Travel Reference
In-Depth Information
into sociocultural, economic and physical categories, with many researchers acknowledging
the integrated nature of impacts but then pointing out they are dealing with only one type,
thus missing the whole point of the argument. I am of the feeling that there is not a lot more
in the general sense that we can learn about impacts resulting from tourism, although that does
not mean we should not continue research in that fi eld, particularly in terms of the environ-
mental element. We might, however, concentrate a little on seeing if residents view tourism
and tourists differently rather than assuming they treat these as the same.
Personally, I am not sure what else we have accomplished of a specifi c geographical bent.
There are many areas in which some research has been done, but rarely enough to produce
fi ndings which would generally be accepted by all in the tourism research fi eld. Stansfi eld and
others began highly spatial research on resorts, particularly their morphology, including a
defi nition of the Recreational Business District (Stansfi eld and Rickert, 1970), which has
never been followed up to the degree that would seem appropriate. The transformation of
places, both initially and then over time, is surely at the heart of what we should be interested
in. An examination of Las Vegas or perhaps more recently Macau shows how massive such
changes can be. How do places change physically? Gale and Botteril (2005) have recently
discussed this, but such papers are rare and yet the fi eld is so fertile. Why does Barrett's (1958)
model, drawn up in the 1950s, still have great relevance? Is it inertia, or is it because it is still
highly effi cient? Along with this is the question often raised and never answered - why do so
many tourist destinations look identical?
Then there is the dreaded life cycle (Butler 1980), widely known and equally widely ignored,
at least by destination planners apparently. I have grown used to being invited to tourist destina-
tions to talk about it, having been told how well known the model is at that place and being
shown around a destination and left feeling that if it really is so well known, why has this place
made the same mistakes that other places have done and thus is also now in decline? We have
so little research on how places change and, perhaps as or even more importantly, why they
change, other than case study after case study which does not really answer the question.
I would argue that tourism as an agent of landscape change is one of the major issues that still
needs study. We have seen many declining urban centres; from my home town of Birmingham
to my second home town of Glasgow as a former European Capital of Culture, basing their
probably insecure post-industrial renewal on leisure, recreation and tourism development.
Often such developments appear to be based more on wishful thinking and the availability of
EU funds than anything else, as are many 'tourism attractions', which open to great celebrations
and signifi cant defi cits that only grow larger as it is discovered they are either not attractions or
are in the wrong place, or both. Many developers and local governments appear to work on the
' Field of Dreams ' concept - 'build it and they will come', except the potential customers don't
always do so. In rural areas, tourism has been no less important as an agent of change.
In both urban and rural areas, tourism (and leisure) has been effective in changing the
superfi cial perceptions of places. Old industrial city centres now appear attractive, at least for
a beer and a curry, or a show, or shopping, and if it is raining, maybe even a museum or some-
thing cultural. However, we should perhaps be more concerned than we have been in the past
with the countryside and the effects of tourism there. As long as we refuse to pay the appro-
priate price for food, the countryside as we think we know it and those trying to survive on
traditional activities such as farming will be in dire straits. Frost and Jay recognised this some
forty years ago when they wrote 'the countryside suffers, the romantic, idyllic countryside.
And as long as it is defended for what it is not by those who do not know it and exploited for
what it is by those who do, it is likely to go on suffering for a very long time to come' (1967:
69). Their words have proved to be as prophetic as their book is amusing and insightful.
 
Search WWH ::




Custom Search