Tourism is a product that relies totally upon simultaneous production and consumption. The implication of this for the destination’s host community is that it will come into contact with an alien population during the production process. This contact can be beneficial or detrimental to the host community depending upon the difference in cultures and the nature of the contact.
Tourism can develop and grow when host community has a positive attitude toward it and when they see their role in the process of the tourism development. At the point when a tourism destination is born, the quality if the life of the local hosts goes through radical changes, which are not necessarily negative. Literature suggests that tourism development has created both positive and negative impacts on communities. As a consequence, community residents hold different attitudes towards tourism development. Residents who do not support the development of tourism have been identified in almost all segmentation studies concerning attitudes towards tourism, namely ‘Haters’ (Davis et al. 1988; Madrigal 1995), ‘Cynics’ (Williams and Lawson 2001) or ‘Somewhat Irritated’ (Ryan and Montgomery 1994). Host communities do see new business opportunities in tourism and are motivated to explore them. At the same time, they know that some negative physical, cultural, social and economic impacts will emerge. The most complex problems that accompany tourism development, reside in the relationship between local host and tourist. Furthermore , there are limits of tourism growth that are closely associated with the place capacity and with the quality of life in the local community.
The most complex problems that accompany tourism development, reside in the relationship between tourists and local host. Furthermore, there are limits of tourism growth that are closely associated with the place capacity and with the quality of life in the local community. When these limits are exceeded, local residents develop negative attitudes towards tourism. When negative attitudes become beliefs, tourism development obstacles appear. The beliefs of the local hosts become the most reliable indicator of the limits to the growth of tourism.
2.1 Tourism Development
Tourism development is an expression that encompasses not only destinations, origins, motivations and impacts, but also the complex linkage that exist between all the people and institutions of that interconnecting, global supply and demand system ( Pearce, 1989).
It has been widely recognized that tourism development is a double-edged sword for host communities. Not only does it generate benefits, but it also imposes costs (Jafari, 2001). By evaluating these benefits and costs, host community develop their perception toward tourism. Tourism is an industry which uses the host community as a resource, sells it as a product , and in the process affects the lives of everyone ( Murphy,1981). In general, tourism development within a host community often impacts the community both in negative and positive ways. These Impacts have been well documented and are usually classified as socio-cultural impacts, environmental impacts and economic impacts ( Allen et al., 1988; Ap, Farrell et al., 2001; Liu and Sheldon, 1987; Liu and Var, 1986; Nepal,2008; Pappas, 2008; Van Winkle and Mackay,2008). Resident’s attitudes will be positive if they can use tourism resources such as recreational facilities or if they perceive that tourism development will protect or preserve the environment ( Lankford et al, 2003). Conversely attitudes towards tourism were found to be negative if residents perceived the impacts as negative, or if the resources within a host community diminish as a result of tourist activity ( Lankford et al.,2003; Perdue et al., 1990). Tourism development initiatives usually center around the economic benefits derived from tourism. This typically includes job creation, taxes and other indirect income.
2.2 Tourism Planning
Based on the World Tourism Organisation’s Hainan Declaration in December 2000, it is noted that one of the reasons for the failure of tourism planning in the past can be attributed to the lack of consultation with the local residents (Yahya et al. 2005:According to Williams and Lawson (2001) and Gursoy et al. (2002), research on residents’ reactions to tourism can help tourism planners understand why residents support or oppose tourism. Such information can help planners select those developments that can minimize the negative impacts and maximize support for tourism development amongst certain members of the local population. It has now become widely recognized that planners and entrepreneurs must take the views of the host community into account if the industry wants to pursue the goal of sustainable development (Allen et al. 1988; Ap and Crompton 1993). Success of a regional tourism development plan depends on the successful involvement of the community (Inbakaran and Jackson 2006: 64).Difference between success and failure could be location or temporally based so this research aims to set the foundation for continuing studies and inform local policy makers, planners and managers. This is particularly relevant in light of recent changes to local government structures in the region. Moreover, the successful development of a tourism industry requires effective planning that both recognises tourists’ demands and emphasizes the values of the local host community (Lankford, 1994).
