1 68497 ., RETURN TO BANt~ ADMIN. & "" POLICY FILES REVIEW .QE ~ SOCIOLOO:ICAL LITERATURE ON TOURISM Raymond Noronha November 4, 1976 . SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS This report reviews the sociological literature on tourism. Sociological interest in tourism is a recent development and, therefore, sociological insights have been supplemented by reference, albeit partial, to the literature of other disciplines - mainly economics, geography, planning, and administration. A further reason why it is neoessary to refer to the literature of other social disciplines is that fac~ that tourism is multi-sectoral and requires a multi-disciplinary approaoh. For the sake of convenience, however, summaries of the literature that are annexed to this report have been divided: summaries of sociological literature are to be found in Annex I; those of other disciplines, in Annex II. The last Annex also contains a sampling of Bank tourism sector surveys and project appraisal reports in order to indicate the concerns of the Bank. The division of chapter topics follo-ws, as far as possible, those suggested by the Bank for the Seminar. ii. fjOst taxonomies of tourists are limited by the fact that they are designed to serve a specific purpose: the particular study at hand. Thus for the travel agent the tourist is one category of persons; for the SOCiologist, another. Further, the sub-categories in every taxonomy overlap; they are not discrete classifications. More importantly, most taxonomies neglect to include perceptions held by a host population as to who is, and is not, a tourist. Local populations draw clear distinctions between who are members of· the community and who are lI outsiders". Outsiders include individuals who may be fellow-nationals. Even among outsiders a further distinction is drawn: between those who visited the area at the earliest stages of tourism development (am may continue to reside in the destination area) and those who pass through later, with increasing tourism. The latter group are generally stereotyped, though the host population at times distinguishes between imputed national characteristics of visitors. - ii - Tourism does not appear to increase local awareness of tourist racial characteristics. What seems to happen is that where there are existing socioeconomic patterns of dominance by one racial group, tourists belonging to the dominant racial group fit into the existing patterns. Mass tourism is often viewed as a threat locally because increasing numbers of tourists widen the social distance between tourist and host. iii. The factors in a destination area deemed necessary for tourism are climate, the people, political stability, physical and cultural features. Probably the only touristic universal here is the attitude of the host population to visitors. Curiosly enough few writers, and these are economists, refer to an important resource for a developing country seeking to increase tourism: administrative capGlllty.This "resource" becomes even more important with the institutionalization in the literature of tourism, and is a lacuna/that sociologists must attempt to remedy in future studies. Although a destination area may have all the factors necessary for tourism it is possible that tourism may, at most, playa negligible role in the country's economy. I'his is largely because the IIdemand.n side of tourism is subject to factors beyond local control. Here it may be worthwhile to point out that countries which are far from areas from which tourists emanate and have only physical attractions should consider whether it is at all economic to develop tourism. i v. An aspect of crucial importance in evaluating the social impact of tourism is the nature and depth of the lIencounter" between tourist and host. It is this meeting which determines whether there will be a free exchange of ideas and the consequent growth of understanding among peoples from different geographical areas and cultures. It is necessary to draw a distinction between the "institutionalized ll and the non-institutionalized" tOUJ'iet. The former is less - iii - willing to give up his familiar surroundings; his patterns of travel, routes, and times of travel are routinized; the facilities he avails himself of are standardized to combine a maximum of nonnal comfort with an image of fake- aut~entic color of the destination area. On the other hand, the non- v institutionalized tourist is more willing to exchange the strange for the familiar; to go out of his everyday living patterns to seek out, and learn about the unfamiliar culture and people. Unfortunately, most of the literature examines the encounter between institutionalized tourist and host. Based on this literature the following conclusions about institutionalized tourism can be drawn: (i) The tourist generally meets members of the host population in formal roles. (ii) These economic hosts are drawn from the lower/strata of the local population. (iii) The tourist is led to believe that his carefully organized tour conducts him to all the important events and sights in the destination area. (iv) The resultant knowledge is a weak basis for understanding another people, and is more likely to lead to misunderstanding and confirm prejudice. Contact between host and tourist is at its lowest when IItotal tourism" pervades the destination area: Then 11\ from the moment the tourist lands he isAthe hands (and very rarely out of sight) of the tour arrangers who link up hotel accommodation, transport, and sight-seeing. The whole tour, then, is objectively an exercise in futility with a subjective maximum of illusion. Here again, there is need for more evidence about non-institutionalized tourists: who they are, how they arrange tours, who they meet, where they stay • what they learn. v. Particularly in institutionalized tourism the staging of events and places is important. Geographers have investigated this. Sociologists do not think that place is as important as human actors. And yet it should be realized that place does influence behavior. Here is another area where more - iv - sociological research is required. vi. An individual who plays an important role in mediating between host and tourist is the "culture broker". At the earliest stages of tourism development in a destination area, the culture broker is the initiator of change. However, this individual, who can be seen in the literature in a variety of roles, seems to wane in importance as tourism develops and reaches the stage of institutionalization. There is little evidence which will inform the student of tourism whether the role of the culture broker is transmuted; or whether he is replaced by organised agencies. Hore research is required in this area. vii. An analysis of host perceptions of tourism through each stage of development show changing valuations of tourism -- from welComing tourism to annoyance and antipathy. At some stage in tourism development, increaSing numbers of tourists are viewed as a threat to the way of life in the destination area; increasing resentment is the local expression of the perceived threat. But of tourists it is not nU1Jlbers/P§'£. ~ that are the cause: An examination of the literature shows that this resentment grows generally because with institutionalized tourism the population in the destination area no longer controls tourism, is not consulted, and is treated as mere agents of decision makers who reside outside the destination area. The tourist is merely the focus of resentment. In other cases, as in the Caribbean, the causes of resentment lie in the socioeconomic and cultural history of the area. Here again the tourist is the focus. Where there is local expression of resentment against tourists or tourism, it is verbalized by the elite (who usually do not come into contact with the institutionalized tourist) and is directed either against "mass II tourism or against It long-haired hippies". The reason for criticism of the former type appears to be the social distance that it creates and the fact that the forces of tourism demand lie beyong host population control. The attitude against the "hippie" can be - v - explained by referenoe to the fact that the IIhippie" is an ambivalent symbol for developing nations who are attempting to imbue their populations with the so-oalled IIProtestant ethio ll whioh allegedly Ushered ' Western nations into modernization. However, two points of importanoe should be noted: First, where there have been surveys of looal attitudes towards tourism, the vast majority have wanted more tourism and tourists. Seoond, despite institutionalization, some peoples - the Balinese, the J.1aoris, the oitizens of Leavenworth, are examples, have been unaffeoted and show no resentment. The reasons for this are the subjeot of hypotheses later. viii. The final question in the enoounter between tourist and host is whether the encounter results in a transfer of tourist values to the hosts. The term "demonstration effeot" whioh is used to express this transfer has been invariably suggested as a definite oonsequenoe, without adequate data to -!::lack up such a hypothesis. With increasing evidence now it is obvious that as far as values are ooncerned, tourism does not directly influence local values. There must be a mediating agent - a local resident. or a national lea.der- who ohannels the ideas that tourists portray. On this subjeot, however, there are two further questions which have reoeived scant attention: (i) Do values really ohange, or is it that human groups re-assess the methods by whioh they oan attain values1 (ii) Assuming that there is, for the sake of argument, a ohange in value systems. then are these changes desired by, are they not goals of, the host population? 1x. In the realm of the socioeconomic impaot of tourism, the first aspect dealt with is employment. Most of the information here, with the exception of employment in arts and crafts, oovers hotel employment. Briefly, the general findings are: (i) At the early stages of tourism developnent, hotels are small (generally family-owned and staffed) and the employees are from the host population. - vi - As the numbers of tourists grow, the hotels are increasingly owned by non-residents; the host population staffs the lower leveJ.S; expatriates, the managerial positions. (ii) E"t::n at the lower level, the evidence of comparative wage scales in the hotel industry versus other sectors of the econOl1\V is mixed - in some cases, as much as seven times w.h.at agriculturis'ts earn; in others, hotel wages stand at the lowest level. It would appear that hotel wagea a:re low in comparison with wag3S in other sectors wnere the destination area is relatively developed, economically_ (iii) It is not certain whether hotel employment diverts employees from other sectors, or whether hotel employees are, on the average, better educated than most of their fellow nationals. Here again, the evidence does not permit of definite conclusions. (iv) On 'the basis of the slim ;t..nf'ormation available, it could be said tnat in the earliest stages of tourism development mos't of the employees in hotels come from areas proWimate to the hotels. However, the growing popularity of tourism encourages more persons to come into the destination area in search of employment - an estimate is i., persons for each available job. (v) 0n1.y one study -- in Fiji -- shows that employment in hotels reflects national patterns of socioeconomic dominance and ethnic attitudes both with regard to the type and level of employment. In the Gambia, skewed distributiOns of different ethnic group representations can be explained by the proximity of one ethnic group to the hOl-els. ( vi) The few 8tudies available indicate that management in hotels tends to denigrate the abilities of lower staff, and to dismiss the importance of local CUlture. This evidence exists in areas where the management is both expatriate and g 'rOl"l 1:0 of a different ethnic lsi 1lI!II kat from employees. There is no evidence of rel.a.tions between management and lower staff ....... from the same nation ana culture - a l.a.cuna in the literature that ought to be remedied. Qvii} In other sectors -- for instance, the construction industry, agriculture, business - most 01' the information on the soci08Conomic impact of tourism is in the nature of "guesstima"esII , - vii - with the exception of one study. That study shows that tourism not only strengthened trad1tional occupations but also led to the diversification of occupations. l viii) Tourism. particul.a:rly institutionalized tourism. requires adjustments to be made in the nature and rhythm of work. Further, since tourism is generally a seasonal occupation. the non-tourism months can also be the "hungry" months, especially when tourism is the main economic aotivity of the host population. The increasing dependence on tourism. partioularly with institutionalization. can result in hannful social oonsequences when there are sudden shifts in demand.. (ix) Although there may be adjustments in the r.a.tu:r'e and methods 01' work. it is not certain whether this also results in changes in social responsibility among members of the host population. There is. in fact, no stuay Which evaluates the impact of migration, or of employment in the tourism industry, on the social structure, the 1'amily, or kin. It is o~ten said that one of the effects of tourism is to transfer ownership of lar~ in the destination area out of the hands of former resident owners. lmplicit 1n this statement is the view that the local residents are fraudulently deprived 01' their lands. There is no clear evidence for this view at all. In fact. an examination of the process shows that at the ini.tial stages 01 tourism developnent it is local owners who profit (by sale or diversification of lands) frOli& lands previously thought to be of little value. La'\..er, however. the local or national elite enters the picture and land. speculation is rife at this stage. It is this elite that often combines ~"ith foreign interests to further drive up land prices, and price the local owner out of the market. However. this previous statement. and the fact that there are fraudulent transactions point to the need for careful regulation of land transactions. and to the preservation of continuing rights in land (or in the viii profitable use after transfer) of i:ormer owners. This is particularly important where land, which is acquired or sold, was owned under communal tenure. Usua1~ the net effect of the conflict between traditional and modern tenures is resolved in tavor of the latter. There is no reason why this should be so. One recommendation is for the creation of land boards -- which are fairly successful in Fiji, and are being considered in Truk and British (;olUlllbia. However, the success of these boards is largely dependent on government will, and the ability to resist powerful economic and political interests. These are matters to which sociologists have given little attention. xi. Institutionalized tOUl'ism increases competition for local resources j~ three ways: First, through the use of physical resources and local conSUlller goods by host populai.,ion, totn"ists, and immigrant populations. Second t through competition for employment and increased use of social services by immigrants. Finally, tb+"ough diversion of resources tor .experXtlture on tourism, which might have been more profitably (not only in an economic sense) III spent on other seC1.0rs. Though these are mainly questions that should be answered by economist,s, from the point of view of the SOCiologist local attitudes and perceptions are ini·luenced. by these views of deprivation and sharing,of resources. The answer lies in careful choice of goals, consistent planning aoo execution, and local participation in these processes. What is interesting to note is that these complaints are voiced only at the institutionalized stage of tourism. xii. Tourism does not have a uniform effect on the position of women. The effect varies wi th cultural valuations. Certainly, tourism does tend to allow women greater economic earnings, but this does not necessarily connote greater independence or freedom of decision. xiii. Tourism does appear to decrease out~gration, and increase in-migration. - ix - xiv. Rising nutritional standards appear to be correlated. with increasing tourism. However, the evidence with regard to the impact on health is meagre and mixed. So too is the intormation on other social services - water, electricity, roads • political access. The evidence with regard. to education is. also ir:direct tourism seems to facilitate greater educational achievement, provded that is one of the goals 01' the destination area. While it is certain that some tourists avail themselves of the services of prostitutes, it is not certain whether increases in crime, delinquency, and prostitution can be solely attributed to the advent of tourism in an area. J ourna.1ists, the main protagmdsts of this view, do not clearly answer questions whether increase in ce>ime, for instance ~ can be attributed to improved statistics, or to the W'lux of immigrants in search of jobs with a breakdown of previous methods of control, and who are the main victims of crime. With regard to prostitution, there is no careful assessment of whether it existed. before tOurism, whether it is the monetization of a traditional practice, or whether the growth is attributable to other factors (for example, increased use by local residents and fellow nationals). xv. Tht: final part of the chapter on the socioeconomic im.Jact of tourie:m covers the question of the distribution or renerits. Who gets what? Ar'r3' student of society would deny reality if' he could not see that it is not necessarilY economic rationality that prevails in the growth and development of tourism within a nation. But it is one thing to admit reality, another to suggest that tc'urism freezes the existing socioeconomic strata in the destination area. For this charge to be proved it must be shown that tourism prevents those at the lowest levels of economic strata from opting for any other jobs (presumed to be availaille .I:or them); and that employment in the tourism sector prevents those so employed f'rom improving their status. Another implicit assumption in the argument is that persons x so employed have talents whio:n oould be more suitably be employed. in another sector. There is no evidenoe to pendt of this generalization. Nor is there evidence of tne social impact of the systems of distribution, whether tourism ohanges existing systems of distribution, and what tensions or conflicts result from alterations in the system of distribution and social responsibility, i f any. xvi. This leads to a discussion of the sociocultural impaot of tourism. It is generally aooepted that tourism does assist in the preservation of traditional crafts, some times in their revitalization; and also in the preservation and reoovery of archaeologica.L monuments, and architectural creations. However, it has been suggested that tourism, and especiall;r institutionalized tourism, encourages a bastard species of art: airport art. This is undoubtedly true, but it is not to deny that excellent speoimens of art also flourish; and that the true appreciation of art lies muoh in the eyes of the beholder. In regard to orafts , it has been pointed out that tourism softens the gradual transition to mass produotion by providing traditional craftsmen with an opportunity to produoe traditional oraft,s profitabl;r while pret:aring themselves for the transition. xvii. But there is one area of controversy in the sociocultural realm: it jLS suggested that by placing a monetary value on local arts (particularly dance which may aiso hB. ve a religiOUS connots.tion), tourism debases the event. The event lc)ses its spontaneity, its meaning for the local population is lost, and sometimes the performance for tourists has the degrading implication o:r~asking a host population to portray what they were (really, or in the imaginations of the tour organizer is ) ,L'ather than what tney are. The evidence in support of this is not general. In fa<:t, there are more instances against such interpretations than for them. It:is true tnat a nost population may feel degraded .o,y the lnonetization of its arts, which thereby implioitly ohallenge host population value systems. But the xi causes do not appear to lie in the mere "cOlTlIllercialization" of culture, but elsewhere. xviii. There is now enough evidence to suggest that the develoIEent of touri.sm in a destination area proceecl.S through three stages: from lluiscoveryll, through "local response and 1nitiativell , to "institut.iona11zation". The difference between the second and thil'd stages is not a mere matter of numbers of tourists. It appears to lie in that the second stage is more pecul1arl,y characterized. by local ownership, and absence of standardization, of local. facilities; the use prilIIaril,y of local resources; and, most importantly, local decision-making and control of tourism. At each stage the contact between tourist and host takes on increasing impersonality - from face-to-face contacts at stages one and two, to intermediate contacts at stage three. The types of tourists visiting the area also differ. xix. Institutionalized tourism has the greatest impact on the host population ~rpespective of whether the tourists share the same cultural