Geography Reference
In-Depth Information
• minimisation of regulatory approaches
• a framework for managing conditions.
Unfortunately, only a few LAC systems have been generated and successfully
implemented, mostly in wilderness areas of North America and, to a small extent, in one
or two natural areas in Australia (Hall and McArthur 1998). The most critical aspect of
the development of the LAC system has been establishing stakeholder endorsement and
support (Prosser 1986b). Stakeholders from the local tourism sector and community can
provide valuable input into desired conditions and acceptable standards, and are usually
essential in providing the economic and political support necessary to maintain
monitoring programmes and implement management decisions. The failure to establish
suf ficient stakeholder support has largely occurred because the LAC was created by
natural area managers, for natural area managers (Stankey et al. 1985).
According to Hall and McArthur (1998), the culture of the LAC is not attuned to
attracting wider stakeholder involvement, and provides three examples of problems in its
implementation. First, the use of the term 'limits' within the title, which the tourism
industry has interpreted as being discouraging to growth and thus business. Second, the
conventional narrow focus on the condition of the physical environment and, to some
extent, the nature of the visitor experience. Other critical dimensions such as
characteristics of the visitor market, socio-cultural aspects of the local community and
economic activity associated with the tourism industry are not included. Third, the lack of
co-operative involvement of the tourism sector in identifying indicators and standards
that are acceptable to the industry. Without this involvement the monitoring results
become prone to conjecture, particularly if they reveal surprising or controversial
implications. However, if the culture of the LAC system was diversified and its
components broadened it may be better able to deliver the significant opportunities it was
originally designed to generate (McCool and Cole 1997).
INSIGHT: The Tourism Optimisation Management Model (TOMM)
The Tourism Optimisation Management Model (TOMM) is one of the most recent and
relatively untried models to monitor and manage visitors (McArthur 1996, 2000b; Hall
and McArthur 1998). The conceptual emphasis of the TOMM is on achieving optimum
performance rather than limiting activity. The TOMM positions a range of influences in
the heritage-visitor relationship to focus on sustainability of the heritage, viability of the
tourism industry, and empowerment of stakeholders. The TOMM has borrowed the key
strengths of the Visitor Impact Management Model (VIMM) developed by the United
States National Parks and Conservation Association (Graefe 1989, 1991) and LAC, then
broadened their focus into fields linked with the tourism industry and local community.
Besides environmental and experiential elements, the TOMM addresses characteristics of
the tourist market, economic conditions of the tourism industry and socio-cultural
conditions of the local community. The expansion recognises the complex
interrelationships between heritage management, the tourism industry and supporting
local populations. In this respect the TOMM is more politically sensitive to the forces
which shape visitation and subsequent impacts (McArthur 2000a, 2000B).
The
TOMM
contains
three
main
components
context
analysis
a
monitoring