2.3 Host community
According to Sherlock (1999), it is difficult to define the term “community” precisely; nevertheless, the word can be used to refer to a group of people who exist in one particular location. Aramberri (2001) suggests that “host societies are in fact communities, made of one piece”. For Williams and Lawson (2001) community is defined as “a group of people who share common goals or opinions”. “Host Community” is particular is defined by Mathieson and Wall (1982) as the “Inhabitants of the destination area”. Similarly, Swarbrooke (1999) defines it as “all those who live within a tourist destination”. According to Gursoy et al.(2002) and Williams and Lawson (2001), the community consists of different groups of people who live in the same geographical area, which does not mean they necessarily belong to the same ‘community’. In the light of the previous definition, it can be concluded that a host community consists of all those people in the destination, whether they are homogeneous or heterogeneous and regardless of whether the impacts of tourism are beneficial or otherwise.
Tourism is an industry which uses the host community as a resource to sell it as a product, and in the process affects the lives of everyone (Murphy, 1980). The community as a product of amalgam of the destination’s resources. As such the tourism industry is dependent on the host community’s hospitality, and therefore it should be developed according to the community’s needs to desires. Before host communities begin development of tourism resources, it is imperative to gain an understanding of host’s opinions regarding development. Tourism development in a community is not simply a matter of matching product supply with tourist demand, local acceptability must also be considered ( Menning, 1995). Moreover, it is the host community to who has a voice in concluding which tourism impacts are acceptable and which impacts are problems.
However, the host is community is often the last to be notified of tourism development (Thyne and Lawson,2001) and quite often they are not given a chance or encouraged to give their opinioin on tourism issues.
2.4 Relationship Between Host Community and Guest
A good relationship between local hosts and tourist is essential for the long term development of tourism destination. ( Ap and Crompton, 1998). The relationship between host community and tourists is mainly affected by the socio-cultural impacts that are caused due to tourism development (Smith, 1995). The variation in the relationship between hosts and tourists depends on the level to which the benefits of tourism are perceived to exceed costs ( Faulkner and Tideswell 1997). In other words, this mean that if the tourism industry brings in benefit rather than cost to the host community, the relationship between both parties would be much more stronger. Smith (1989) conclude that contacts between tourist and host community if different cultural background take the form of direct face to face encounters between tourists and host of different cultural groups. The interaction between hosts and international guests raises another issue linked to cultural tolerance. As argued by Bochner (1982), the mutual understanding between cultures can create an opportunity for acquaintance leading towards enhanced understanding and tolerance and, consequently, reduce prejudice, conflict and tension between hosts and tourists.This type of contact is experienced by tourists when they travel from home culture to a host culture by hosts when they serve tourists from a foreign culture. That is, both tourist and the host community participate in exploring each other’s culture. Tourist exploring the host culture by learning and exploring it and on the other hand the host community is interacting with tourists, who are of foreign cultures.
2.5 Host community perception towards tourism development
Research has been conducted for the convenience of tourists, while local community perceptions and attitudes towards the industry have been given less of a priority (Murphy 1985). Butler (1980) claimed that there is a correlation between the development of tourism and the attitude of the domestic people towards the tourists. The domestic people show a very positive attitude towards the increasing number of tourists in the region at the beginning because they have high expectations from the tourist in long term basis. However this positive attitude is gradually replaced by the negative attitude as the time passes. Local residents’ perceptions are strongly influenced by the benefits and costs of tourism development. Those who received benefit from tourism stated that they are dependent on tourism, but the case was contrary for those who received nothing
For instance, destination communities have been inconvenienced by congestion and some other negative impacts brought by tourism (Brunt and Courtney 1999). Any impacts from tourism causing annoyance or anger in the host community may lead to problems for the long-term development of the industry. Therefore, Murphy (1985: 133) argued ‘if tourism is to merit its pseudonym of being “the hospitality industry”, it must look beyond its own doors and employees to consider the social and cultural impacts it is having on the host community at large’. Studying host community attitudes and the antecedents of resident reaction can help both residents and planners (Williams and Lawson 2001).Williams and Lawson argued that it was possible to select those developments that can minimize negative impacts and maximize support for the industry. By doing so, on one hand the quality of life of residents can be maintained or enhanced; and, on the other hand, the negative impacts of tourism in the community will be reduced.