background as the hosts, or not. Institutiona1ized tourism requires both an economic and political decision: a conscious decision that tourists should be encouraged to come, or arl~ visiting a destina1;.ion area, in increasing numbers; and that the local authorities, entrepreneurs. and resources are incapable 01' handling the tourists satisfactorily. This transition has economic , political, and. social consequences which. briefly, are: (i) loss of local autonomy and control of tourism develoIEent; (ii) transfer of power to wider political authorities there-qy converting local authorities into functionaries and agents; (iii) star:dardization of goods, services, tourism facilities, and itineraries; (iv) increasing impersonality of relations combined with for.ma.liza'tion of roles; and (v) increasing dependence of the host population on groups, individuals, and factors beyond local control. Insi..itutionalized tourism involves a qualitative, not merely a quantitatiV'fl, change in the nature of tourism in the destination area. It is ins~1'tutionalizea tourism, xii often equated with "mass" tourism, tnat most arouses local fears and resentment. xx.. But even the most casual observer will notice that the impact 01 tourism differs with destination areas - whether they be at similar or different stages of tow'ism development. This is not the result of the destination area being on an island, or on a continent; nor is it a matter of mere numbers of tourists in relation to the total host population in the destination area. Inductive inferel'lCeS from the .literature lead to the hypotheses that there are three reasons why the deleterious impact of tourism, if any, is muted, and can be obviated totally even at the tlinstitutionalized" stage of tourism. These reasons are: (i) 'l'he llexibility and differentiation of organisations ana associations in the destinal..ion area which are related to the type of tourism prevalent; (ii) thE: Quality uf meanings for touristic events sucn that the event has one meanil'lg for t.ne host population ancl. another for tourists, and the two meanings are independent; and (iii) purposive planning - not necessarily for tourism alone with local participation. These hypothesas deserve further verification. xxi. Nost authors point out the need for planning with local participation. The examples where this nas actually occurred are few, and limited to developed na tions • This does not, however, mean that it is impossible where the vast majority of the host population in a destinai..ion area are illiterate, or dispersed andl..he means of' communication limited! It may take time; but careful planning can resolve participation and the methods by which it can be attained. It i~ here tha~ sociologists have a role to play in defining the role and scope of traditional organisations and leadership, and the methods by which decisions are arrived at. Plarming a.lso involves the choice of social indices t on which veI7' little work has been done by sociologists in the field of tourism; it involves an assessment of the differential social impact of alternative Il.l8thods of economic xiii development, and of alternati ve types of tourism development (when tourism has been selected as the method of economic development). Sociologists should also concern themselves with the question of backward linkages and assist in determining the type of tourism which a country should foster. The question of the type of tourismleaus to the final question about the pace of tourism development. XXii. In some cases the literature suggests that it is the pace of tourism development tnat has caused problems - too rapid, unplanned development. This could be translated to mean that the absorptive capacity (or "carrying capacity") 01 the destination area was inadequate to meet demand. In the first place, this is not strictly accurate since, as pointed out earlier, the e of tourism also has a crucial impact on destination area problems. Assuming, however, that absorptive capacity is important, it should be realized that this "capacityll var:i.es wi th the type of tourism. Further, it has been suggested that it would be a useful exercise to estimate absorptive capacity only i f tourism were the sole economic base for, otherwise, so many other factors would be involved - for instance, socioeconomic differences b~tween tourist and hast, the distribution o~ benefits. questions of control of' investment and management of tourism faCilities, type and location of visitor accommodation. However, it is believed that it would be useful to estimate the total number of visitors at any one point in time during the year in relation to the type or tourists and the extent of local skills and facilities. This exercise still awaits the intrepid sociologist. xxiii. The final chapter examines a few key issues discussed in previous chapters, ennumerates some areas deserving of further investigation, and makes some recommendations regarding the role of sociologists in the work of the Tourism Projects Department of the Bank. Implicit in the recommendations is the view tlu:Lt ~he questions which sociologists are deemed capable of answering, whether in xiv sector burveys, project work, or supervision, are questions which the Bank should raise and answer. xxi v. The Bank, and other international organisationa t have a vital role to play in the employment oy developing nations of tourism as a technique of economic developnent. If this role is played wisely, the ideals of tourism can be attained while at the same time promoting economic and social development with equity. I. INTRODUCTION 11 1.00 Sociologists have recently turned their attention to the analysis of tourism. The earliest article on the subject dates back a little over twelve years. And it :is only in the last thrpe years that there is evidence of academic recognltion of the importance of tourism as a subject of study. 1 .01. It is difficult, to explain this belated interest, particularly since tourism deals with social change and developing cOUDtries -- both major topics of sociolo~ical analysis over the past two decades. Several explanations comp to mind: Possibly, the fact that the sociologist in a tourist area is himself a "tourist" '2/ has hJindpd him to the importance of the phenomenon. It has also been suggested- that since "leisure" had hitherto been treated as a residual category of human ACt:iv:i ty there W8.S minjrnal academic interest in the subject. Another possi.ble explanation could be the popular equation of tourism with hotels, catering, night clubE, amI enlf courses -- elements associated with hotel training schools, not academic usua11 y objects of "sedaus "/ study. Whatever the reason for past neglect, socioJ.opjcal analysis of tourism is now coming into its own. 1 .O? Some evidence of this growing interest is to be found in the Ii i.erature summari 7,"'r in the Annexes to this review. The numbers of symposia now being held on the "impact of tourism" extend beyond the confines of the travel industry. It is now a "respectable" subject for academia -- the papers read at symposj a organj zed at two Annual Meetings of the American Anthropological Association; the articles and dissertations, to mention a few, are sufficient indication of this. 1 ~OJ. But the intermj ttent and belated interest on the part of sociologjsts l7 Throughout this report the terms "sociologists" /"so ciological" will :include "anthropologit;ts"/"anthropological". '2/ See S. Perker. The sociology of leisure: progress and problems, The 12!itish Journal £! Sociology, 1975, 26, 91 - 101. ----~----------~-~- -----.;..------ -2- has resulted in the failure to develop any accepted methodology for the analysis of the growth and impact of tourism. There has been little collection of "hard" data. Even when the data have been available" the goals of theory and the constraints of an academic audience have usually diminished their value. Few have broken free. However, deep! te these limitations there are numerous valuable insights. But these insights need to be supplemented with data from the other s()cial disciplines: economics" geography" planning, and administration in particular. 1 .O)~. There is another reason why the so£iological literature requires to be supplemented by an analysis, however partial, of the findings of the other social diGciplines: Tourism is multi-sectoral; it touches on various aspects of human life, it ('ut.s Hcross both the rural and urban sectors, it affects values, 8mp]cy~0nt, social organisation, the arts and crafts, and contact between people. As A_ means of development there is an economic focus, which nevertheless has repercuSGi ons on the social, and the political. Therefore, it would be invalid, ana indeed impossible, to assess the impact on groups without also considering the jnterconnections of the myriad facets of human life. In this instance, the reference to literature other than sociological, serves to indicate areas of in'~ prest and concern of non-sociological disciplines. It supplements, albeit skd.chHy, the "rork of other students of society, who (if ten have realized the importance of tourism before SOCiologists. Again, SOCiologists tend to eeneralize from microstudjes; other disciplines, particularly economics, pursue macrostud:i es, and thcm particularize. Both approaches are essential to an unders bmding of tour:ism. In the ensuing discussion of the literature, the insjehts of all these social disciplines will be employed. For the convf'nience of the reader, however, a distinction has been dra"m in the Annexes b,:;twppn the sociologica] literature, and that of the other diSCiplines. The former is to be found in Annex I, the latter, in Annex II. .3 1.05. Finl'1.lly, Annex II also conta1.ns some examples of Bank sector surveys and project, RpfJr'a:tsal reports (in so far as these deal with the IIsocial" aspects of tourism) jn order to indicate some of the concerns of the Bank. It mould be noten that theSE! interests have widened, and the reports referred to are not to be taken as representative of present concerns. Obviously, the sponsoring of u Seminar if:: adequate evidence of continuing Bank concern about the "social" impact of tourism projects. been 1.06. The "I.opics LUscussed in the chapters that follow have/grouped together in the manner suggested by the Bank for the Seminar, as far as has been porlsjble. Undoubtedly, this results in some degree of repetition, and overlappinp;. However, repetition, in this relatively uncharted area of social impacts, may serve the desirfible end of focussing attention on neglflcted aspects of an important phenomenon. At the outset, that rather nebulous and chameleon- ljke indjvidual, the "touris;t" is examined. Thereafter, the literature on touristic "resources" 1S surveyed. The next four chapters cover the "encount.er" bet.wcpn tourist and ho::;t and the results of this encounter and of tourism in c;enerul. In chapt.er VII, "Development and Planning" there is also an attempt to set out, the broad staees of tourism development and the implications of this dRvelopment both for the local population and the tourist. The last chapter brings tog~ther the disparate findings with a view to discover, if possible, "touristic universals"; to point t.o further fireas of research and to deduce the pracUcal jmpl:i efl.tions of the generalizRtions with particular reference to the needs and gORls of the Bank. It should be emphasized that the division of topics Rno chr.pters is for a.D81ytical convenience only. II. WHO IS A "TOURIST"? 2.00. The term. "tourist" has taken on a complexity in the literature rivalling that 0 f the cln:1sic "man in the street", the "average man": Who he is varies with the purpose of the study, the geographic location of the tourist, and the reaGon why he i3 in that place. For example, to the travel industry the tourist is one kind of animal (the "potential traveller ll ) ; to the host, another (the "for-ei.gnp!," who temporarily uses local resources). This complexity is understandable since '''0 are dee.ling with man. The reasons why a person tr:wc:ls span the entir0 range of human motivations: curiosity and sad ::lbi uty; mRterial and spiritual needs; the intellectual ann the biological. Whnt is more, each journey is usually undertaken for a combination of reasons. That is why jt is so difficult to classify tourists under convenient labels. Tourists 1'lre usually cl~ssified under their major apparent purpose. Wl'lo is a tourist? 2.01. ~ohen (197h) has recently attempted to isolate the set of attributes that chnrnctel'ize a tourist. He defines a tourist as "a voluntaI".r, temporary traveJ leI', travell1ng j n the expectation of pleasure from the novelty and change ~xper-i enced on a relaH vely long and non-recurrent round-trip". (1971-i: 533) Coben bel:ieves that the definitional components can then bo placed on a contJnUUTIl t.o distinguish hetween various sub-types with increasing (or decreAsing) touristic elements. Take for example, "novelty and change" (the pllIJ)o::;c of the trip). Here, Cohen points out 'one refers to institutonaHzed f'Xpl~ctnt.i ons (simply, what society considers one should expect), not the netun:. expeM ence by the traveller himself; and to the behavior which should corrr::Jponri to such expectations. He, therefore, dist.inguishes between 5 toud sm proper and other forms of "partial tourism": thermalists, students, pil,'~rim1::, ald.-country visitors, conventioners, business-travellers, tourist- employees, and officiAl sightseers. In the category of "partial tourism", toud_sm is i.ncidental to, and not the main overt purpose of, the trip. Further, the elemen ts of novelty and change enable Cohen to draw a distinction betv-!een the sightseer and the vacatjoner. 2.02. Many will take issue with Cohen's definition, and its constituent clements. That he expects. His major aim is to turn attention away from 1.11 overconcentration on ''mass tourism" to determne the elenents or tourism and to rp-AXRminc the core elements of tMs phenomenon. Corlen also admits th::1.t his in I'l first step tOWArds attaining conceptual clarity about tourism in :i L~; Ulany forms. ? .C)). The mm in this [;ection is to set out the various typologies of tourists "rith t.bp underlying caution that there can be as many typologies as purposes for whieh they are constructed. Fortunately, the literature does not contain ml'my examples of typologies. ?~))I. Tourist typoloe::ies have also been one of Cohen's mlrin concerns (1972a, 1nJ). He dt vi.de:J tourist.s into four rnain types on the basis of their will:ingness to 1/ (,xch[\nl~e fRmiliar surroundings for the strange:- (1) the organized mass tourist; (?) VIP j ndi vidual mass tourist; (J) the explorer; and (4) the drifter. The fi r':::t :i s the: least wi llin G to ei ve up the environment that reminds him of, w the 1/ - It 'i s reported that Cohen is currently working on a book on tourism to be pntit.lerl., "strcmgeness and familiarity: The varieties of travelJing experience". Soc Curr~nt Anthropolof~Y, March 1976, .l1., h9. 6 style of l i fe to which he is accustomed in, his country of origin; the drifter jmmeY'S(>s hjmself almost totally in the host country and its ways. A further ~rit(?rion is the dRgrec of "insitutionalization", that in routinization of patteens of trl'lvel, routes, established agencies, and times. The organi7.ed mass tourist and tlle inctj vid1lR.l masS tourist are institutionalized; the explorer and the drifter arc noninstitutionelized. ''Mass'', therefore, refers both to nUlllhers and orgtmhl1tion (see 111so Pi-Sunyer, 1971,). Both Cohen and l"orster (1961,) see the "explorer" as I't trail blazer for the institutionalized tourist, pointine the way to new J,laces 1,fhich then form tourist sites for the mass tourist. 2. In hie later article, Cohen has second thoughts about the "drifter": no longpr·th p genuine indjviduoJist, a rebel a.gainst the phenomenon of mass tourism, a cld Id ot' the affluent 20th Century, but one who has succumbed to :insti tu t j onRlization. The only difference between the mass tourist and the dr.; ft0r -is how each vi e\,fS thl') host society. The former sees it through the llubbl f'; or h:i S R.i rconditioned room; the latter, "from the dustbin". According to Gohen there are "full-time" and "part-time" drifters, and each of these IJypcs (~an he imm.rd- Or outward-oriented. ?o6. The second example of a tourist typology is that of Nunez (n.d.). Nunez SUG~f;Gt:.:; [1 tRxonomy of "ethnic" and environmental tourism; internal and intc'rnfl.ti ann] tourism; "packaged" and programmed tourism and inrli vidual tau rj sm; rOGort tourism nnd off -the-beaten-track tourism; religj ous and seculn r t01l1'i~m; rect'eational and educational/cultural tourism. It "(orill be zed that the tRxonomy is not discrete. Nunez acimi ts that it j s t,f'l'lfAi.ive rmd overlappine. This is so b8cause tourism studies are at too early a stl1E;e to attempt deftnjtive taxonom:i es. 7 1/ ?07. - ~rrlith (n.d.)- has suegested a third taxonomy. "ld ::mrcd mobility" shr: divides tourism into five types: Based on the kinds of (1) Ethnic tourism -- visits t~J F'xotic peoples; (2) Cultural tourism -- involvement with people ';lith c:ifferent life styles, primarily concerninr, onesself with behavior; (3) JIjstorj~al tourism -- "the Museum-Cathedral circuit', stressing the past; (h) Env] ronmental tourism -- stres place; and (5) Recreational tourism -- where destinaUon activi ties cover sport and sun. McKean (1974) suggests th.'1t 1! distinction should be drawn between "cultural" and "ethnic" tourism. In tbe former, one is concerned wi th the appreCiation of life-styles (dance, rnJieion, Rrt, musjc); in the latter, with exotic people. ?OR. Another truconomy is that constructed by Nolan (1975). He interviewed hous~'hold membf!rs vIho had journeyed more than 100 miles and spent at least tl-m ni ght::; 1'.1"".1 from home. His typology is based on frequency of travel and . "trQvel style" (type of movement). There are four types based on the frequency of trnvcl: (1) Limited travellers -- who generally travel to fulfi.l an oblje;.,tion or out of ner:essity; (2) Occasional travellers this group, intermeni at,; between t}18 former and the next category, often mix obligatj on wit,h rec r'('![ltj on and are less likely to truce vacations. If they do take a vacation it :i s con::;) dered the hi ghlight of their lives. (J) Regular travellers. This er011}J tenrls to travel often, but usually to the same place. (h) Extensive traveIl.ers vIho genuinely enjoy travel and usually manage to convert their travel tiD cconomje eain (for example, by 18cturing on their trips). Nolan arrives at five typCG of travel style, based on different orientations towards the trip with rc:p,l'lrri to destination, interest in the destination, adventurousness, and v. Gmj Ul. Introcfuction. Tn V.Smith (Ed.). Hosts and Guests. The anthropology 0Ll,ourism. Unpublished Mss., n.d. R Mrl oRfj ni teness of purpos". The five types are: (1) Rapid movement -- reaching the dcs1.i nRtion as quic'kly as possible, most characteristic of limited tr.'l'T';11er:o, alt:,hou~h some reGUle.r travRllers also fell within this cate~ory. (? ) Fast-Vlced touring -- a closely planned itinerary where reaching the rJ.p::;tinntion is more importMt than the journey. These trips could be guided or s()IJ'-structured. Occasional and regular travellers are found in this cntq~ory. (J) Leisurely movement -- a loosely stnotilred -itinerary, with the jOllrn(",Y nnd destjnation aS3urning equal importance. All types of travellers werr found :in thjs cnte~or.r, except the limited traveller. (4) Exploratory tJ'.1vcl --- the· destinati on is the main object here. There is little advaJ1ce !Jlnnn:ing. This travel stylI" is eenerally characteristic of only the extensive trnvelJer. (S) Multi-purpcse, nrulti-destinational travel -- Here, unlike the former cnteeory, the trip is carefully planned. There is a great deal of !1dVRnr'''' research Rhout the destinations. This style is to be found only runone exton:>} v(: tl'Rvcllers. Since most of the travel styles are to be found in all typPP, of trRveJJers, Nolan concludes that under a given set of circumstances trnv0.l style may be a rnore important index of travel behavior than the frequency of trove1. 