Geography Reference
In-Depth Information
appreciation by planners of the social costs of tourism is essential for both financial and
social reasons (Reid 2003). Rejection of visitors by segments of the host community may
well result in a decline in the attractiveness of the tourist destination, in addition to the
creation of disharmony within the host community (Murphy 1985; Getz 1994b; Page and
Lawton 1997). Nevertheless, it is also important to recognise that it may be difficult at
times to distinguish between tourism as a factor in social change from other dimensions
of change, such as globalisation of communication technology.
Tourism development may initiate changes in government and private organisations
(Baldridge and Burnham 1975; Hall and Jenkins 1995; Mason 2003; Reid 2003) in order
to cater for the impact of tourism. For instance, additional law enforcement officers may
be required (Rothman et al. 1979), while special measures may be needed to restrict
dislocation created by increased rents and land values (Cowie 1985) where such
regulation is possible. Geographers have long emphasised the importance of meaningful
community participation in the decision-making process that surrounds the formulation of
tourism policy and development (e.g. Butler 1974, 1975; Brougham and Butler 1981;
D.G.Pearce 1981; Getz 1984; Murphy 1985; Mason 2003; Reid 2003; Murphy and
Murphy 2004). Furthermore, studies such as those of Keller (1984) and B.J.Shaw (1985,
1986) indicate that the social impacts of tourism are complex and need to be examined
within the context of the various economic, environmental, political and social factors
that contribute to tourism development in a destination (Mings 1978; Runyan and Wu
1979; Wu 1982; D.G.Pearce 1989; Mason 2003; Murphy and Murphy 2004; Hall 2005a).
Community attitudes towards tourism invariably simultaneously reveal both positive
and negative attitudes towards tourism (Butler 1975). For example, various positive and
negative attitudes towards tourism were indicated in several studies of resident attitudes
towards tourism in northern New South Wales, Australia, in the 1980s (Hall 1990).
Pigram (1987) utilised Doxey's (1975) irridex scale of euphoria, apathy, annoyance and
antagonism to investigate resident attitudes in the resort town of Coffs Harbour (Table
4.5). According to Pigram, 'the overwhelming majority felt that the economic and
otherwise benefits of tourism outweighed the disadvantages' (Pigram 1987:67). Despite
the overall favourable or apathetic response of residents, several negative reactions
towards tourism did emerge from the study. According to Pigram (1987), the greatest
impact of tourism on the local community was the perceived increase in the cost of goods
and services because of the presence of tourists. The respondents also indicated that they
believed that petty crime was also worse during the tourist season, an observation
supported by
Table 4.5: Resident reaction to tourists in Coffs
Harbour
Irridex scale Survey scale
(% response)
Euphoria
Friendly
29
Apathy
No worry
58
Annoyance Nuisance
10
Antagonism Rude/unbearable
3
Source: after Pigram (1987:68)
Search WWH ::




Custom Search