PENGHARGAAN WARISAN DAN PERSEPSI MANFAAT BUDAYA-SOSIAL DALAM PESTA KALIMARAN DAN PESTA KAAMATAN
HERITAGE APPRECIATION AND PERCEIVED CULTURAL-SOCIAL BENEFITS AT PESTA KALIMARAN AND PESTA KAAMATAN
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.55197/qjssh.v7i5.1766Keywords:
interaksi simbolik, representasi budaya, kewibawaan adat, orientasi antara etnik, kesan silingAbstract
Kajian ini meneliti hubungan antara simbol komunikasi, penghargaan warisan dan respons persembahan dengan persepsi manfaat budaya-sosial dalam Pesta Kalimaran dan Pesta Kaamatan di Sabah, serta batas penilaian pengunjung sebagai petunjuk kefahaman adat dan hubungan antara etnik. Pendekatan kaedah campuran digunakan melalui tinjauan terhadap 382 pengunjung Pesta Kalimaran dan 400 pengunjung Pesta Kaamatan, disokong temu bual bersama 14 informan. Data kuantitatif dianalisis menggunakan regresi kuasa dua terkecil biasa, manakala data kualitatif dianalisis secara tematik bagi memperincikan pengalaman budaya dan pemaknaan ritual. Model regresi menerangkan 55.6% dan 54.8% variasi persepsi manfaat budaya-sosial bagi Kalimaran dan Kaamatan. Penghargaan warisan mencatat pekali terpiawai tertinggi dalam kedua-dua perayaan (β = 0.451; β = 0.528). Walau bagaimanapun, perbezaan pekalinya berbanding simbol komunikasi hanya signifikan bagi Kaamatan (p < 0.001), bukan Kalimaran (p = 0.235). Kesan siling turut dikenal pasti apabila 64.9% dan 54.3% responden mencapai skor maksimum. Keterangan informan mengenai pameran budaya, Tolak Bala dan Magavau memperlihatkan perbezaan antara penghargaan awam dengan pemaknaan adat. Kajian menyimpulkan bahawa penghargaan simbolik, orientasi hubungan antara etnik dan pengetahuan ritual merupakan dimensi berbeza yang memerlukan penilaian tersendiri. Dapatan ini menyumbang kepada pemahaman hubungan warisan dan manfaat sosial tanpa mengandaikan perubahan tingkah laku atau penguasaan adat secara langsung.
This study examines the associations of symbolic communication, heritage appreciation and performance responses with perceived cultural–social benefits at Pesta Kalimaran and Pesta Kaamatan in Sabah, while considering the limitations of visitor evaluations as indicators of customary understanding and interethnic relations. A mixed-methods approach combined surveys of 382 Kalimaran visitors and 400 Kaamatan visitors with interviews involving 14 informants. Quantitative data were analysed using ordinary least squares regression, while qualitative accounts were thematically analysed to contextualise cultural experiences and ritual meanings. The regression models explained 55.6% and 54.8% of the variance in perceived cultural–social benefits at Kalimaran and Kaamatan, respectively. Heritage appreciation recorded the largest standardised coefficients in both festivals (β = 0.451; β = 0.528). However, its coefficient differed significantly from symbolic communication at Kaamatan (p < 0.001), but not at Kalimaran (p = 0.235). Substantial ceiling effects emerged, with 64.9% and 54.3% of respondents attaining the maximum benefit score. Interview accounts of cultural displays, Tolak Bala and Magavau distinguished public appreciation from customary meanings. The findings emphasise that symbolic appreciation, reported interethnic orientations and ritual knowledge require distinct forms of assessment and cannot establish behavioural change or customary understanding directly. These distinctions contribute to a more nuanced interpretation of festival experiences.
References
[1] Abbasian, S. (2023): Festival participation for integration and inclusion? A critical reflection. – World Leisure Journal 65(4): 464-483.
[2] Barlocco, F. (2011): A tale of two celebrations: The Pesta Kaamatan as a site of struggle between a minority and the state in Sabah, East Malaysia. – Asian Journal of Social Science 39(5): 605-626.
[3] Bell, C. (1997): Ritual: Perspectives and dimensions. – Oxford University Press 368p.
[4] Blumer, H. (1969): Symbolic interactionism: Perspective and method. – Prentice-Hall 208p.
[5] Braun, V., Clarke, V. (2021): Thematic analysis: A practical guide. – SAGE 376p.
[6] Carter, M.J., Fuller, C. (2016): Symbols, meaning, and action: The past, present, and future of symbolic interactionism. – Current Sociology 64(6): 931-961.
[7] Connerton, P. (1989): How societies remember. – Cambridge University Press 121p.
[8] Creswell, J.W., Plano Clark, V.L. (2018): Designing and conducting mixed methods research. – SAGE 492p.