2 .09. A final example of typologies is the research conducted by Bennetts and .._ Ii' 11 Burak for Air Canada. This research was specifica~ directed to discovering the types of vacations that potential travellers desired. Questionnaires were constructed to determine life styles, activities desired on a vacation, the kinds of vacation experiences that the respondents wanted. Two cluster analyses ifA. Bennetts and P. Burak. Designing products for the leisure travel market from market definition to product information, 1975. In The Travel Research Association. ~ Imt!.ct .2£ Tourism. Sa1tL'ake City, Utah: The Travel Research Association, 1976, 153 - 162. - 9 - were conducted on the same respondent base of ) ,000 adults. The first cluster related to general life styles and attitudes towards different kinds of vacation experiences. The second, related to the respondents' description of their ideal vacation. There were four different groups of people in the first cluster: (1) Extravagant consumers -- predominantly female. of all ages, with above median incomes; for them. !Ian appealing vacation would emphasize luxury. service, pampering and clothes in places like Europe, Hawaii a!d the Caribbean." (2) Nature people -- generally young, unmarried, and well-educated; looking for new and different places, and willing to see them without much concern about usual comforts. () Playsters - primarily young males involved in the active pursuit of sensual pleasure; desiring an inexpensive, s'Wingirg" modern and active vacation with "no social values other than fun". (4) Cautious homebodies - generally older, less affluent. less well-educated, and more from rural areas. They emphasize safety, security, a predictable environment and do not seek new experiences. The four groups constituted 18, 20, 23, and 39 percent, respectively, of the population sampled. The second cluster produced six distinct types of groupings: (1) Peace and quiet -- generally middle-aged, less than average IIdiscretionary income". (2)Aesthetic appreciation -- appeals mainly to the well-educated and those in professional and managerial positions. (3) Hot Winter -- generally appeals to luxury and fun seekers. (4) Grand hotel - appeals to luxury and fun seekers with higher incomes. <.5) Inexpensively active -- appeals mostly to males and yow.g people. (6) Relatives and friends -- appeals mainly to the older vacationers who are not well-educated and have modest incomes. It should be noted that when all the factors were taken together, the likelihood of any one among these types taking a vacation in any one year was not more than 35 percent of the total number of adult Canadians. 2.10. It is unnecessa.ry to multiply examples of typologies. Suffice it to say - 10 - , that even a cursory examination of the typologies mentioned above evidences their tentati va and non-discrete nature. Further ~ they are generally constrained by the purpose for which they were constructed. Again~ the typologies so far reproduced do not include local (host) perceptions of who is~ or is not, a tourist. These will now be discussed. 2.11. The literature on local perceptions permits tm following conclusions: First ~ members of the host population usually distinguish between persons who are members of their own group (who, therefore, share their values and concerns) and "outsiders II" (see Rei ter ~ 1974). Second~ persons are corusidered outsiders even if they are fellow nationals (Nunez, 1963; Friedl~ 196.3; Fukunaga" n.d.; Hugill~ 1975:; Packer, 1974; I.bxey, 1976). ENen non-national resident immigrants are usually treated as outsiders (Packer, 1974) although in time) ,they III83'" come to be accepted as members of the community (Moore, 1970; Pi-S\Ulyer~ 1974; Evans~ 1976). Third, the host population draws a distinction among foreigners who are tourists and those who Sl"e not. Tourists are foreigners who, visiting the area temporarily, use local resources for which they are believed to make an adequate or inadequate contribution. Fourth, among persons considered as "tourists ll , the local pop- ulation does distinguish between the earlier and the later visitors -- that is between tourists who came at the earlier stages of tourism development in the area, and those who come later. In the case of the former" local attitudes are friendlier, more accepting, and the perceptions of nationality sharper (see Sndth, 1974; Evans, 1976). Increasing numbers of tourists do not appear to increase awareness of racial differences among tourists (contrary to what appears to have been suggested by Forster~ 1964). What seems to happen is that increasing numbers result in dindnishing face-to-face contact with tourists and encourages stereo... typing of tourists. For example~ the Mexican villagers (Nunez, 1963) - 11 saw the tourists as IIAmericans ll because of their life styles, and called the tourist enclave lithe American section". In Colpied aoo La Roche, the villagers also sawall tourists as belonging to one category (Reiter: 1973). Similar conclusions can also be drawn from Aerni's article (1972) aoo Greenwood1s dissertation (1970). This also seems to be the case in Bali (Francillon, 1974/ 1975) although personal experience would belie such a conclusion. However, one of the problems in reaching an estimate that the host population tends to stereotype tourists into one category lies in the fact that the studies just quoted do not appear to have examined this stereotyping in depth. Where this has been done (see, for example, Doxey and Associates. n.d.) one finds that that there is a distinction made both between nationalities and types of tourists. F'or instance, in Bartados the Americans were believed to be aggressive and demanding; the British, reserved but 'more respectful of traditions I; the Canadians were found to be quiet and unassuming and willing to 'mix'. Cruise paasengers were disliked. Similar local distinctions between types of tourists also exist in other areas (see Packer. 1974; Aerni. 1972). Fifth. there is a widespread perception that all tourists are rich -- a perception which is partly encouraged by national proclamations of the economic gains from tourism. the fact that tourist accommodation generally corresponds to the style adopted qy the upper income brackets of the host country. and the fact that tourists usually spend more in their short sojourn than a large percentage of the host Population receive as wages in a year. This is also. possibly. a reason why the low-spending IIhippie" is often perceived as a fraud (see Francillon. 1974/19'15) who drives away the bigger spenders while using the same services (Loukissas, 1975; Hoaglaoo. 1976). 2.12. There are two other aspects of local perceptions of tourists that merit - 12 - separate attention: perceptions of race; and "massl! tourism. Although it has been pointed out earlier that increasing numbers of tourists do not seem to increase awareness of differences in tourist racial characteristics, it may be possible that when the tourists come from a race different from the host population the contact may exacerbate perceptions of racial differences between tourists and hosts. It has been suggested (}llitche11, 1971) that this is particularly likely if the tourists belong to the same race as the dominant economic group in the host country. This was a conclusion with regard to Kenya, but Samy (n.d.) also infers that this is possible in Fiji. and Kent (n.d.) suggests the same for Hawaii. The source of the suggestion is the Caribbean, and yet even there, as Blake (1974) on the Virgin Islands, and Doxey and Associates (n.d.) .on Barbados point out, provided the tourist comes from another island/ country and fits in with prevailing patterns of dominance which tend to reproduce an earlier abhorrent system, the tourist would receive the same treatment as a person from a different race. In Doxey's example, it was the American Black who would receive the same indifferent service as his white counterpart. The examples of Kenya, Fiji, and the Caribbean are instructive in that they point to the fact that there must be an existing pattern of socioeconomic dominance in the host country. What tourists seem to do is to fit in with these patterns, resulting in socially deviant conduct on the part of some members of the host population. It is in the history of these areas that the answers lie; tourism does not seem to increase racial awareness but to provide another example of economic dominance and a reminder of social patterns that are disliked. Tourism is a doubtful catalyst. 2.13. Nass tourists are often perceived as a threat, more because increasing numbers, and the brevity of stay extend the distance between host and tourist. Gradually local perceptions of differences blur into single stereotypes. Arq, - 13 - as Samy (n.d.) quoting an article by Scott, s~s, there is soon a deadly similarity of a succession of lithe same little old ladies. with the same blue hair rinses t spending the same life insurance money and speaking in the same accents of the same things which have penetrated their similar peroeptions ••• " (n.d. : 119). The organized mass tourist seems to fit into a local mental slot, to be dealt with oonveniently t i f inaccurately. The purposes of tourism 2.14. Nost authors refer to the ouriosity of man, the oultural expression of leisure, escape, and the search for the lIauthentio experienoe" as reasons why people leave their homes for longer or shorter periods. 11acCannell (1973), however, sees a higher purpose in tourism. He says that "sightseeing is a form of ritual respect for society and that tourism absorbs some of the social functions of religion in the modern world II (1973: 589). He is joined in this , view by Horne who, after his paokage tour to Ayers Rock, reoommends _ the development of a market strategy "for organized tourism would seem to call for anthropologists' reports on the disciplines of oeremony" (1976: 10). There are not too many who would agree with these analyses. However, Horne!s other conclusion about paokage tourists deserves careful exami.na.tion. He suggests that "tourists go on tours to meet other tourists". This will be discussed. at greater length below. It may be that some tourists find a substitute religion in tourism but without leisure, a sooial obligation to take a vaoation, and teohnological advanoe, there would be no tourism. Notivation, without a cheap means of travel, and a well-developed transport infrastruoture, cannot lead to touriSlll,(see, for instance, Robinson's study of twelve South Asian countries: 1972). - 14 - III. RESOURCES ).00. This chapter will deal with those factors which, according to the literature, are deemed to be conducive to tourism. In economic parlance. this is the IIsupply" dimension of tourism. ).01. There is a remarkable amount of agreement about these factors: climate. the people (and. particularly, their attitude to "foreigners"), political stability, the prevalence of good beaches/exotic cultures or historical and archaeological monuments. ).02. Speaking of Mykonos, Loukissas (1975) says that it has a bracing climate, was clean, cheap, and its inhabitants were indifferently polite. This "indifferent politeness II was earlier remarked about by Packer (1974). Hykonos is also a boat-ride away from Delos. Kanellakis (1975) also speaking of Greece refers to the climate. the IIhospitality of the people", accommodation, and adequate infrastructure as resources. Both Calvo (1974) and Kjel1strom (1974) refer to the "image" of the Caribbean and l>lorocco, respectively. With reference to Barbados, this "image ll • according to Doxey and Associates (n.d.), "stems from its delightful climate, its physical attractions. the friendliness and charm of its people, and its general stability" (n.d.:17). Tourism in The Gambia is marketed by specific factors according to Esh and Rosenblum (1975). These factors are: a pleasant climate during the European winter; the nearest place to Europe in which a 100-':; sunny climate can be guaranteed; sandy beaches; a stable government and a II friendly , tourist-minded people II ; communication in English; and interesting excursions -- a IItouch of Africa". This last aspect, the people, is important when the major purpose of tourism is ethnic / cultural tourism. Then, as Greenwood (1974) remarks, the people and their culture become 15 a factor (Ita commodityll) which is marketed to tourists. This would be partly true of Bali, Fiji, Papua New Guinea, and Mexico. With regard to political stability, Kjellstrom correctly points out that it does not really matter to the tourist whether the regime in power is authoritarian or democratio provided that there is no real or perceived threat to life am security. 3.03. Very few sociologists include infrastructure as one of the faotors preswnably since it is the provinoe of the eoonomist and the teohnical specialis·t.. Surprisingly, however, even fewer (both sociologists and non-sociologists) inclwie local skills, particularly administrative skills, as a "resource!!. This omission is all the more inexplicable since, in referring to the stages of tourism development, sociologists have discussed the question of local competence to manage and control tourism development in the "institutionalized ll stage. In Packer's (1974) ec.pa.rative study, and in Forster (1964) and Greenwood (1974) the lack of local administrative and technical skills is viewed as a process under which it seems inevitable that the wider political authority will take over the control and management of tourism development. It is not examined as an existing resource, or the development of this resource traced. Evans (1976) mentions in passing that returning residents of Puerto Vallarta had developed both skills and accumulated finances abroad. There is no detailed discussion of how these skills fitted in with each stage of tourism development. 3.04. Administrative capacity is a subject touched upon by Mitchell (1971), 11 Diamond (1974), and Kjellstrom (1974) • Hi tchell suggests that administrati ve capacity is a "resource whose scarCity is equal or more important" than jJ Kjellstrom admits his indebtedness to Mitchell whose dissertation he appears to have used extensively. 16 capital, "although documenting the fact is difficult ••• To the extent that successful tourist development requires a higher degree of coordination among a more disparate set of public agencies" (as in Kenya) "than the expansion of many other activities. this factor will tend to reduce the relative attractiveness of tourism for poor countries" (1971 : 221). Kjellstrom has the same thing to say with regard to Morooco (1974 : 29) and adds that the two public bodies in the tourism field continue to have an ambiguous and inefficient relationship "despito a World Barkrecommendation. dating back (to) 1965. to merge the two, nothing has been done to correct this anomolous situation" (1974; 29). Diamond (1974) doubts Turkey has the ability to coordinate and manage the dispersed and comparatively small units which characterize Turkish tourism. It would seem necessary for sociologists to pay more attention to the analysis' and development of local skills and organizational capability in the future. 3.05. It is necessary to end this brief chapter with the caution that the factors referred to above are considered important in the host country -- probably the only "universal" is the attitude of the people. However, they can in no way guarantee that tourism will develop in a particular place- The "demand" side of tourism is subject to factors often beyond the control of the host country: for example, the economic climate in the countries of tourist origin, the costs of transport, competitiveness between different host countries, and the "image" that is sold by the industry _ In this regard Cohen I s conclusions may be worth considering. ).06. Cohen (1974) draws a distinction between the touristic role of "Sightseer" and "vacationer II : the former is interested in novelty, is multi-destinational, tends to be a non-recurrent visitor, and is more inclined to visit "attractions" 17 (unique sights, artistic treasures, exotic cultures). The vacationer, on the other hand, seeks change, whether or not this brings novelty in its train; he is exemplified by the habitue. The vacationer is "more oriented towards facilities and amenities II (1974 : 545) t for example, sun, sea, and sand. This does not, however, cast the sightseer in the role of an "activist II and the vacationer in that of a passive visitor - the sightseer can become a completely passive obje(~t in an organized mass tourist visit' But in this ideal-type distinction Cohen finds lIan important practical implication for developing countries ••• namely, that countries lmich are at present far-off the beaten track have only limited prospects of success in the development of tourism on the basis of facilities such as beaches, however magnificent there may be. It is possible, though. that the prestige-value of far-off travel may induce some of the vacationers to forego the intervening opportunities and prefer the farther-off to the nearer vacationing facilities. Mere remoteness, then. may prove to be a touristic resource on its own" (1974 : 546). This is hardly likely for, given the typology of tourists. it may attract only the "explorer" and persons with large purses -- a fraction of the tourist trade and hardly a basis for economic development through tourism. IV. THE ENCOUNrER 4.00. The encounter -- the meeting between host and tourist - is of crucial importance for two reasons: First, because theoretically one of the justifications of tourism is that it results in the exchange of ideas. Such cross-fertilization could form the basis both of progress and international understanding. Second, whether this in fact takes place depends on the 18 personalities of the parties to the meeting, their preconceptions, the type of contact (whom one meets, under what circumstances, and for how long), and the mediating parties. This chapter will, then, cover the theoretical aspects of the encounter; the relationship,' i f any, between the type of tourism and. the depth of the encounter; mediating parties to the encounter (the "culture broker"); whom the tourist meets; changing valuations of tourists; and the impact, if any, on local values and attitudes ( the demonstration effect - part I). Theoretical analysis of the encounter 4.01. Cultural and personality constraints are the subject of Sutton's (1967) analysis. Sutton points out that the meeting between tourist and host has wi thin it the seeds of both good- and ill-will (see also Nunez, 1974). A slight mistake can turn what was potentially a friendship in the making into disgust, contempt, and resentment. Sutton offers four bharacteristicsl of the meeting which might tilt the balance one way or the other: (1) the relationship between host and visitor is essentially transitory and mainly non-repetitive; (2) there is an orientation to immediate gratification on the part of both parties; (J) the relationship is assymetrical (the host knows more than the tourist does about local resources and prices); and, (4) the essence of the tourist experience -~ the search for the novel, the desire to see "everything" within the limited time at the tourist's disposal -- imposes a strain on both the tourist (who has to decide and choose between alternative "attractions" with imperfect knowledge) and his host. Examples of the initial unfarniliarity of the tourist, and. his consequent fears can be found in the contacts between Jews and their co-religionists in Iran (Loeb, 1974) and the humorous analysis of "exchange rate trauma"by Adams (1972). The encounter !!!S! the ~ of tourism 4.02. An analysis of the elements set out by Sutton would lead to the 19 inferences that there are three important elements in the meeting: (1) The duration of the meeting between host and tourist would affect the relationship -- the greater the length of the meeting (at one time, or over a period in time) the more likely that there will be greater understanding and a greater range of contacts. This is only an a priori judgement, for increasing contacts could lead to resentment and disgust. In the latter case. however. '~ the reaction would be greatly influenced by each party1s view of the "exploitative" element in the relationship. (2) The type of tourism would influence the nature of the contact. (J) The persons who the tourist meets. the purposes for which they meet. and the persons who mediate the meeting would also influence the relationship. These three elements are interconnected. This: section deals with the first two elements. 4.03. It is necessary to return to tourist typologies. Cohen's typologies (1972a, 1973) drew a distinction between llmass" tourists on the one hand, and the explorer and drifter on the other. Nolan (1975) suggested that it is necessary to study travel styles. Bennetts and Burak (1976) classified potential travellers on the basis of life styles, attitudes. and the concept of an "ideal vacation". At this stage, these typologies could be combined. The explorer, the extrovert drifter; the fast-paced self-structured traveller, the leisurely movement traveller, and the multi-purpose multl-destinational travllers; the aesthetic appreciators among nature people, could all be grouped under one category. They are more likely to appreciate and look for novelty; they are more likely to mingle with the host population. The other types, who prefer the familiar, the secure. the luxurious atmosphere are less likely to do so. Further, it is also more likely that the first category will tend to stay a longer time in each destination. 