between local communities and visitors with reference to Preferences for Landscape setting H4b: there is no difference in perceptions betweenlocal communities and visitors with reference to Preferences for Architectural vocabulary of the buildings H4c: there is no difference in perceptions between local communities and visitors with reference to Preferences for Lighting inside Heritage buildings H4d: there is no difference in perceptions of local communities and visitors with reference to Preferences for Materialfor street furniture 3.3 CASE STUDY METHOD From the literature Review it is observed that case study method is used to understand perceptions at natural or cultural heritage sites (Chang , 1996,li,2003;Ooi,2003, Waterton, 2005,Stephenson,2008).Case study method is with reference to a particular place and landscape where complex multi-faceted explorations are needed ( Deming,2011). It is basically an enquiry of a contemporary phenomenon in a real-time context ( Yin,2005). Casestudy approach can help understand perceptions of 2 varied groups – local communities and visitors in one single place and context. As an initial exploration for the research, a qualitative study of Sinhgad fort [which is in process of serial nomination for WHS] in Maharashtra [about 30 kms from Pune] was 66 undertakenusing cognitive mapping tool [Lynch, 1972] and open ended interviews to check perceptional differences between local communities and visitors. The findings were published in JIIA [attached in Appendix IV]. But later it was decided to take up a site which has WHS designation. This initial study helped finalizing the tools for study. 3.4 WORLD HERITAGE SITES IN INDIA It is noted in case of World Heritage Sites that lack of involvement of residents leads to serious implications for sustainability of the site (Nicholas, Thapa & Ko, 2010). In Indian context, it is observed in many World heritage sites like Hampi, Pattadhakal, Aihole, local communities are removed / displaced from their places affecting their livelihood and sustenance ( Chiba,2013). Hence of various levels of importance of Heritage sites, this research focuses upon the case of a World heritage site. Throughout the World , the cultural heritage sites outnumber the Natural heritage sites(UNESCO, 2012). Out of 1031 total world heritage sites, 802 sites are cultural, 197 are natural and 32 are mixed heritage. India is more known for its cultural heritage and is therefore frequented by tourists as compared to Parks which are Natural heritage sites (Raval, 1991 ) . India has 25 cultural heritage sites and 7 natural heritage sites. Of the 25 Cultural heritage sites, maximum number 4 are from Maharashtra . Of the 4 World Heritage Sites, 3 of them are examples of Rock Cut Architecture. Ajantha, Ellora and Elephanta are situated in semi-urban context and are initial inscriptions of India on the World Heritage Site list. 67 Fig No. 3.2 Map of India showing World Heritage sites – Natural and cultural Source:Archeological Survey of India 3.5 WORLD HERITAGE SITES IN MAHARASHTRA Maharashtra being culturally, socially, environmentally and ecologically diverse state with highest number - four World Heritage Sites. From tourism point of view, Maharashtra is most frequented state by international tourists with more than 5.1 million foreign tourists’ arrivals annually and fourth most frequented state by domestic tourists as per the tourism statistics provided inMinistry of Tourism (2010) Report. Tourism in Maharashtra shows maximum foreign visitors in Aurangabad and Mumbai (Maharashtra Tourism Report, 2010) in the month of January and May. Rock cut architecture and art is relatively old in India with continous development of rock-cut religious art and architecture over a period of more than thousand years ; within which Kailas is the most outstanding piece of sculpture ever executed in India (Dhongde and Ranade,2010 ). Of the total number of monuments and typologies, Maharashtra has 80% caves and 50% forts (Patil, 2014). Of the 1200 rock cut caves found in Indian sub continent, 900 are seen in Maharashtra (Chandra, 1957). Rock cut architecture is the best representation of art and beauty; Imagination and talent. Of the 4 World Heritage sites in Maharashtra,Ajanta Caves, Ellora caves are both near Aurangabad and Elephanta caves and Chattrapati Shivaji Terminus sites are located in 68 Mumbai. Of the 4 World Heritage Sites, 3 of them are examples of Rock Cut Architecture. 3 Sites –Ajanta, Ellora and Elephanta are situated in semi-urban context, while one of them, Chattrapati Shivaji Terminus has Urban Metropolitan context. Ajanta and Ellora are first ones to be designated as World Heritage site in India in the year 1983. (UNESCO, 2012). Ellora has yet to have the SMP / IMP/CCMP (Comprehensive Conservation Management Plan) implemented(Govt of India, 2013). It is still in the process of development, in the middle of Tourism Area Life Cycle (TALC); and in this situation understanding the perceptions of tourists and local communities will give true insight into the associations of the local people with the heritage and meanings and values of the heritage. 3.6 SETTING OF THE STUDY: ELLORA Ellora is selected for reasons stated below. 1. Ellora is in close proximity of Aurangabad, which is declared recently as tourism capital of Maharashtra and the most important place on tourist map of India ( Pandit, 2013) which has political, social and cultural development which is pan Indian in ethos but local in detail ( Dhongde and Ranade, 2010). 2. Ellora brings to life again the civilization of ancient India with its uninterrupted sequence of monuments from 600 to 1000 ( Criterion IV of WHS Nomination,1983), with co-existence of 4 religions – Buddhism, Hinduism ,Jainism and Islam, displaying tangible and intangible heritage links and intercultural exchanges, very typical of India which is multi-cultural and multi-ethnic. Like most of the heritage buildings /sites in India, Ellora is best example of Architecture, sculpture and painting, where Kailasa displays Hindu rock-cut architecture at its zenith ( Dhongde and Ranade, 2010) 3. UNESCO Report of the Ellora in 2003 showed threats and risks - Development pressures which can threaten the authenticity; leakages inside the caves, general deterioration of rock surfaces, bats in the cave interior and tagging on rock surfaces. 4. Ellora which is amongst first to be nominated as a World Heritage site in 1983, has largest number of domestic and International visitors in Maharashtra, visiting Ellora caves. It has Verul/Ellora village and Khuldabad villages in close proximity to Ellora caves. The Ghrushneshwar temple, which is a living heritage frequented by pilgrims, pilgrim-tourists is in close proximity of the Caves. This is typical Indian scenario with living and non-living heritage close to each other. 69 5. With its role as a Sacred tirtha , the area of study includes the World Heritage Site – Ellora caves Precinct and Monument of National importance - Ghrushneshwar ; both with its 100m prohibited