[9] Fetters, M.D., Curry, L.A., Creswell, J.W. (2013): Achieving integration in mixed methods designs-Principles and practices. – Health Services Research 48(6pt2): 2134-2156.
[10] Hall, S. (Ed.) (1997): Representation: Cultural representations and signifying practices. – SAGE 400p.
[11] Harnish, D. (2021): Tolerance of ambiguity: Negotiating religion and sustaining the Lingsar festival and its performing arts in Lombok, Indonesia. – Religions 12(8): 12p.
[12] Hassanli, N., Walters, T., Williamson, J. (2021): “You feel you’re not alone”: How multicultural festivals foster social sustainability through multiple psychological sense of community. – Journal of Sustainable Tourism 29(11-12): 1792-1809.
[13] Henseler, J., Ringle, C.M., Sarstedt, M. (2015): A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. – Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 43(1): 115-135.
[14] Hjerm, M., Eger, M.A., Bohman, A., Fors Connolly, F. (2020): A new approach to the study of tolerance: Conceptualizing and measuring acceptance, respect, and appreciation of difference. – Social Indicators Research 147(3): 897-919.
[15] Kementerian Pelancongan, Kebudayaan dan Alam Sekitar Sabah (2014): 30,000 visitors expected for Kalimaran Festival in Tenom. – Kementerian Pelancongan, Kebudayaan dan Alam Sekitar Sabah 2p.
[16] Khalli, M.N.M., Sintang, S., Kamu, A. (2022): The framework of socio-religious harmony in Sabah, East Malaysia: An application of Fuzzy Delphi method. – Heliyon 8(8): 12p.
[17] Le, T.H., Abreu Novais, M., Arcodia, C., Berchtenbreiter, R., Humpe, A., Nguyen, N. (2024): How authenticity in events fosters social sustainability: Towards an authenticity ecosystem and implications for destination management. – Tourism Management Perspectives 51: 15p.
[18] Lembaga Kebudayaan Negeri Sabah (2023): Pesta Kalimaran 2023. – Lembaga Kebudayaan Negeri Sabah 2p.
[19] Ling, J.W.K., Harun, M.J., Bala, B., Abdul Latip, N., Molinka, N.N. (2025): Ulung Buayeh: From mythology to ecotourism. – Planning Malaysia 23(38): 342-359.
[20] Low, K.O. (2012): Belief in Bambarayon (paddy spirits) among the Kadazandusun of North Borneo. – Borneo Research Journal 6: 75-101.
[21] Lukin @ Lokin, S.A., Sintang, S., Johnes, J. (2022): Sejarah dan pengalaman hubungan etnik di Sabah: Kesepaduan dalam kepelbagaian. – e-Bangi: Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities 19(6): 183-194.
[22] MacKinnon, J.G., White, H. (1985): Some heteroskedasticity-consistent covariance matrix estimators with improved finite sample properties. – Journal of Econometrics 29(3): 305-325.
[23] Marques, L., Borba, C., Michael, J. (2021): Grasping the social dimensions of event experiences: Introducing the Event Social Interaction Scale (ESIS). – Event Management 25(1): 9-26.
[24] Mead, G.H. (1934): Mind, self, and society: From the standpoint of a social behaviorist (C.W. Morris, Ed.). – University of Chicago Press 401p.
[25] Molinka, N.N., Harun, M.J., Ling, J.W.K., Abdul Latip, N. (2025): Cultural urban motif: Kimaragang symbolism in urban planning. – Planning Malaysia 23(38): 313-328.
[26] Rappaport, R.A. (1999): Ritual and religion in the making of humanity. – Cambridge University Press 564p.
[27] Rossetti, G., Quinn, B. (2021): Understanding the cultural potential of rural festivals: A conceptual framework of cultural capital development. – Journal of Rural Studies 86: 46-53.
[28] Smith, L. (2006): Uses of heritage. – Routledge 351p.
[29] Somiah, V. (2025): From ‘sumandak’ to beauty queen: Constructing Kadazandusun gendered identity in Sabah's Unduk Ngadau pageant. – South East Asia Research 33(3): 313-330.
[30] Stephen, J., Hussin, R., Sintang, S., Lokin, S.A., Johnes, J. (2025): Languages, places, and peace: Ethnic harmony across urban and rural Sabah, Malaysia. – Planning Malaysia 23(38): 360-381.
[31] Topin, B. (2021): Kaamatan: Our sacred festival. – Koisaan Publications 150p.
[32] Turner, V.W. (1969): The ritual process: Structure and anti-structure. – Aldine 213p.
[33] Turner, V.W. (1967): The forest of symbols: Aspects of Ndembu ritual. – Cornell University Press 405p.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 JOHAN JOHNES, ROSAZMAN HUSSIN, JEANNET STEPHEN, RAHMAH RASHID
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