20 4.04. The two categories referred to must be combined with what would appear to be a crucial element in the encounter: To what extent is the tourist lIinstitutionalized ll 1 This does not mean that the tourist does not believe that he is seeing lIunique sights", or getting an "authentic feel" for the place he is visiting. It refers to the extent to which the itinerary, the timetable, the II sights " to be seen; the events to be participated in, are chosen for the tourist; the extent to which the tourist is a creature of a "tour" that has been chosen for him. The representative of this type is the "mass" tourist. This type of tourist, as Aerni (1972) points out, goes along a pre-set II migratory trail". He starts his wanderings preconditioned. Because of the numbers, the necessity to maintain control, the desire to 'process' as many tourists with the greatest possible speed am the least trouble, the persons the tourists meet play definite "roles" (waiter, tour agent, guide, dancer, handicrafts dealer). There is, in other words, an impersonality of contact, and a slanted view of eaah both by the tourist and the host. It is not people meeting people, but the~ckaged'culture that the tourist sees. The tourist, as Samy (n.d.) says"moves like a II registered parcel". This type of tourism has great potential for harm -- particularly since it fits in with the tourist's belief that he has seen and understood the most important aspects of an unfamiliar people am can, therefore, speak about them with authority. In the process, unfamiliar cultures lose their distinguishing characteristics; soon, one country is capable of being substituted for another. Esh and. Rosenblum (1975) commenting on the charter tourist in The Gambia note that it does not really matter to the tourist in which country the factors of climate, beaches, sunshine, and a friendly tourist~inded people exist; it is the price and the factors, more! than the country that matter. This type of tourism can easily become the basis for 21 strain and conflict. The discussion so far also means that it is the type of tourism that is more important than the purpose of tourism in the effects on the way in which tourist and host relate to each other. For example, "cultural" or II ethnic II tourism can be devoid of all but minimal contact if it is "institutionalized" - and, today, "package tours" can be arranged to suit every need. To what extent does the literature bear. out these conclusions? 4.05. The literature appears to uniformly support these conclusions. May (n,d.) for example, in his article on arts in Papua New Guinea (PNG) points out that one of the reasons why tourists have had little impaot on the people is because geographic limitations and minimal interest in the arts have generally resulted in contaot with few "natives". Sa.n\Y (n.d.) says that the Fijian employee of the hotels has to playa role built for him thousands of miles away -- the care-free childlike innocent who still dresses in grass skirts and performs war dances. The hotels reproduce a Western ambience and standard of comfort; their menus merely translate western dishes (like "Prime New York Cut Sirloin") into the local language to add a touch of the exotic. Esh and Rosenblum (1975) say that the charter tourist in The Gambia generally has a very superfioial interest in the local population "since his contacts with the local population take the form of curiosa" (1975 : 46). Further, most expatriate managers of the hotels had vague ideas about Gambian culture, were II strongq biased towards the Western European ideals and these aspects of the Gambian society were either considered as non- existent, inferior, or totally incompatible to European conoepts II (197 5 ; 57). Francillon (1974/1975) talking of the "mass' tourist in Bali suggests that there is very little contact between him and the local population: the tourist arrives, is whipped out for a shopping tour, taken on a set tour of carefully selected objects of culturaJ. and architectUral- intereSt~ View. -a fo 22 dances, and is moved out to make room for the next "mass" tourist. On their pazt, the local population, as pointed out earlier, tends to deal with the tourist increasingly as a stereotype. 4.06. Calvo (1974) suggested that there could be an interrelationship between the different types of accommodation -and social impact. The term "social impact" could be translated here into contact resulting in impact on the local population. She suggested that "luxury typel! accommodation had almost no impact locally; while the "first classl! type of accommodation had a ilhigh visibility because of absolute numbers and. groups". In both these cases contacts with locals are limited - even though, in the case of the first class hotels there is high visibility. This argument has been independently extended by llobineau (n.d.) in the concept which Kent (n.d.) calls "total tourism". Robineau refers to the encouragement of internatio nal hotel chain building in Tahiti in order to speed up the developnent of tourism. The first two hotels brought with them travel bureaus, internal transport systems, and a local airlim~ network. The old semi-faMily-style hotels of Polynesia, he points out, are not compatible with "mass international tourism". This type of tourism adds spatial segregation through the building up of "geographic blocks or aggregates composed of large-scale tourist units which operate as closed systems; and the movemeinent of tourists outside the block within a social space cut-off from that of the majority of the population. Pushed to the limit, this model leads to turning the tourist zone into an annex of the countries providing the tourists" (n.d. 67) • 4.07. The implications of the last statement would seem to justify Home's (1976) conclusion that "tourists go on tours to meet other tourists II - at least on package tours. There is another way of asking the same question. If one agrees 23 With ¥.acCannell's view of dramaturgy (see also Nunez, 1974) then the question would be "how many tourists actually get back stage ll and see the real, the authentic, rather than the fake-real? In other words, how many are able to strip away the many masks and face the host population as total persons? The answer so far, with reference to the llmass II tourist, would be livery few". Distance, time constraints , cultural differences, tourist agent conditioning, all add to the problems of the real exchange of ideas. 4.08. The evidence with regard to the type of contact (and its depth) between the individual non-institutionalized tourist and host is less clear; it is mainUlv inferential. Nearly all authors (see, for instance, Moore, 1970; Smith, 1974; Hobineau, n.d.) refer to the enthusiasm with which early tourists were welcomed. But, it must be remembered that this was at the early stages of tourism development in each locality. We do not know whether this continues after the growth of institutionalized tourism. Is it that the non- institutionalized tourist is different only in that he must make his own arrangements? Does he have sources of information and contact which permit greater contact with hosts? Surely, the information network developed by the "modern explorers" (the II hippies II ) would provide this advantage. But even this group, as Allsop (1972), Cohen (1973) and Theroux (1976) suggest.have had their trails organized and their contacts are more with each other than the local population. One could still infer, however, that the non-institutionalized tourist who patronizes small hotels, am the "budgetll tourist often have a greater probability of contacting the host population as total persons than the mass tourist. 4.09. Finally, although it has been argued that the type of tourism is more important than the purpose of tourism, the purpose does playa role. Where, for 24 instance. the tourist is interested in sun and sam. (as in the case of the charter tourist in the Gambia) it is likely that contact with the local people will be minimal and confined mainly to the provision of services. This would also be the case with the types that Bennetts ard Burak (1976) defined as "extravagant consumers·· or IIplaystersll. However, Cohents (1974) llvacationerll even though mainly interested in facilities is quite likely to make contact with the local population, particularly if he goes repeatedly to the resort. The setting of the encounter II .1 t). Tourism sociologists have tended to examine the encounter as a IIplayll (~ec, for instAnce, :t-fD.8Cannell, 1973; Nunez, 197L.) to the neglect of the sc~,t.i.nG. For these socioloGists, the place only has reaJity by virtue of the "meanings" that human actors attach to it. Thus they have concentrated on the role-pla.lj.ng of the participants to the encounter, but not on the influence a particular setting may have on the behavior of the participants. Hugill's article (1975) is included to bring a more balanced perspective. Hugill, a geographer, examines the influence that the physical environment has both on the type of visitor and his behavior patterns. The "place ll is the Golden Mile in Southend-on-Sea. Hugill demonstrates how the setting -- the character of the builrlingn, the way in which amusement stands are physically placed -- and the stRee management of this setting encourages the desired type of behavior: R senE,e aT relRXed,uninhibited behavior. Further, the general character of the n8::iehhorhood limits visitors mainly to the lower economic strata who want a cheap week-end holiday. This example evidences that the influence of place i.,s not to be discounted in analyzing tourism encounters. 25 Wl10 ~ the tourjst ~? It. 11. Th(' 8vi dence h",re ts clearer wi th rega.rd to the "mass II tourist than for the n)n-em to imply that contacts between tourist and host are mainly limited to hosts in service occupations -- vendors, boat owners, waiters. Cohen (1973) sup:~r;::;k 1.hat the contAct between drifters and the local population ts mainly limit~d to the lower social levels and to similarly minded youth who seek out the rjriftc;rs. This view seems to be confirmed by Theroux's article (1976). i'Jith regnrd to Leavenworth and Bodrum (Turkey) Packer says that the contact between tourist and host are mainly limited to service contacts. In Kotzebue and Nome, Sm:ith (1?7l:) says that the persons with whom the tourist comes into contact are rnpmbr:rs or 1m out-group and not the best representatives of their own society. In H.ykono3, Lould ssas poi nts out that tourists contact mainly the lOVle r class Mykonian -- the aristol.:' rats and local elite are affected by tourism but do not come in contnct \'1i th tourists. As f'nr as possible, the upper cl.asses tr'.f to leave thf" island when the tourist invasion commences. A survey showed that 51 percent of the junior" high school students interviewed had no contact whatsoever with tourists, ~nd only 23 percent had some contact. Esh and Rosenblum (1975) state t,hat the charter tourist has contacts mainly with locals in service occupations anrl 'rdth local boys who hane around the hot~ls ,offering to be guides. Kent (n.d.) ~ontr",:otinF~ tourism in Hawaji jn the 1950s wi.th tourism today, suggests that [,he> Crt )'1 i PI' t,ouriem at least allowed for some contact (because it was more -Ipi ) ,'lnd an appred I).tion of' the cultural diversity and natural beauty of 26 HAWI]jJ. Today, he SAYS, tourism is a charade in which the encounter between tourist ,"nd "host" js mainly limited to room maids and waiters. )1.1? T}ri s would be a depressing conclusion if it were entirely true. Fortunately, it is not. A.s Cohen (19711) suggests, there has been far too much concentration on tho !!m,!]SS II tourist, sociologists have tended to ignore the other types. Thus, the picture is slAnted ann incomplete. It is incomplete even with regard. to the Im"lSS" tourist who certainly comes into contact with guides, travel agents, and, Rt 188sL, other representatives of the trade. But here, again, the greater the deeree or insti tutionnJ5zRtion, the less likely that the tourist will meet members nf' t.ho::' host popu] RUon in Any but formal roles. Whether these members of the hc'st l)opulati.on [I,'C tho flbest" representatives of their societies is a moot point ,"'n thr form!'!] rol es that they occupy it is doubtful whether they are. But;, on the other hand, B,re tourists "representative" of their own societies? There is inadequate information about the types of persons in the host society with whom t,hr> non-institutiona1tzen tourist comes into contact. It is possible to infer thAt t.hn38 hosts are "more representative fl both in status and variety. But this is R mere lnference unsupported by data. 14erlj ators and mediums: the culture brokers 1<.13. The culture broker -- that felicitous term to describe an individual who straddles tvw cultures and serves as interpreter for the members of each -- recu;C"s often ln the literature under review. He takes on a variety of roles and cuts flcross It}] ar,e groups; he is the "entrepreneur", the guide, the tour agent, the f'r':i 0O'i, the agent of socia]. change. )1.l!.l. In Mr:xico :he is the Guadalajara businessman (Nunez, 1963), the returning 27 1"'e~:idpnt, the re:-:;ident American, the boy who conducts a tour for visiting optometdsts (EvaIl:", 1976). In Los Santos, they are the Swedes and the defrockpd nuns (Moore, 1970). In Valloire, it is the mayor -- even though he 1'::1.1.ls (Hut:::;on, 1971). In Eliat, they are the Arab boys (Cohen, 1972b); in Iran, they ar'E' the Jewish merchants (Loeb, 197L\). In South-west U.S.A. there is Fred Harvcy and Don Lorenzo Hubbell (Deitch, 197h). In Bodrum and Mykonos, the male youths Derve as culture brokers for the tourists, while the local populations are sArved by resident foreigners and non-resident fellow nationals (Packer, 19711). In the Gambia, the boys who hang around hotels serve as culture brokers (F:sh 8.J:. llosenblUlTI, 1975). Examples could be multiplied. )1 .1 5. 'Phc moti vlltions A.re wide. In Mykonos, the mere knowledge of a foreign -L ~mcua~e (pr-trti cularly fi.nglish or French) is a passport to a steady income (Packer, 1 nh). In Eliat and the Gambia, contacts with tourists open up the Ilossibili ty of foreign travel and escape from limited economic opportunities. For othp. r'f~ in the Gambia, it also serves as an opportunity to learn about foreig::1 cul turps (Esh & Rosenblum, 1915). In Caji til an and Puerto Vallarta, as also in Los Santos the skills of the culture brokers introduced social changes (Nunez, 1961; EVans, 1976; Moore, 1970). Again, since the culture broker comes from a variety of stations in life it cannot be generally said that he is the "best" interpreter. There is, however, the view that in times of rapid social change tho-; cuI ture broker, who does not usually come from the politically and socially most pOl-lerflll strata of society, can be an important initiator of social change and an interpreter who links local values with these changes (see Nunez, 1 97h). Thic :i G [lTI aspect that merits greater study. 28 ),.16. There is I'mothr::" acpect, probably of interest only to sociologists, which de~;(:rves examination with regard to culture brokers: Does this marginal. man have te become [m "outsider" in his own society to serve as interpreter? The limited evidence woulrl seem to sugeest the contrary. Ritchie (n.d.), for instance, wrjtj nr, of Apirana Ngata, a Maori culture broker who encouraged modern schools, the :-;tud~r of Haori traditions, the development of museums, and strummed country- western ballards on a guitar, states-he was stIll recognized as a Maori -- being "n r-1.~ori i::; an available ro1e that is validated in its recognition by others" (n.d.: S?). The same C:'ln bp. said of the individual attached to b Secondary '!'~"'Jchers r Training College :i.n Goroka (PNG). Changing valuations £!~ encounter 4.17. Do host perceptions of tourists change? Is there a point in time in every tourist destination when. as Sutton (1967) put it. the strain of the relationship becomes too great and the relationship between tourist and host sours? This section will seek to offer some answers to these questions. 4.18. The villagers of Fuenterrabia. who first welcomed tourism. found it lIunpleasant and conflictfu1" when the numbers of tourists increased. Their attitudes were ambivalent: On the one hand they sighed with relief when the tourist season was over; and yet, on the other, they dreaded the possibility that the tourists on whom they were economical~ dependent would not return (see Greenwood, 1972). This initial enthusiasm is remarked upon by Nash (1974) who points out that tourism usual~ commences without planning and may (and usually is) more often welcomed rather than rejected by potential ~~~~---~~~~------------- - 29 - hosts " even though promoted at govermnent and economic levels I ittle concerned with long-range results at the community level" (1974:14). fut this enthusiasm does not seem to last. The Eskimo at Kotzebue who first welcomed visitors to their homes now resent intrusions into their privacy; they have erected barriers s a:-eening their homes from the outsider; photography is no longer allowed (see Smith" 1974). In Mykonos too" the initial enthusiasm has waned and has been replaced by irritation with mass tOurists" and hippies; and tears that the tourists of today are preventing bigger spenders from visiting the island thereby reducing income (see Hoagland" 1976; Loukissas" 1975)0 4.19_ Doxey (1973, 1976) has attempted to trace these changing valuations and to construct an "irridex l1 (an index of the level of irritation). Doxey believes that irritations resulting from the contact between tourist and host cannot be wholly avoided, but will be destructive ot tourism in the long run unless recognized and controlled. Doxey' s "irridex" covers four levels of expressions of reactions: (1) Euphoria -- usual~ the initial phase of tourism when both visitors and investors are welcomed. (2) Apathy -- the transition to this stage varies in time; there is a gradual formalization of contacts, tourists are taken for granted. (3) Annoyance -- doubts about tourism begin to be expressed; the saturation point is approaching. (4) Antagonism -- the overt expression of irritation; all ills, social and personal, are attributed to the outaider. Doxey believes that the causes of irritation are numerous and interrelated: economic, SOCial. cultural, psychological, and environmental. He makes two basic assumptions: (i) the reactions of both visitors and hosts will vary in different destinations; and (ii) at the root of the local response is the belief that the outsider (which can include a fellow-citizen) "represents 3. challenge to the life style of the destination " (1976: 19.5). Some of the )0 variables giving rise to these irritations are (i) fears on the part of the locals that they are being treated as second to tourists; (ii) the belief among locals that their culture is being threatened; (iii) the exclusion of locals from physical amenities (beaches are the most prominent example); and (iv) iInproper dress or alien behavior. Doxey points out that it is the value system of the destination that must be investigated because "there is no 'typical' tourist, nor homogenous destination" and that, therefore, it is a question of the spill-over effects -- real or illusory - of interpersonal relationships" (1976 : 195). h.2(), GOXf-'Y'S ob:~0!"J"'1t,iont: (1)'73, 1r)76) nre 1mportant enoueh to warrant further analys:is. They can be clasGifiBd into five "principles": (1) There is no homOGenous destination, therefore what will cause "irritations" in a particular dC'Jti nAti on will depend on the value system of the population at the destination. Thie, vnlue system must he identified, and the values ranked. (2) The irritations r'(>~111t from contact between the local population and the outsider and stem from a ve:'iety of complex causes. (3) The local population must believe that its values a['(; bfd r1f~ threatennd. (L) Implicit in Doxey's "irridex" is the fact that increa::;ing munbet's of outsiders are an essential ingredient of rising annoyance and nntlll~onism. (:;) Al tbough irritations are inevitable, they are both identifiable 1/ and controllable through planning- and continuous monitoring. )1.21. Doxey applied his hypotheses to two tourist destinations: Barbados, and Ni nr:rlra-on-the Lake, Ontario. In the former destination he concluded. that I'urthf'r (;xpl111sion of tourism would be dangerous becuase it would constitute '1 (~onri, r'mnU on of t.he belief that the "charm" of the island was being irreparably ~7 rPh" "plBnnj ne;" aspect of Doxey's articles is dealt with in greater dets.il i 1, Chnpte [' VII. 31 dRJllrl[:Rd (really a composite of social and environmental "causes"). In the latter nestj rw.tj on, h(' found that simple regulation of traffic would dispel the j iT] t.RLi.!)r::; fmd the bel~ef that a "'lay of life of the local residents was being thrF!atened. )1 .?? It is obvious that mere numbers by themselves do not constitute the threat. What incrcasine numbers of outsiders does is to heighten local issues and problems. To return to the earlier f'x811lples (see para 4.18 above): In both F'ucnt<~rrabil1 And My-konas, closer examination of the problem indicates that loss c/ ] oCRl centrol, the nbsence of t.he ability to plan, and the failure on the lf1t't 0f·~.1"> l.[jdpr puthorities to consult with the local groups enhanced the beli PI' trat thp 10r;.ql population RIJd its resources were being lIused"; that they Her'n mpl'e I,awnc in an economie game Nhich waG beine: played without their knowledge -- the frui ts of the ~allle being reaped by poli tica~more powerful "outsiders" whik the lOCi'll population WaS left in ignorant dependence. In these circumstances, the' "tcu r'h:t.1! becomer:; a convenient focus for local fears. In Kotzebue too, i Tlen~ numberD of tourists brought the issue of different cuI turnl values to the fore. Wh8.t happened js that the organized tourist found Eskjmo prar;ticcG and rJ:i.r:t n~puenlmt. The Eskimo believed that they were being ridiculed and thctr ('u:;Lo/;:s ::;c..,f'f"d at.. This j::; probably the only example in the literature where nntaf~(ln:i3m 1I-'1.S resulted in Ii local desire for reduced contact with the tourist. h.n. It Hould certainly appear that the opportuni tie:; for misinterpretation of hf'hAVi ora1 pR.tterns, nU~J1ces of language and customs, resultine in changing vn'lu,', ~J'i on::; of the encounter would be greater when the tourist and host come from I' j r!n'!y eli n'f?dn[~ eu} t.nres at different levels of economic development. But the -32- I i terature provides us with no clear answers on this score. The villagers of Caji tilan were resentful against their government, not against the tourists who were upper- class, urban-based Mexicans (Nunez, 1963); the villagers of Los Santos did not resent tourists, nor did the villagers of Valloire, Colpied, La Roche, and Kippel (Noore, 1970; Hutson, 1971; Reiter, 1973; Friedl, 1973). 