2.6 Tourism Impacts
Researchers in the early years of the twentyfirst century list an impressive range of both positive and negative impacts on the host community as a result of tourism development (Fredline and Faulkner, 2000; Upchurch and Teivane, 2000; Gursoy et al., 2002; Besculides
et al., 2002) The study of impacts from tourism on local communities takes in a range of literature that includes both the positive and negative effects of hosting tourists to a community. Andereck and Vogt (2000) point out that residents of a tourist community differ with respect to the impacts resulting from tourism development. However, researchers agree that a necessary condition of successful tourism development strategy is the inclusion of residents of the entire community if tourism investment is to yield substantial returns (Allen et al., 1988, 1993; Jurowski & Uysal, 1997; Long et al ., 1990; Snepenger & Johnson, 1991).
2.6.1 Socio-cultural Impacts
Tourism is a socio-cultural event for both the guest and host (Murphy, 1985) and the contact between host and tourists can be beneficial or detrimental to the host community depending upon the difference in cultures and the nature of the contact .Tourism development also affects the social, cultural and environmental aspects within a destination. Socio-cultural impacts are concerned with the “ways in which tourism is contributing to changes in value systems, individual behaviour, family relationships, collective lifestyles, moral conduct, creative expressions, traditional ceremonies and community organization” (Pizam & Milman, 1984, cited in Haralambopoulos & Pizam, 1996, p.503).
Host community has always been viewed as victims having to accept the social and cultural changes that are brought by tourism development (Sharpley and Telfer, 2002), while guest who imposes their own values on the host communities are viewed as the villain.
Socio-cultural aspects within a destination may be positively affected through increased tourism Research (Ap & Crompton, 1998; Easterling, 2004) suggests that tourism brings an increased understanding of other cultures, and strengthens the cultural identity of the host destination and increases community pride.
Furthermore, tourism development increases and promotes cultural exchange between tourists and residents. Tourism can also be a force to preserve and revitalize the cultural identity and traditional practices of host communities and act as a source of income to protect heritage sites (Easterling, 2004). Tourism on the socio-cultural aspects can contribute to the revitalisation of arts, crafts and local culture and to the realization of cultural identity and heritage. In order to attract more tourists, architectural and historical sites are restored and protected (Inskeep, 1991).
According to a study by Isik (2005) in Denmark, it was common that local people are not happy because tourism narrowed their alternatives of life, they do not have jobs, for children and the youth there are no activities for fun, no cinemas and entertainment. Life is too monotonous. Many years ago, citizens were very happy; there was a perfect friendship between the neighbors but now they do not even greet each other. However, the same study was carried out in GüzelçamlÄ± in Turkey reveals that hosts are very happy with tourists and every summer they organize festivals to get more tourists
From a cultural perspective, tourism development and the appearance of tourists could cause a series of changes in host communities, such as increased price and identity, cohesion, exchange of ideas and increased knowledge about cultures ( Stein & Anderson 1999). In other word, meaning that the host community will gain in about the tourist culture, helping them to expand their knowledge. Other changes included assimilation, conflict and xenophobia as well as artificial reconstructio (Besculides, Lee & McCormick 2002). Relevant literature acknowledged that perception of host community on such impacts ambivalent that is they have a feeling of both hate and love towards changes occurring with the tourism development. To others, the cultural changes caused by tourism “threatens to destroy traditional cultures and societies” (Brunt & Courtney 199, p 495) and to others it represented ” an opportunity for peace, understanding and greater knowledge” ( Brunt & Courtney 1999, p.495).With an expansion in the international tourism, the contact between guest and host would increased automatically. Such an increase would deepen the cultural impacts of tourism on host communities. In an extreme situation, the host communities could become culturally dependent on the tourism generating country ( Sharpley 1994).
2.7 Factors Influencing Host community perception towards tourism development
Tourism development does not only generate benefits, but it also imposes costs ( Jafari, 2001). By evaluating these benefits and costs, host community develop their perception toward tourism development. However, previous research indicates that the development of locals host’s attitudes toward tourism is not determined by those perceived benefits and costs but is modified by various moderating variables ( Lankford, 1994). Those tested variables are classified as the intrinsic dimension which includes resident’s socio-cultural economic and demographic attributes , but the results are mixed.