4.24. The instances cited in the preceding paragraph relate' to areas where the tourists and hosts generally share the same cultural background -- Westerners visiting relatively underdeveloped areas within developed countries. Where tourists and hosts do not share the same cultural background, the evidence is mixed. Examples of antagonism in the Caribbean are most often cited (see Kent, n.d.). Even there,the majority is not against tourism. And when it comes to tho vocal minority, it is far from clear whether the resentment is against the tourist per ~ or against the tourist as a symbol of continuing national dependence on the foreigner (see G.V. Doxey and Associates, n.d.). As Galvo (1974) says the antagonism towards tourism in general and the analogy with the continuance of a plantation system is verbalized "almost exclusively by the intelligentsia, who , do not normally depend for their living on working as a waiter" (1974: .5, fn 2). In the Virgin Islands there would appear to be greater antagonism towards the resident alien (equated with ''black alien \I) than the tourist (Blake: 197 4) • In Uganda, Aerni refers to local resentment. This seems to be the resu.1t of the type of tourism -- institutionalized impersonality, minimal contact wi th the host population. In Uganda, as also in the Gambia, the local pop- Ulation wants more contact with tourists (see .Aerni, 1972; Esh & Rosenblum, 197;;). There is no generalized resentment against foreigners. In 'lUrkey, as also - 33 - in Guam, San BIas, and Puerto Vallarta, it is fears that there will be the loss of local control, or lack of it, that make the local populations wary of increased tourisnl (soe Packer, 1974j Sanchez, n.d.j Swain, 1974; Evans, 1976). 4.25. Local fears, articulated by government officials and generally the "local elite" (who, as pointed out earlier, have little contact -with tourists) take tw'o forms: first, there is a fear of "mass" tourism which is never clearly defined but could be attributed to the fact that so many of the factors related to "demand ll lie outside gavernment control and to the impersonality that appears to characterize the contacts between the "insti tutionalized" tourist and the ±I hosts. Second, there is antagonism (again expressed mainly by government officials and through customs procedures) towards a certain type of tourist: the "long-haired hippie". Cohen (1973) suggests that this antagonism stems from the ambivalence of developing countries towards the West. The countries wmt "selective modernization" -- the good and profitable, not the bad. For Cohen lithe long-haired hippie ll (a species I) is the symbol of "all that is negative, rejectable or despicable in contemporary Western culture" (1973: 102). Cohen could have also suggested that since the IIProtestant ethic II -- with its emphasis on hard work as the basis of success and income -- has been preached as the fore- runner of modernization in Western countries, the "hippie" presents a rather contradictory example to the populations of developing countries whose governments are striving to get their populations to modernize through emulation of the lIethic II • Goldstein suggests another reason why local populations resent the influx of tourists en masse, if they do resent them at all: she suggests that since tourists have no social, emotional, and economic commitment to the places they visl t, they do not have to learn local social cues and therefore overstep boundaries 11 See the comments of Dr. Hibbert, Education Minister, Solomon Islands, JL (Go1dstcin: n.d.). This is a mere variation of Smith's (1974) example. ).I.?6. To :mrn up: (1) Local valuations of tourism change -- human relationships an' nei t.her [;tatic nor ever rfJach perfect equilibrium. (2) The reconsideration of tourism is brought to the fore by increasing numbers of outsiders. 'fhese outsiders include fellow nationals who have come to a destination area for 1I economic rnesons • (J) But it is not mere numbers that would suffice to bring ,,,bout thi:-J reconsideration. It is a type of tourist -- the "mass" tourist thnt seems to c.g.use thh, reconsideration. (h) It could be hypothesized that wherp: cul turR.I differences between tourist and host are ereat there is ereater li.kelihood for local resentment against tourists. However, with one exception (SmiU!, 1971j), there is little evidence to support tills hypothesjs. (5) What ap}Jcnrs to :happen is that increasing numbers of tourists result in diminishine ] or'a] r.ontrol and particpation in planning. (6) Increasing numbers of tourj sts of the ninstitutionalized ll ' type extend the distance between thA tourist and the local population. The increasing distance is resented by the] OCRl t)ojJlllnti on. (?) The resentment is mainly articulated by government offic:Lals I'\.,tld the local "elite II and is directed against "mass" toud sm and tithe long-hai red hippi plt • The resentment !'te;ainst the former type seems to f;xpress a vae;up unease thnt the forceG tbat bring the influx of tourism are outside government control and al~>o nrrainst the impersonality of mass tourism. The ntti tude against tire! If}rl1:JJ.d p" n.pj)ears to be t.hA result of the contradictory symbol this represcntativp of modernL,~ed nations presents to developing countries trying to moderni:0e. (8) ------ rptnted in W.D.Potterson. Need for planning: good ,'1.nd bad examplps. PA'I'rt/ 1S)7? lieport of proceedings - MalAysia. San Frencisco: PATA, 1972, p.21C. 1/ Mitcl1elJ (1971) estimates that each potential ,job brings 1.5 person::: to Lbe nren in searr.h of it. Centre D'etudes du Tourisme, Aix-en-Provtm;e, jn jts report "Impact of tourism on tourism" (April, 1975) quot.e;'1 an lmpublished work suggesting that each job brings ? persons (p. 12). 35 There rioe" not nppeRr to be a generalized resentment against tourism. This is not to den:! the spor'ldj C [lcts of violence (particularly in the Caribhean) or thf: (;xi G t,0m~e G C local :i rrj tClti ons aE;ainst tourists. This violence and the irritations Deem to appear at a later stage in tourism development -- when "insti tutionnlize,d" tourists constitute the mf1.jor proportion of all tourists visiting the destination. Then the tourist and the tourism become the focus and target of all Rttacka (see .ql~() Finney and Watson, n.d.: 145 - 146). Often tlE malaise lies deeper: its root.:; c~m bA founri, :i n <;ome cB.ses, in the sociocultural history of the destinatioJJ a1"'fl; they might, more often, lie in local inability to manage and control Loud ;~m deve] opmeni. and in the dj stribution of political (and economic) pOwt~r bC:Lvr8cn lcc::!l and the wirler authorities. (9) When resentment is wid0;;1)ref1.c1, only tb't'RPPUt-iC planning seems possible. tt.27. There is ::;tilJ, however, a nagging question: Why is it that in some c!t:stinfltionG "institutionalized" tourism causes local resentment, but not :in others? Fo r eXAmp] 1;, tourism hAS hardly affected the Haori way of life. As R.:ili:;hic :311,,(5, "Ap~rt from a few tour [,'Uides and one or two carvers this •• has provided an econorlic hl1se for livjne to practically no one. Concert parties may perform for tourists but only earn trifling sums this way, and if they do not wish to do so, to t hr. fury of the tour di rectors, they won't. The persistence of M::1.Ori eu1ture h'1S b(Oon privHte rather than public ••• " (n.d. : 51). BRlinese culture ann t,he Fl.?" wen-de in thr' -1:1 tf'T'ature on tourism: it is comlJrehensi vely VR.p'ue and nTouse::;; nfig,qUvC cmot:i on:::. 1r.rit.h reeard to tourism. On analysis, the term connotes two di ffer(mt lip ffects" which the tourists are said to have on the host population: F:i cst, there is r-m imp~~ct on the vnlue system and attitudes of the host population -- an intaneible import of tourism. Second, the local population's observatj on13 0" tlv; ires;;, accOlnJTlodatton demands, and food habits of the tourist are srd rl tc indur~'" in tbD locAl populntion hiFrrJ(~Y' spending and demand for consumer e;oor:::; th,J1, the loc:al popula.tion, so the arp:ument runs, can ill afford. This section 'Mill b(' conf:Lnen only to the fiT'st connotation, althoueh i t sbould be '~lrll)}111 ~;i zed tb",t both Aspect::; of the term are interlinked. I ,,(. ,j " (' j . Th.~ argument j n Eupport of the position that touri:::;m affectc local value~:; :'rIr! !he sod al structure! of the host population is deceptively ::;imple; Tou:;:'i::;t:~ nt'r' "(';'i'f!;;(::ni~ ~'i vee; oj' countr:ief3 '·:ith cultures different (generally) frOIli that d-+/;-'Y;S t' t1i" lr,;'t Jl"t;uJ ati nn; their style of hehaviort as also their wants, tH[;;t.;~" I'nd h~,bi ts. Th\' local IJopulation attempts to imitate tourists. This im:i Ld:l.on 37 rp.:;uJ t.CJ h) ~,lle break-up of the sodal struct.ure and ch8J1ges in value systems -- for instnrH'f', the decline of community (Greenwood, 1972). The imitation need not necessArily be Voluntary for example, an employee housine pro,ject neRr' ;, rr'sortqrea mieht compeJ employees to live in nuclear families rather tl1o.n extended families; concepts of leisure and hours of work might chance (Forstpr, 19611; Packer, 1974~ Kent, n.d.). Local valuations of time might have tu bf~ Ild';'.lsted to meet the demands of tourists (Mitchell, 1971; Packer, 1 nlr). It dor's not appcRr to be necessa:r;-f to multiply examples. ). Then~ are severnl assumptions implic:i t in the proposition: (1) Tourists ""f' "rnodr:is" for the host popula.tion which the host population believes are "rorthy errmla ti on. (?) Thprr~ are contacts between the host populat.ion and the t,r)urists. (J) There i~, a nexus bptween the contacts (or example) ;md the chanees that rpsu] t.. (L~) The chanr:;os are unidirectional -- that they proceed from tou:'j d, to h;;;,t only. (5) The i rnpact of these chances is generally deleterious -- PI'! d,icu] arly wh('n t}\8 contact is bAtween tourists froPl a developed countL'.\~ nncl ho;;ts in a developj ng 00untry (see lrJest, 1973, for a journalistic evoluation of' thjf;). It js necessary to examine the validity of these assumptions. II .~n. To he a "mode]" worth emulating a tourist must have gA; he must be' a] and economic e1 i te ;:lS possessing that prect:i ee; 1)1; mm,t in "luencp thF! Toea] and pol itical elite to accept the values he rr::I,X'(cpn l.:-;; ~md, finally, the values that the tourist induces mu \.rj Lh ('x:istin'j lOCH1 values. Is t.he tourist such a model? It does not rth,,?pr to 1)" ;~o. The models are generally local (sometimes resid(~nt foreigner:::;) ar,d nnLi·;r.:,l nn001'Dizjng lel'iders. The literature appea.::-s to support !Jur.~h A vi(~v.'. J n i-1jlu'J1o:" thE' host population imitAtes Athens (see Packer, 197L1; LoukisSAS, J8 1~'?5). Tn Ho1"oCOO the tourist, usually wealthy, is hardly "a model for mnJlc!~blf~ your;,~ HOr'occnns" (Kjellstrom, 1971H 388). The examples of Eskimo :{onUI JO'J::Jnr:; ,iolrm on their tr,qriitionnl values (Smith, 197)!) f>nd the local poplll'lticn in North Kohala - with its increasing appetite for education and con:;umt')r' goods if> more an emulation of the eeneral values in Amer:i ca, not an im; t~{U.on of tcurists. In Valloire, Caji tilan, and Kippel the chanecs wer'e a 10C:lJ response hrougl f'p:, tc. thn "dpmonstratj on ~ffect" have not carefully eXclIrrincd "rhetber j t i::; qlc leen] l(:~nderf; lrrho f'orr t}18 "models", and not the tourists, even though tc'urj sts .-10 form 11 pattern that is stereotyped. Packer has cX3mined this qu('~) ti nn (~J oe ely. Hf' Gums up what appears to be the most acr;optable pocj t~ on in t.rris J'Pf,Hrd: "Sienificantly, the evidence suegests that tourists do nnt ~:E:~ve '1::; Ule motjvat-Lne ,10nrel') for the adoption of (new) values hut Rre only the cb:mw:1 or modinm for transmission of such information. ThE: real trMSIfLi_ti,E'r '1nd soure,,-: of informnt:ion Lo urban i.ndustrial society. TOllI'ii3tS se.t'\re primnr'il:{ to 1")('11;:; thc' infc~:mation s11::71P1 upon thA rf~sidents of the commun-j t~r ;;0 th;lt tlt: J 17 clllmnnls foJ' those va1ues 8M be estahlished. These sUFpleIll"!ntar.1 (~}I.'1nncl s tnke the form of foreieners and outsiders who ::ome to live :1 n Ul,:~ V' 11 1:11, th'l'l fUr1(~tJ cn [Ie effecti va models:tbr learnhlG. In nIl three cor.mnmitie:3, l'(!;_;jr]cnl, ouLsiderc are thn primary mode1s for assumption of urban vnlues whc:t} )' 39 bcr.mlSf; of' thdr pre~ence as realistic expmples of touris t, VP,lucs (r1ykonos), their at.tcmriflnt social and Aconon.1c ser'vicps (Bodrum), or their jnfiltn'1tion Hnrl ;;ssumption of control in cervice oreani7.ations (Leavenworth) II (1 nh: ?111). h. :::2. The seconri queGt:i on js the nature and extent of the contacts betvmcn tourist and host whj dl 'lrrUl permit the transmission of tourist values. This has 11 The general conclusion there was that contacts Rlready been examined earlter. bctM!;Cn the "insti tutj cnali?ed II tourist and host are limited, both in dUl'Htion i:md rlF:'pth. Further, the "instttutionalized" tourist appears to meet only [)(:d,j.')nc of' the host populRtion directly involved in the tourism industr'J. As HncCnnn(:l.i \ 1 ~173) points out, the local people generally eo about their mm l)u:'ini'::;~ and t"nd (HiU, the exception of a few hangers on) tc aVOH] <"reno rrequ">1t.r'd b,/ tourists (see [11'00, Cohen, 1:J72r:, with reeard to drifters). Therr; is In!;a::;rp information M.bout the contacts betHeen the non-i.nsti tutj onalizcd t,ou:ciGt and the: Lost population. It could, hQ1.'l/cver, be hypothesi?crl that thp conkwt::3 h<"?"p ;'1T'r r';20atr-:r And could j nfluence local values. H01tJc:ver, it is t}1€' Y'f)~;-Ldent (1",lirot.h"r f'oreic;ner, or fp110w national) who has the most continuoUG cont.'i.ct. This onl,:: scr'vfJ': to rc-afflrm Packer's conclusion. 4033. Most authors fail to show a connection between changes in values and social patterns and tourism. For example .. in Fuenterrabia the changes could be more readily attributed to industrialization and urbanization which had already taken root before the development of llmass II tourism (Greenwood: 1970) • Even Greenwood .. wI'¥) has been the most articulate with regard to the deleterious impact of tourism on local values .. admits that Basque values have not changedo What has changed is '~he assessment of the means of attaining those values (Greenwood.. 1972)0 This is also the view of Hi tchie (n.d.) with regard to Maori 'falueso To assume ''''11''''1 .. , ... 1"'\ 40 uni-directional alterations in value 8ystems as a result o£ the encounter is to deny botb cultural resilience and cultural integrity in the host populations; to suggest that that all c!~nges are harmful involves a subjective judgement by the observer. Further, there is almost negligible evidence to sepBl'arate out changes which are peculiar to tourism from changes which are broadly £ound to accompany "modernization"/ " industrialization II • And, finally, there remains a question t which again the )110, literature deals with neither consisterilyer with any satisfaction: Assuming, for the sake of argument, that changes in value systems do occur as a result of tourism, are these not changes desired by, or goals of, the local population? 4.:34. The net effect of this discussion is that "tourists II do not have the impact on local population values that is often claimed. Tourists may portray a style of life different from that of the host population. Whether, however, this style of life results in changes in the host population value systems depends on the method by which these values are transmitted -- through prestigious residents; on the goals of the host population;, and on the organizational capabilities of the host population. The I1demonstration effect", then, is at most indirect and mediated. V. THE DlPACT OF TOURISM -- PART I: SOCIOECONOlvUC 5.00. This chapter will evaluate the literature relating to the socioeconomic impact of tourism on host populations, other than arts and crafts: employment, occupations, land, ownership, local resources. and social services. The chapter will also include a discussion of the distribution of the benefits of tourism. Employment . 5.01. A recurring theme of the literature is that tourism creates jobs for the 41 local population: directly, for instance in hotels; and indirectly. There was little evidence, however, of who got the jobs, at what level, what the skills of the employed were, where these employees came from, what the relationships were between employees inter ~, and whether employment in the tourism sector resulted in a diversion of labor supply from other sectors. The evidence, such as it was till recently, mainly supported inferential conclusions. 5.02. The literature supports the view that in most tourism destinations the top management in the hotel industry is generally non-local (expatriate, or felbw non-resident nationals), with one exception: Antigua (see Joshi & Sharpston, 197)). This is also often the case with the supervisory levels in hotels as well (see, for instance, Samy, n.d.; and Kent, n.d.). However, the predo~inance of expatriate or fellow non-resident nationals at the upper levels of hotel employment is not characteristic of the earliest stages of tourism development. It is a process that takes place with the gradual development of "institutionalized" tourism, with the recognition of tourism as a significant method of obtaining foreign exchange for development, and tiith increasing interest of national political authorities and powerful economic interests in the tourist destination (see, for instance, Robineau, n.d.; Kent, n.d.; Packer, 1974; and Esh & Rosenblum, 1975). At the earlier stage, hotels are generally locally-owned, and often managed by families. 5.0). With the development of tourism, locals generally occupy the lowest levels of employment in the hotel industry -- the semi-skilled and unskilled occupations (waiter, busboy, room maid, gardener, kitchen helper). But are these employees unskilled/ semi-skilled1 There are two parts to this question: whether they are "objectively" unskilled/semi-skilled in regard to training; and, whether they are unskilled/semi-skilled in relation to the general level of skills in the host 42 population. Esh and Rosenblum (1975), who examined both questions with regard to employees of charter hotels in the Gambia, found that 37fo had no fonnal education, and that 5Jp had a secondary school education. In Fiji, Samy (n.d.) found that 45ft> of the Indo-Fijian staff had worked in agriculture , compared with 15~:o of the Fijian staff; for most of the Indo-Fijian women hotel employment was their first wage employment; and that more than half the Fijian women employed had worked as nurses. In fact, on the whole, the Fijians were better educated than all other groups, except for the expatriate management. On the basis of this limited information, while objectively the lower level employees may not be highly educated. in terms of the general standards prevailing in the country they belong to the relatively few who have received formal education. As Diamond points out with regard to Turkey. in a country where 1150 percent of the adult population is illiterate. the possession of a foreign language can be viewed as a skill" (Diamond, 1974: 611). Undoubtedly, the information on the formal education qualifications of lower level employees is limited. l>lore research is necessary to support a tentative hypothesis that even lower level employees in hotels have higher qualifications than most of their fellow countrymen. 5.04. The evidence discussed so far leads to another question: Does hotel employment divert labor from other sectors of the economy? Or, phrased differently, is hotel employment in direct competition with other sectors that could equally use the labor? Esh and Rosenblum answer these questions affirmatively: " ••• the tourist industry attracts they young and relatively well educated people ••• who. from the outset. have a fair chance on the labor market •• 11 (1975: 29). But their answer is qualified. later, with the proviso that this situation might change with the expanSion of tourism as plarmed. In 43 Fiji. it is a matter of inference that the Fijian women (at least) had been drawn away from other sectors. In the Cook Islands, this is one of the fears (see LeFevr~n.d.:87 - 97) while in Tahiti, there has been a fairly widespread movement away from traditional agriculture into the wage-earning sectors (including tourism), as Finney (197.5) points out. However, the evidenCE' is far from complete. With regard to }'lorocco, Kjellstrom says that tourist "regions are not located in areas where there are a multitude of alternative lucrative occupations available II (1974: 278) and that hotel and restaurant business is preferred by unskilled employees. It is suggested that any satisfactory an~ to the questions must weigh both regional factors and the data whether the employees were in fact capable of being employed elsewhere. The flood of applications that hotels receive for employment (see, for instance. Fukunaga. n.d.; Esh & Rosenblum, 197.5) is capable of two interpretations: first, that the applicants are unemployed, or come from areas of underemployment (for ins tance» agriculture); or, second, that they are being diverted from present employment because of the attractiveness of hotel employment. 5.05. The next question is from which geographical areas do the employees come? Are they from areas proximate to the hotels; do they come to the area in search of another job (that is. after making the move from their own native villages) and then secure employment at the hotel; or do they move to the area only because of hotel employment. The answers to these questions are far from satisfactory. It has been reported earlier that it is estimated that each job brings 1 • .5 persons in search of it (Mitchell, 1971), another estimate (Centre D'etudes du Tourisme, 197.5: 12) is two persons in search of each job. These are general estimates. The only data available are from the Esh and Rosenblum (197.5) study of the Gambi:l.. There it was found that 43.1i't of the employees of the four charter hotels were 44 born in areas proximate to the hotels. Of those born outside the proximate area 19.2'iV moved into the area before the hotels commenced business; of the JJ .51" who moved into the area after the hotels commenced business, the authors found that only 17p could be considered genuine hotel/tourist migrations. In Mykonos, Loukissas (1975) found that most of the hotel employees were not natives of the island. This could not be attributed to the "negative mentality ••• which assimilates the profession to that of a 'servant' profession which is not held in high esteem ll (Kanellakis, 1975: 68 - 69) since the employees were Greeks. In North Kohala, as also in Guam and Truk, employees come from the areas surrounding the hotels. It might be inferred that potential employees are drawn from a wider geographical area when tourism increases and reaches the "institutionalized" stage. Before that, when standardization of services is not as important, and when hotels are small and generally family-owned, the vast majority of employees will come from areas closest to the hotels. 5.06. What patterns does the employment take? Do they reflect local political and economic strata? The clearest evidence available is in Samy's (n.d.) study of a luxury hotel in Fiji. In that case not only did levels of employment reflect the economic power structure of the country, but the type of work was related to the stereotypes the hotel management and tourist industry had of the different ethnic groups -- there was no evident relationship between qualifications and type of employment: Europeans (mostly expatriates) occupied almost all the execu.tive and managerial positions, they predominated in administration and reservations; occupations requiring face-to-face contact with tourists were staffed mainly by Fijians (reception and tour desks, hand, switchboards, bar, and security); and other lower level positions were staffed by Indo....Fijians (accounts, maintenance, gardens. and kitchens). The management confirmed the ethnic approach -- the European 45 is more a "public relations man"; the Fijian, "an extrovert"; and the Indo-Fijian, "more an introvert ll • The same appears to obtain in Tahiti (see Robineau, n.d.): At the top are the foreigners, non-Tahitians; followed by the 11 creoles " (Europeans born in Tahiti), the Chinese, the "demis" (descendants of Polynesian-Europeans), and, the lowest level, the Polynesians who constitute nearly 80 percent of the population. In Hawaii, Kent points out that the native born Hawa.iian (as contrasted with the Haole) occupies the lowest rungs of the hotel industry. This phenomenon, called "layering", is also said to exist in Guam: liThe third layer, comprising those who follow directions •• carry the suitcases ••• serve the tables, n~ke the beds, and perform the innumerable chores that are necessary to keep the island going, the visitors happy, and the people in the top layers prosperous 11 is mainly comprised of na tive Chamorro-Gua.manians (Sanchez, n.d.: 85) • It has also been pointed out, with regard to Hawaii (see Kent, n.d.) that the tourism industry pays the lowest wage scales in comparison with construction, communications and utilities, manufacturing, and finance. This last comparison does not appear to be general: in Norocco, for instance, earnings in the hotel and restaurant business can be as much as seven times higher than in agriculture and "even twice as hieh as in construction work lt (Kjellstrom, 1974: 279). This would also appear to be the case in Bali (Udayana. University: 1974). A distinction should, in fact, be drawn between Hawaii' 5 developed econolT\Y and other areas where the economy has not reached that level of development. In the latter case, it could be hypothesized that hotel employment generally results in wages higher the.n are available in other sectors for persons with like qualifications and ability. 5.07. Another aspect of this discussion of hotel employment is the relationship between employees, and the possibilities for promotion of those au'the lowest levels. In .Flji, and the Gambia - two areas for which there is data - the attitudes of each ethnic group to the other reflects general stereotypes: the European 46 expatriate manager both in Fiji and the Gambia believes that the hotel will be a shambles without him; he believes, in Fiji, that the Fijian has a low intellect. and is not entirely honest. In the Gambia, the managment believes that the Gambian is dishonest, lies, and cheats. In both cases, there is little understanding of local talents and needs. In these circumstances it is not surprising that promotion is rare. There is another aspect to this argument-- one that Kent (n.d.) expresses forcefully: The skills learned in hotels (except, perhaps in hotel maintenance) are not readily transferrable. Therefore to work in a hotel at a lower level is to be condemned to a dreary, monotonous jol:), at a young age, from which there is no escape. Carried to the extreme. his argument is that because of the comparatively low wages, and the neglible opportunities for promotion why should the poor, those on welfare, work in hotels when comparative wages are low? Who will babysit for the poor. They do not "want to be exploited •• there is no dignity in earning enough money to starve upo:n II (Kent, n.d.: 186). Here again, it would seem that Kent's argument should be limited to the peculiar circumstances of Hawaii. Certainly, the chances for pro~otion at the lowest levels of hotel emplqyment are slim. But is this a~{ different from any other industry - say, for a factory worker in the steel mills 1 The other important aspect. touched upon in this and the preceding paragraph the reflection in employment patterns of local (and national) political and economic structure, the obstacles to advancement placed on the lower economic 11 sections, will be discussed in detail below. 5.08. The discussion has been 60 far confined to employment in hotels, largely because the evidence in this regard is available. Tourism has an impact beyond emplo~nent in hotels: mainly the construction industry, but also in agriculture, business and trade. :Host of the evidence in this regard i~ in the nature of llguesstilnates ll • The only clear evidence is to be. found in Packer's (1974) jJ See paras. 5.27 - 5.29 below. 47 study of l'lykonos, Bodrum (Turkey) and Leavenworth. In all three towns Packer found that tourism increased employment both in traditional occupations and also in new occupations that tourism gave rise tOt Particularly in Hykonos .tourism income formed the wherewithal by which the residents could modernize. This modernization also took place in Bodrum and, to a much lesser extent, in Leavenworth where there was a much lower reliance on tourism. In Mykonos tourism plays a dominant role in the economy. However , it should be realized that in most other areas tourism plays a small role in the economy -- for instance, 5% of the labor force in Fiji is employed, directly and indirectly, in tourism (LeFevre, n.d.: 105); in Tahiti. it is J% (see Robineau. n.d.); in Bali, it was 0.68fo of the working population in 1972 and would be even lower (0.45%) in 1974, according to Udayana University (1974). 5.09. Despite the low percentage of employees in tourism and tourism-related occupations, in relation to the total labor force generally. what social impact has tourism employment had on host populationsl Forster (1964) suggested that the character of work would change. This is not the only result. First, employment in the tourism industry is largely seasonal (Packer, 1974; Kjellstrom" 1974; Esh & Rosenblum. 1975; Greenwood, 1970, 1972). This means that tourism employment only occupies the individual for part of a year; it must be supplemented by other work (in agriculture, for instance, as in the case of Morocco; or 1traditional occupations - carpentry. architecture -- as in lJiykonos). This is not always the case and for many, the non-tourism season is also the IIhungryll season. Second, the greater the dependence on tourism, combineKi with "institutionalized" tourism, the greater the likelihood that shifts in domand will leave many unemployed, sometimes with no possibility of finding alternative occupations. This was the condition of Greenwood's (1970, 1972) 48 Fuenterrabians. This is the likely condition of the Tahitian who now prefers wage labor (Finney, 1975). This is the fear of the Hykonian today (Loukissas, 1975; Hoagland, 1976). As Force says, tourism cycles can mean unemployment of many who have been attracted to uroo.n areas by tourism. The unemployed would then find themselves living in tropical slums, frustrated and unable to return to a "substandard" life style. "Such individuals am their family members are prime candidates for malnutrition, psychological and neurological disorders, and temptations and I retaliative I behavior ••• (Force, 1975: 360): Third, a question raised by Nunez (1974) was that even though there is relative insecurity in tourism why is it that so many individuals leave their traditional occupations. A partial answer is the level of unemployment in traditional occupations, economic opportunity in tourism. However, as in the case of migration to cities, there are more reasons than the mere prospect of a wage incomes received regularly: scarcity or loss of land, better opportunities for children, the greater availability of social services are some of the non-economic reasons (Force & Force, 1975). As Finney (1975) points out with reference to Tahitians, the transition to wage labor involved a change in values: Tahitians distinguish between farming work and money work. The former is considered II dull , dirty, and old-fashioned, while wage labor is exciting, clean, and modern way to earn one1s living" (1975: 188). F'ourth, there are adjustments of hours of work and methods of work (see Packer, 1974; Greenwood, 1970, 1972). These adjustments may take some time since they may involve adjusting values to the economic aspects of tourism. In both Hykonos and Bodrum, at the initial stages of tourism local landlords found it difficult to accept payment for their accommodation fr~n tourists because of customary hospitality. In Micronesia, the residents face th~~ sa.'1le problem. Further, in Hicronesia there are also differences between what tht3 Hicronesians believe tourists will want in the way of food and accommodation and - 49- what tourists actually wanto For instance, Micronesians do not want to serve papayas (which are served to pigs) and bananas (which t'tE poor consume) to tourists who are believed to be wealthy.; nor do they want tourists to live in shacks without electricity when the Micronesians prefer a IIfunctional concrete cottage with an electric light bulb hanging £rom the ceilinglt (Ashman, n.do: 137) -- to the Micro- nesian, the concrete cottage is progress I Fifth, although adjustments are made the extent to which these affect social relationships or responsibilities is a moot question -- the Gambian employed in the industry who leaves his village to come to work in the hotels does not ignore his responsibility to kith and kin (Esh & Rosenblum, 1975). It would seem that ties with the extended family are maintained notwi thstanding migration to an urban environment (see Force & Force, 1975) 0 But there is little hard evidence of the nature of the impact that tourism has on families of migrants. In J.tykonos, the family continued as a viable unit even though there was an increased tendency to live separately. This separate living ~'as accepted as a principle prior to the advent of tourism, economics prevented its attainment (see Packer, 1974). Greenwood's analysis can also be attributed to industrialization and does not appertain to tourism alone. Hence, it is not dealt with. So too in Colpied and La Roche t the breakdown of the extended family was as much the result of wider economic forces in addition to tourism (see Reiter, 1973) and the same can be said of Kippel (Friedl, 1973). 5.10. The literature contains innumerable references to the increase in land prices lareely through speculation, and the gradual loss of land by the local populatiom for instance a 2000fo increase in value in Uykonos (Packer, 1974), and between 300 ~b - 900tv in Kailua, West Hawaii (Fukunaga, n.d.). This 50 prices land out of the reaeh of most local residents (Greenwood, 1972; Fukunaga, n.d. ) • The process by which this takes place deserves some examination. At the early stage of tourism development, it is the local owners who profit. Land, often thought to be worthless (for example, non-agricultural areas near the sea) obtains a new valuation as it can be put to a new use; the local owner sells the property at an enormous profit. Alternatively, the local owner converts the formerly valueless property to the new use and makes a profit from it. Gradually, as tourism develops , it is non-resident, economically powerful fellow nationals who generally enter into the real estate market. It is at this stage that land prices soar above what some may opine is their real worth. At a still later stage of tourism development the national elite, usually in partnership with international hotel chains, demands land which drives prices up still higher. This process is not invariable, since at times the national government itself may enter into the tourism field at an early stage and acquire lands for a generally nominal compensation to the owners. What seems evident in the process is that fellow nationals themselves are the first to make the profit. The principle behind the complaints is, then, not so much price, but deprivation .... of local owners through what is impliedly fraudulent dealing. LeFevre's example of land speculation in the Cook Islands (LeFevre, n.d.:93) crystallizes this argument. The effects of speculation can be viewed from two aspects: First, the type of tenurial system involved; and, second, the development of policye Where there is individual tenure, as in Hykonos, Bodrtun, Leavenworth, or Bali, the sale of land is still a matter of individual arrangement, and individual calculations. It is when group tenures are involved, that sales affect a larger ntunber of individuals. Further, group tenures are usually "traditional U tenures, and What takes place generally is a conflict between modern and traditional law with those following traditional law ignorant of the 51 intent and effect of the modern law (see also, Friedl, 1973). 5.11. This leads to the second aspect. the development of policy. It seems to be important to determine what lands are sold. to whom they are sold. and for how much. Restriction of sales and verification of price paid are important. But they are mere dead letters when powerful interests can get around them -- through, for instance, ostensible purchases in the name of a local resident. In other words policy. without the means or will to enforce it, is hardly useful. Weal thy Athenians could construct , notwithstanding an order suspending building; Turkish economically powerful interests could do the same (Packer. 1974). 'What appears to be a feasible approach. particularly in the case of group tenures, is that suggested -by HcGrath (1975). He suggests the creation of land control boards as the final authority in all land use cases. Among the goals of the board he reeommends that it should ensure that all land-use proposals are in conformity with a master resource development plan; and that IIthere is maximum direct participation by the original landowners b,y providing them with a proportionate share of the annual profits and a share of the stock of the venture undertaken on their land ll (HcGrath, 1975: 139). These proposals were first made for the Trust Territor,y of the Pacific Islands in 1946; are to be found in Fiji (where native land is controlled by the Native Land Board); and are being implemented in british Columbia. OwnerShip 5.12. Closely linked with the previous section is the changing character of ownership patterm - from residents to lI outsiders ll (who may be resident for part of the year) These patterns extend to land. and business. In Leavenworth, the downtown businesses are increasingly owned by immigrants (Packer, 1974); the 8am4:l can be said of fI.ykonos (Loukissas. 1975). In North Kohala. the supemarket 52 replaces the neighborhood store (Fukunaga, n.d.); in Tahiti, the small family hotel is replaced by international hotels (Robineau, n.d.) and the same takes place in the Gambia (Esh & ltosenblum, 1975). But this is not a universal phenomenon -- Antigua is an example where local ownership still prevails, although it is a matter of inference that ownership is mainly in the hands of the local economic elite. This transition is not, however, necessarily connected with the rise of II insti tutionalized 11 tourism: in Hawaii, for instance, the control of both business and land was already in the hands of immigrant companies long before the development of tourism; in Leavenworth, the influx of outsiders into the field of business was related to community revival which only had tourism as one of its r,oals, and a minor goal at that. Competition for local resources 5.13. There are three points in the literature that will be discussed in this section: (1) Use of local resources, particularly consumer goods and physical resources, by both tourists and the host population; (2) competition for employment in the tourist industry and common use of social services by the host population and immigrants; and (3) diversion of resources for expenditure on the tourist industry rather than on other sectors. 5.14. The examples under the first point relate mainly to rising price.:; of consumer goods and shortages for the local population during the tourist season, and the exclusion of the host population from the use of its beaches. In Bodrum, the price of fish during the tourist season is three times higher than in the non-tourist season. Further, the fishermen sell fish first to the restaurants that serve tourists; the surplus, if any, is then available for local consumption (Packer, 1974). In the Gambia, the price of a bag:of rice rises -5.3- during the tourist season (Esh & Rosenblwn, 1975). In l1.Ykonos, the cales are crowded during the tourist season so tat residents can find it difficult to get a seat; the waterfront promenade tourist crowd makes it difficult for the residents to walk in comfort (Packer, 1974; Lould.ssas, 1975).. In Filenterrabia, tourists get pride of plaoe at the A.larde (Greenwood, 1974); in Niagara-on-the-Lake, tourist cars tend to crowd out the local residents (Doxey, 1976); and the same occurs in Puerto Vallarta (Evans, 1976). In lfa,waii, the Mauna Kea Beach Hotel has stopped local access to the beach (Tong, n.d.) and this is quite common in the Caribbean. In the Pacific Islands, the growth of recreational tourism has accellerated the decline of shallow water fish which were part of the local diets (Johannes, 1975).. '!'hese examples could be multiplied (see Aerni, 1972, with regard to game parks)o They point to the need for both careful planning and consistent execution of plans in the light of national social and economic goals. 5.15. The influx of migrants leads to increased caupetition for local jobs. This happens in the Caribbean (see Blake, 1974), in Hawaii (see Kent, n.d.) to mention two examples. The migrants, generally unskilled, are to be found at the lowest economic levels. They constitute an additional burden on usually inadequate social services -- health, education - and a burden on the tax payer where social security schemes are in force (see Robineau, n.d.; Kent, n.d.). In addition, migrants usually become the target of local frustrations and fears. Force and Force (1975) point out that this competition between locals and migrants could cause severe family disabilities. 5.16. It is often said that" it is not unusual to detect some bias toward tourist-related facilities and away from the more general need ll (Lefevre, n.d.: 105). }i"'l1kunaga (n.d.), for instance, suggests that investment in agriculture 54 rather than tourism would better sustain development. Perez (1973-74) believes that expenditures to augment police forces, in marketing, hotel training schools, construction of roads, and extension of airports to support tourism mi5ht be more economicallY spent on projects designed to assist the local population. While these complaints have a grain of truth, it should be noted, first, that in many instances the expenditure of the local government on infrastruct ure construction benefits the local popu.l.ation as well (for instance, on roads and water supplY). 1'" ' l-rther, it is expenditure that lIiB.y ,nave to be under'taken independently of tourism. There are, undoubt,ed...LY, l.nS1..ances wnen this lJaf:i not been the case (as, :tor instance, in Mykonos Where 'the new water sUPP..LY Wd.S made avai.J..able :"'0 a hotel ana o:t!ered. to passing yachts rather than th~ local population even 'tnough the r~siaen'ts uesperatelY needed it -- see, Loukissas, 1<;175). SttCOnd, in 'this regard. it might be worth cOnSl.C1t;ll'l.ng tnt;; statement OJ. 1\.jellstrom who terms the argument about 'the diversl.o.u 01' re:sources to provide tourl.sts wi.th goods and sel'vices not a viJ.a..ble to, or beyona tne purchasing power of the local population "true, but irrelevant u • Accoraing to him the "relevant criterion is instead u' catering t.o tOUl'ism makes a satis:tactory contributl.On to t.he attainment of th~ row of objectives society has set 10r l.tself. Spal''tan monastenes ::Ln lI'rance see nothing reprehensible in earnl.ng huge proi'its on the sale oi a very special liquor ••• There l.S no reason for c~untrl.es 1..0 be any less rational or li.mmoral l • II (Kjellstrom, 1974 ; 390) • .J.l/. There is a l.inal point in this discussion regarding compet.l.tion for .LOcal resources: Whl..le it l.S 'true that most examp.les eVl.d.ence tHe lack of planning and controJ., i-u~ point at wnich these ~olf1p..Laints arise is significant. '1 ney usually become voca.l at wha't .lJoxey (19'/6) calls the lIannoyance" or lIalfl.o.g~uil:)m" S'L3.ges of tOW'l.sm development.. 'lnl.S l.::; also the stage of "l.nStl.t-utl.onalJ.zed." t.ourl.sm • .Luss of .local abilityt...o control, or a 'OOll.e1" t.ha't t.he local population no longer cun...rols, tourism together Wl. t.n l.llcr~sing numbers of touris"LS who maintain a socia.l a.istance, ~erves to locus ..Local .tears ana to emphasize tne elemew" o.t aeprivation. Aerni's e:xa.mple (1972) of t.he aifferences l.ll l11eaning of game parks t.u .local Ugalnans ana the tourists is apposite: Thougn tne ost.ensible complaint W"db the prohibition of hunting by the loca.l popU.J.ation in tue game pg.rks; ...he real reason was the lack of contact between tne nost population ana 'wle safari t.ourists. The Ugandans felt neglected, a mere object. of cUJiosity; they naa not veen consulted. the meaning 01 satari tourism had not been explained to them; some one else made the arrangements and was making money on tne~vur~sts. Impact .Q!l wQmen 5.18. There is growing evidence in the literature on the impact of tourism on the position of women. Probab~ the most dramatic is Cottington's study referred to in Fukunaga (n.d.). Hotel employment gave women economic opportunity and consequent independence; while men often continued to work on the plantation, the women worked a forty-hour shift at the hotel; their styles of dress and their confidence improved. I t has been suggested that tourism employment increased divorces. There does not seem to be a direct causal relationship between work in the hotel and divorce. The decline in marital stability must be viewed against a background of previous patterns "Wd1ere women were confined to the home and their contacts limited to rela ti ves general~. Husbands were the bread winners. The movement of women out of the house, the potential for rumor. probab~ on~ aggravated pre-existing strife. A later study by Smith, though not representative, indicated that once the initial transition period was over, many women experienced an uincreased sense of self-identity and self-worth. They liked the material t.hings that the new income would make possible, and the new voice they now had in the family decision-making process ll (Fukunaga, n.d.: 210). In Fiji. hotel 56 employment was usually the first wage employment for Indo...Fijian women (see Samy, n.d. ) • In the Gambia, women are not generally employed -- it is a rna t ter left to the discretion of the departmental head (Esh & Rosenblum, 1975). What is interesting about the Gambia is that the average age of the women employees is lower trlAn that of the male employees. In Hykonos, women went out and bargained with tourists who needed accommodation. Tourism also brought them weaving as a source of income, although it did mean the giving up of some traditional patterns of weaving (Packer, 1974). It does not seem that women were frequently employed either in Bodrum or in horocco in hotels. 5.19. The preceding paragraph should irrlicate that tourism does not r..a.ve the same impact on women in different countries. It is largely a matter of the culture of host populations, whether women gain directly from tourism. For ezarnple, in North Kohala, the changed position of women could be explained by reference to the dominant values in American culture which stress both equality and self-determination. \'lliat tourism did was to form a catalyst for the attainment of these values. Probably the most frequent area in which women gain economical~ from tourism is in the realm of handicrafts. But more evidence is needed on this. higration 5.20. One of the results of tourism is to slow down the gradual depletion of the labor force-- pa.rticular~ the movement of the young (and often the best educated) away from towns and villages to urban centers. Examples of this abound: in Lea,venworth, hykonos, and Bodrum (Packer, 1974); in North Kohala (Fukunaga, n.d.) • In Colpied and La. Roche the same situation occurred (Reiter, 1973). It is of interest to note that a significant amount of tourism commences in relatively 57 economically underdeveloped areas. What tourism does is to provide additional opportunities for the local population and thereb,y to slow down the migration rate. . This is one of the goals in the development of tourism in the Cook Islands (see Lefevre, n.d.: 87 - 97). Nutrition, health, education, and welfare 5.21. The consensus of opinion is that nutrition standards are improved with tourism. There is unparallelled economic growth in Fuenterrabia (Greenwood, 1972); the intake of beef has increased in hykonian diet (Packer, 1974); in Antigua and Barbados diets have improved and the range of consumer goods available has increased (Joshi & Sharpston, 1973; Doxey & Associates, n.d.); the Tongans are eating better (Urbanowicz, 1974); both Fiji arrl Tahiti are able to import food stuffs (Robineau, n.d., Lefevre, n.d.). This capacity to increase dietary intakes is partly the result of a rising income and of the greater availability of goods with tourism. In North Kohala, the advent of tourism has resulted in a rising median income, the growth of supermarkets, the provision of credit, and a whole range of consumer expenditures (particularly on furniture and TV sets) -- an expenditure assisted by the fact that many more women are now working, mainly in the tourism industry (see Fukunaga, n.d.). 5.22. Less is known about the impact of tourism on health. Joshi and Sharps ton (1973) have suggested that tourism may have brought some strains of influenza not known to Antigua and some venereal disease. Journalists (notably West, 1973; and Turner & Ash, 1975) have indicated that tourism is linked with the decline in starrlards of health. The same is said of urbanisation. However, the link has not been proved. On the other hand, the Swedes in Los Santos ins isted on, and introduced better standards of hygiene and health.(Xoore, 1970). Health facilities have increased in Puerto Vallarta (Evans, 1976). But the evidence 58 does not permit of any general conclusions. 5.23. The evidence relating to education is more irrlirect than direct. Certainly , there are hotel training projects (11% of the hotel employees interviewed in the Gambia had been trained in the UNDP hotel training course: Esh & Rosenblum, 1975). But what tourism facilitates is the acquisition of an income which allows families to achieve some of their goals - education is one of the most important. Whether in Mykonos or Bodrum (Packer, 1974), North Kohala ('Fukunaga) or Los Santos (Moore, 1970), education for the young is becoming a reality. Undoubtedly, values dictate which sex is more likely to be educated - in Bodrum, for instance, education is more easily available for boys than girls -- b~t there is a general trend towards increasing education. 5.24. Like data on health, data on other social services -- water, electricity, roads, political access -- are meagre and inferential. Improvements in sanitation and hygiene, originally :made for tourists, have been used by local residents (Moore, 1970; Packer, 1974; Reiter, 1973; Evans, 1976). However, how far these improvements have spread is a :matter of some 'doubt. Roads have been built which ha ve increased access and are used by the local population - but, in the case of Bodrllm, for instance, this was a decision prior to the growth of tourism (Packer, 1974) • 5.25. One of the common charges against tourism is that it increases crime, delinquency, and prostitution. This is a complaint generally voiced by journalists (see Esh & Rosenblum, 1975; Turner & Ash, 1975). This is especially so, so the , argument proceeds, in the case of crime and delinquency, when the life style of the tourists is so much higher than that of the host population as to arouse feelings of envy and resentment. The example generally cited is that of the Caribbean. But there, as in :many other areas, there should be a careful assessment of the causes 59 and the socioeconomic background: high. unemployment t poor housing, the inability to pIan for the next day, stark poverty, and cultural history. The tourist is often the focus, not necessarily the cause. Further, there is little analysis of how many crimes are committed against fellow citizens rather than tourists. Finally, is it that crimes have increased, or that crime statistics have improved? Fukunaga (as also Kent, n.d.) who repeat this charge against tourism present statistics which show a comparative decrease in crime with the growth of tourism -- which Fukunaga attributes to the cultural integrity of the local population in North KohaIa. In fact, in the case of North KohaIa, the increase in crime could also be attributed to the loss of employment with the impending closure of the sugar mill and, again, the inability to provide support for the family. Tourism brings to the area more people than there are jobs and another possibility, inadequately assessed, is that tl?-~ increased population demands for- mal measures of control for which informal methods formerly sufficed (Forster, 1964). With regard to prostitution, it is true that some tourists undoubtedly seek these services. However, there is a tenuous link between the creation of these centres and tourism in general. Authors who propound such a link do not assess the existence of these centres before tourism, determine whether it is the commercialization of a fairly widespread practice, or whether their growth is attributable to other factors -- the local urban population, the military, for instance. Demonstration effects -- ~ll ,.-26. The impact of tourism in the socioeconomic sphere is much more evidenfA. than in the realm of values: changes in domestic architecture to accommodate tourists, hygiene, education, employment, technological improvements, health, food habits, hour,s of work, agricultural production. And yet, even here, the 60 changes have been mediated by local (and national) leaders and resident foreigners. \tJhether it has been reconstruction in Leavenworth (Packer, 1974) or technology in Los Santos, or house construction in Kippe1 and Co1pied (Noore, 1970; Friedl, 1973; Reiter, 1973) the conduits of change have been residents or fellow nationals accepted by the local population. Since this process has already 11 been examined at length before repetition is unnecessary. Suffice it DO repeat that the demonstration effect of tourism is not as direct or inevitable as it is made out to be. Distribution of benefits 5.27. It should be obvious that in the growth and development of tourism economic . and political interests, not necessarily economic rationality, prevaiJ,i quite often: Local initiative is supplanted in almost every phase by more powerful central political authorities and economic powers; land and businesses increasingly pass into the hands of non-residents; consultation with local authorities diminishes; more and more. as Finney (1975) expressed. it, the local population becomes a wage proletariat with the resident ( or original inhabitant as in the case of Guam or Tahiti) at the lowest levels. To deny economic and political interests that are capable of riding roughshod over the local population is to deny reality. Political factors often play a role -- not only in the determination of the type of tourism that will be fostered, but also in where resorts will be located. As Kjellstrom (1974) points out with regard to Fez, the choice of this city was influenced. by the need to cater to the politically important Fassi. The luxury hotels there are unprofitable and Kje11stram views this as "presumptive evidence that the best placed and connected segments of the local elite are able to steer the supply of luxury acconnnodation (and food) according to its own preferences, whether this is in the interest of tourism or not" (1974: 382). So also was the grant of a capital subsidy to the Rabat-Hilton in excess of the 11 See paras. 4.28 - 4.34. 61 government •s own standards. In Bodrum, the economically powerful in IDir and foreign interests are buying up land and planning their own schemes for resorts; the same is the case in Hoorea, an island a short distance away from Papeete": But to admit that powerful economic and political interests have a way of paverting development to serve their own purposes is not to support the suggestion of Sanchez that tourism crystallizes, nay freezes, the existing layering of society. For this charge to be proved it must be shown that tourism prevents those at the lowest levels of eoonomic strata from opting for any other jobs (presumed to be available for them); and that employment in the tourism sector prevents those so employed from improving their status. Another implicit assumption in the argument is that persons so employed have talents which could be more suitably employed in another. sector. The evidence available does not permit of such generalization. 5.28. There is another aspect to this discussion: It is a matter of inference -- except, possibly, in the case of Hawaii -- that those employed in the tourism sector from the local population are generally unskilled or semi-skilled. It is therefore possible that. given the location of tourism destination areas, the employed are likely to be from the category of the unemployed/underemployed. However, this inference should be accepted with caution in the light of the evidence (Esh & Rosenblum, 1975) that those employed might have formal qualifications higher than those of the average fellow citizen. 5.29. The final aspect of this discussion is that the maldistribution of benefits, the competition with immigrants, does lead to conflicts and resentments. T.hese generally surface at the "institutionalized ll stage of tourism. There is exbEmely little evidence of the working of distributive mechanisms within the employed groups -- as both Esh & Rosenblum (1975) and FI'anciIlion( 1974/1975) 62 point out. We know little how the dance association in Bali distributes the income from a performance among the members of the village; we do not know whether the kin of the hotel employee in the Gambia continue to have a claim on him and his earnings. These are matters worth further investigation, especially if the social impact of tourism is to be adequately assessed. In Fuenterrabia, in Bodrum, and in ~lykonos the evidence is that earnings encourage inter-generational conflict. But these are cases where the primary obligation is well-defined as the nuclear family. VI. THE ll-iPACT OF TOURISM - PART II: SOCIOCULTURAL 6.00. In this chapter the impact of tourism on arts and crafts will be evaluated. The topics discussed below are art and handicrafts • architecture. archaeology. dance, festivals, and the "commercializationll of culture. Art ~ handicrafts 6.01. In the fields of art and handicrafts it is generally agreed that tourism has assisted in revival. preservation. diversification, or. at least. job retention. In southwestern U.S.A. Deitch (1974) says that lithe Indian arts of the Southwest are an example of one instance when the coming of the white man did not destroy something native. Rather. the contact with Anglo society heightened and in certain instances revived old traditionsl! (1974: 15). The jewellery, and rings produced by the iJavajo have improved in quality; new designs are now used by this tribe as well as the Hopi and Zuni; production has diversified into the production of silver platters. and decorative cigarette boxes; women were encouraged to continue rug weaving; new media were introduced. Old forgotten designs were traced and revived by museums and archaeologists. In all this. tourism assjsted in the increase in sales and a revival of interest in Indian art. In 63 the Cook Islands. LeFevre points out that the recent manufacture of handicrafts by two companies appears to have good prospects of sale to tourists. In Mykonos, Packer (1974) says that tourist demand for traditional sweaters and wool items originally produced for home consumption has now found a market outlet. With the assistance of the Nykonos Agricultural Cooperati ve new s;t.yles. new materials. and new techniques are now used; knitting and crochetting are now quite common. These items, produced mainly by women, adds to their income. Kjellstrom says that it is "incorrect to talk about job creation due to tourism in (the area of handicrafts); job retention would be a more appropriate term. The demand emanating from tourism could be most helpful in smoothing what might otherwise have been a brutal transitional process with much job dislocation in handicrafts due to increasing modernization of the Noroccan economy. The artisans are carrying on a long artistic tradition of producing delightful items for ornamental purposes as well as utilitarian goods for everyday life ••With no tourism in Horocco, several branches of handicrafts would have languished into relative obscurity instead of experiencing the rather bouyant demand of today ••• 11(1974 : 281-283). The number of artisans is estimated at 41.203, most of them being carpet weavers. rlay (n.d.) tentatively agrees that tourism has helped to preserve traditional art in PNG. 6.02. But what sort of art does tourism encourage? Is it that peculiar species, "airport art II , such as the visitors to the Polynesian Cultural Centre usually buy "probably because of uneducated tastes" (McGrevy, 1975: 23)? It has been suggested that mass tourism, with its demand for souvenirs, encourages the entry of fakes and lowers the general quality and standards of art ( Udayana University, 1974). hay (n.d.) has examined this question perceptively with reference to PNG. He places art in the continuum ranging from IItrue traditional art" through "psuedo traditional 64 art" to IIwholly introduced art forms". Of the first type are those works which, without regard to aethetic quality, are llmade within a traditional society for use -- religious or secular -- within that society or for trade with traditional trading partners" (n.d.: 125). In the second category, which includes the worst form -- airport art. the works are usually mass produced by persons who have no knowledge of the traditional culture and are often not even members of the society whose art they pretend to exemplify. In the third category. embellished with varying degrees of creativity and adaptation the example, in PNG, ure tapa handbags and the work of individual creative artists. Nay believes that the role of the tourist lies somewhere between people who deprive a nation of its treasures and who encourage art preservation. But the tourist has also encouraged the development of pseudo traditional art, particularly airport art, faking, and the llbastardisation of traditional art" (n.d.: 127) - the adaptation of traditional forms to meet foreign tastes or needs, for instance, the reduction of shields and houseboards to suitcase size. Hay finds both the tourist and the art dealer to blame in the introduction of pseudo traditional art. Tourists do not know much about traditional art in PNG and therefore are less likely than collectors, administrators and missionaries. to assist in depriving the nation of its treasures. On the other hand, l'i8.y does not believe that tourism can do anything to assist the plastic arts. The tourist, he says. is a one-shot buyer t generally of souvenirs which capture the spirit of .the place or are amusing, provided they are small and inexpensive. '.OJ. Although Hay does refer to the decline in standards of art represented by the growth of pseudo traditional art, he does not deal with two related questions: F'irst, as hcKean (1974) points out with regard to Bali t a whole range of art works 65 are still being produced -- some atrocious (both in style and quality). others excellent. The former are often produced as pot-boUers. Second. the appreciation of art is much a matter of taste and the beauty of it lies in the eyes of the beholder. Although, therefore, purists will carp about declining standards, since the art produced does serve a function can it be criticized too strongly on aesthetic grounds? Architecture 6.04. The literature under review does not provide any instance of an architectural style being introduced as a result of tourism, except for Fuenterrabia. There, Greenwood (1972) says the city walls were renovated; and the fishermens I quarter, where most of the tourists congregate, has been rebuilt. In Leavenworth, the adoption of the Alpine theme in downtown architecture is more closely related to the town's attempt to revive itself than to tourism (Packer, 1974). In }~ykonos. the models for imitation in architecture are to be found in Athens (Loukissas, 1975). Archaeology 6.05. The growth of tourism in }~ykonos can be partly attributed to the fact that the island of Delos is onlY three miles away. Archaeological finds -- Greek and Roman antiquities first found on the sea bed -- first stimulated tourist interest in Bodrum. There is now an underwater Archaeological Husetun and the restored Castle of St. Peter both of which form tourist attractions. ~ "commercialization" of culture 6.06. Forster (1964) and Cohen (1972a) speak of the IIcommercializationll of culture, Greenwood (1974) uses the term IIcommoditizationll. The terms. which are 66 interchangeable, apply to a phenomenon that takes place with the institutionalization of tourism. The phenomenon refers to aspects of the local culture (ceremonial dances are the most common example) which, with the growth of tourism are monetized. What the local population formerly did as a matter of spontaneous obligation, or ritual, is now performed for the visitor for reward. The term "commercializationll includes the II revival" of ceremonial that may have been lost, forgotten, or abandoned (the dances of Hawaii or Tahiti are prime examples of this; so too, it would appear, is the financially successful Polynesian Cultural Centre). This latter aspect has also been called the development of a "phony-folk culture". 6.07. Several consequences are said to flow from this commercialization and development of the phony-folk culture. First, it often transfers the ceremonial from the sacred to the secular realm, thereby de'basing the value of the ceremony in the eyes of the mat population. Secom, this transfer, unreplaced by other values, can cause social anomie. Third, the commercialization extems only to those aspects of local culture which are deemed by tourism.promoters to be of importance -- it is the valuation of the promoters not the host population, that determines what is of importance and what should be seen by tourists. Fourth, the ceremonial tends to become standardized, and to portray a narrower cultural base than actually exists. Fifth, when there is a "revival" of ceremonial it is unlikely that the performers are hatives' and there is also the implicit degradation of the culture of the host population by asking them to perform lias they were II rather than as they are. The entire process becomes what l1aceannell (1973) calls the "staged authentic II - a false front presented as real. These processes are hardly conducive to comprehending cultures. They are more likely to present a "false picture II of a host population. 67 6.08. Greenwood, the leading protagonist of the dangers of cultural commoditization, supports his view by reference to the Alarde, the annual celebration in Fuenterrabia of the defense of the city against the French. Before institutionalized tourism, this event was the focal point of community membership, a symbol of unity and common membership despite occupational differences. It was an event in which all Fuenterrabians joined in willingly, an event that emphasized that all Fuenterrabians were equal. With the advent of mass tourism, tourists became observers; the Spanish national authorities decided that the annual celebration should be performed twice on the same d~ for the benefit of the tourists. The result was that Fuenterrabians were no longer willing to take part in the celebrations. They felt that the event had lost all meaning; that the outsiders did not understand the supreme importance of the event and viewed it as one more offering to induce tourists into the region. Greenwood (1974) does not clarify whether the resentment of the Fuenterrabians was caused by the failure of the national government to consult them or whether it was really due to the failure of the "outsider" to appreciate the importance of the occasion. May (n.d.) offers another example in support of Greenwood' s view: May believes that the mass production of pseudo traditional art in PNG "has been partly the result of breaking the link between the art and its traditional religious or secular function in the society •• " (n.d.: 1 26) • 6.09. However, other examples in the literature caution against acceptance of Greenwood's view as a generalization: McKean (1973) points out that the Balinese distinguish carefully between audiences; when there is primarily a tourist aud- ience, a dance performance is cancelled if the audience does not turn up in sufficient numbers. The performance is not cancelled when performed primarily for a8 a sacred audience. Further, performing for tourists permits the Balinese to do what they have alw~s enjoyed doing -- performing; the proceeds from tourism are then spent (at least partially) to strengthen their own cultural base (see also McKean, 1974). Deitch (1974) says that the ''kachina'' ( a wooden figure symbolizing a supernatural spirit mediator between the Pueblo people and their gods) is modified for sale to non-tribals. The figure is sold, shorn of most of its symbolism, thus maintaining a distinction between the religious purpose of the kachina for tribals, and the needs of collectors. Swain (1974) provides an example of how the "Mola" (a traditional blouse worn by the women) has become a focal point of ethnic identity, a rallying point, and a successful commercial product for sale to tourists, for the Cuna of San BIas. Evans (1976) provides another example: in Puerto Vallarta the holiday of the patron saint may have taken on a commercial quality but it has now been extended "from a two to a twelve-day celebration" in which thousands partidpate, "many in neighborhood- planned performances and costumes" (1976: 196). The final example is taken from Micronesia. Ashman (n.d.) reports that when a woman objected to commercializing sacred dance for tourists, another (an older woman, one of Truk's leading dancers) said "that dancing for money has several redeeming benefit.. Among them, it would renew interest in learning the traditional dances ••• Dancing for pay would give (the young) an incentive to learn, would give them spending money which parents cannot provide, and would keep them busy during otherwise idle hours when they might get into mischief" (Ashman, n.d.: 139). These are examples where tourism fostered self identity, where the sacred was not debased (or secularized) by tourism, where a distinction was maintained between the sacred and the secular. - , 69 6.10. How can a distinction be drawn between the examples of Greenwood and May, and those of McKean, Deitch, Swain, Evans, and Ashlnan? Is it because the Balinese, the Hopi, and the Cuna have a well-maintained sense of self-identity and a preservation of their cultures despite a history of "foreign" invasions? Or is it because these groups have organizational flexibility? Or, finally, because their cultural expressions have dual meanings -- one for the tourists, another for themselves -- which are independent? An answer will be attempted in the following chapter. VII • DEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING ' 7.00. This chapter is divided into two parts: In the first, the stages of tourism development will be traced and an attempt made to determine the essential elements in each stage. The second part deals with planning, the presence or absence of planning, the effects, and the factors taken into account in planning. A. The Stages of Growth Theoretical approaches 7.01. Sociologists usually distinguish between "organic" and "induced" tourism. The first develops spontaneously, and is unplanned initially; the second, is planned from the very commencement and is created ("artificial"?). An example of the first type is Florence; of the latter, Disneyland. It is necessary to maintain this distinction between the two types since each has important sociological consequenceS at every stage of tourism development. For example, 10 sociologists believe that "induced" tourism superimposes institutions which may have no local roots -- that is, are not linked with local organisational structures. 7.02. Forster (1964), Cohen (1972a), and Greenwood (1912) suggest that tourism development proceeds through three stages: (a) "discovery"; (b) "local response and initiative"; and (c) "institutionalized". It would seem that tha:;e three stages only refer to "spontaneous" tourism development, whereas the third stage alone characterizes "induced" tourism. 7 .03. In stage I ("discovery") a new area is "found" by a few intrepid souls. In stage II the needs of the tourists are largely catered for out of local resources, and tourism facilities are constructed by local ~ntrepreneur~. These facilities are usually locally owned and their growth is, as a rule, an unplanned response. The transition to the second stage, that of increased local response and initiative, appears to require a local catalyst. stage III comes into being with "mass" tourism (although "institutionalized" tourism appears to be a preferable phrase). At this stage the control and further development of tourism passes out of local hands. It is difficult to distinguish between Stages II and IlIon the grounds of absolute numbers of tourists alone, or. numbers of tourists in relation to the total local population. Stage II seems to be more peculiarly characterised by local ownership, and absence of standardization, of tourism facilities; the use primarily of local resources; and, most importantly, local deCision-making and control of tourism. Relating 1/ these stages. to Doxey's (1976) "irridex"-, the sta!;oe of "Euphoria" would characterize both stage I and, only partially, Stage II; "Apathy" could cover both stages II and III, while "Annoyance" and "Antagonism" appear to be solely 11 See para. 4.19. above. 71 confined to stage III. 7.04. Each of the stages has different consequences for both tourists and host populations. At stage I, the nature and extent of the impact of tourism depends to a large measure on the population density of the area and its resources. At this stage the relationship between local catalysts and local responses is significant. The effects at stage II are: increased employment, differentiation of occupations, a higher living standard, increased contact with the world outside the destination area, a desire for better education, a greater breadth of attitudes, and increased trends towards egalitarianism. Tourism development at stage II continues to be "organic" -- served and controlled by local institutiOns without any changes in social structure or breaks in values. 7.05. The effects of stage III, "institutionalized" tomsm, have been analyzed most thoroughly. These effects are divided, for purposes of clarity only, into economic, social, and political effects: (a) Economic: (i) standardization of tourism facilities; (ii) increased demand for goods and services; (iii) wider range of employment opportunities; (iv) changes in patterns and rhythm of work; (v) better diets for the local population; (vi) revival of crafts. (b) Social: (i) population growth in the destination area and periphery largely as a result of more immigrants into the area in search of employment; (ii) increasing impersonality of relations consequent on such growth; (iii) standardization of roles; (iv) decline of mututal help and cooperation with· increasing isolation of the individual and family unit; (v) increased intergenerational conflict, particularly since the young are more easily employed 72 in the tourism industry than the old, come into contact with tourists, and economie independence assists in the weakening of familial authority; (vi) declining age at marriage, smaller family size; (vii) changes in social stratification -- tourism can strengthen individuals or groups at the top of the social order, or substitute new criteria for evaluating status (for example, income substituting occupation); (viii) increased educational opportunities; ~---------------- (ix) the infusion of new ideas, patterns, ways of life; (x) the commercial- ization of culture; (xi) increased social deviance -- crime, suicide, abortion, venereal disease; and (xii) increased monetization of relation- ships. (c) Political: (i) loss of control over tourism growth and development; (ii) consequent alterations in the power structure with residents in the destination area playing the role of agents, not decision-makers; (iii) increased politicization of decisions through the development of factions, and parties; and (iv) change of political decisions from consensus to majority. 7.06. The stage III "effects" set out above are subject to the following qualif'tcations: In the economic sphere, first, the tourist destination area will benefit most if it can supply the increased demand for goods and services from local resources. If not, the dependence of the local area on external sources is increased, and the percentage of tourist expenditure retained locally is reduced. Second, the creation of new or different types of employment will be most beneficial only if there is a labor surplus (with adequate qualifications) and there are no cultural constraints to occupational mobility or attitudes against working in the tourism industry. Third, increases in the numbers of tourists tend to coincide with lower transport costs (and increases in the number 73 of "packages" offered tourists). This permits lower income bracket tourists to visit the destination area. Lower income bracket tourists tend to spend less and the per capita expenditure is therefore lowered. Fourth, the greater the number of tourists, the greater is the need for expenditure on accommodation and infrastructure~building. Accommodation is usually constructed on anticipated demand. Accommodation cannot be "stored". This means that there must be an occupancy rate which will provide a reasonable return (or, at least, cover overhead costs). As a consequence, tourist' establishments within the destination area soon compete with each other for tourists; those with more extensive contacts and financial resources push out the smaller. This will tend to change the nature of tourism in the destination area even further, apart from increasing dependence on external sources and decisions. 7.07. The degree of "institutionalization" has the same effects on the population in the destination area irrespective of whether the visitors share the same cultural background as their hosts, or have different cultural backgrounds. These effects are: loss of local control of tourism, decisions regarding tourism taken by groups or individuals external to the destination area (whether these groups or individuals are outside the country or are fellow citizens does not appear to matter much); increased dependency of the local group (in the destination area) on these outside groups or individuals, and resources; inability to influence these external factors; inability to plan; monetization; increasing distance between tourist and host; the necessity for routinization of organizational patterns in the destination area. Institutionalization has a greater impact on host societies than non-institutionalized (for example, 74 "explorer") tourism. It necessitates structural alterations in the host society. 7.08. Since the literature does not evaluate the decisional processes that result in the transition from the stage of local response and initiative (stage II) to that of institutionalization, or the connected sociological implications, this fOllows. 7.09. The type of tourists visiting the destination area in stages I and II would, following Cohen's (1972a, 1973, 1974) classifications, belong to the "explorer" , "permanent tourist", "expatriate" categories, with, possibly, a few drifters. Their travel styles (see Nolan, 1975) would be leisurely, exploratory, or multi-purpose, mutli-destinational. If tourism is disruptive of local societies, as it is alleged to be, tourists in the first two stages would be, if at all, minimally disruptive. From the point of view of the local population, services to cater to the tourists would increase but the rate of growth and the type of services offered would be a matter of local (mainly individual) decisions and subject to local constraints (for example, the absence of an infrastructure). In sociological terms, the growth would be "organic": a differentiation of existing resources, a re-QSsessment of the means of attaining ends (values), small-scale introduction of technological improvements. The encounter between tourist and host would be "face-to-face" (that is, as total persons) and the tourist will adapt to the host culture almost to the degree to which the host population accepts the innovations necessitated by the tourist and adapts to the tourist. 7.10. What generally appears to take place at the end of stage II and in the 75 transition to stage III, is that with increasing numbers of visitors (a significant percentage of whom no longer belong to the categories mentioned in the preceding paragraph) local resources are deemed inadequate to cater to these numbers. The resouces are thought to be inadequate in several respects: (i) the facilities are not standardized; (ii) tare is no overall control and local planning (with likely concomitant/conflict as a result of competition for the tourist); (iii) the population in the destination area lacks the financial resources and skills to manage large numbers of persons; (iv) local sources of supply to cater to the basic needs of tourists may be inadequate necessitating economic links with external sources; and (v) political authorities wider than the local believe that their intervention is necessar,r. 7.11. stage III involves both an economic and political decision. Economic in that the "demands" of tourists cannot be met by local resources. Political (used here in the widest sense) in that power blocs within the host countr,r go through a decision-making process which includes the following elements: (1) it is desirable to encourage tourism and increase the number of visitors to the maximum extent possible (Whatever the reason, though the most frequent 1/ justification is foreign exchange earnings): Implicit in this decision is that those in power "know" just how many tourists are desirable, and what types of tourists are likely to visit the destination area. (2) The local authorities are incapable of meeting the tourist demand. Here too there are several implicit assumptions: that the wider political authorities are (a) capable of forecasting ]} In a materialistic environment it is unsurpnsJ.ng how rarely the justifications for expanded tourism are that tourism is a means of exchanging ideas, or that it is an educational experience for both tourist and host. 76 the numbers of tourists, and (b) are aware of tourist preferences (habits, tastes, patterns of expenditure). (3) It is necessar,y in the interests of planning, control, and construction of tourism facilities, that the wider political authorities intervene in further tourism development. Both the economic and political decision-making processes are closely intertwined. FUrther, it is fairly common that economic motivations and, more importantly, economic power blocs impel the wider political authorities to act. The imposition of political will may involve prior consultation with the people/ local authorities in the tourist destination area. Usually it does not. Even if it did, unless there is local partidpationwith a predominant voice in decision-making, non-local interests take over further development of tourism in the destination area. Tourism growth then ceases to be "organic", it is superimposed. The local entrepreneur becomes an agent, or functionary. There is, to paraphrase Doxey (1976), a structural alteration in the nature of tourism, not a mere dimensional change. 7.12. Stage III has important SOCiological consequences -- both for the tourist and host. From the tourists' viewpoint, increase in numbers necessitates standardization: of tourism facilities and itineraries. A minimum of permissible individuality has to be combined with a maximum of illusion: the tourist has to be "sold" the idea that he is. seeing something "different", and that what he is shown is both "authentic" and conveys the essence of the place he is visiting (including the culture of the host population). Given the fact that there is no necessar,y congruence of goals between the tourist and those responsible for arranging the tour and, further, since the monetary interests of 77 of the tour organizer predominate, tourist views of the host population and the geography of the place are partial and highlighted by those aspects whose importance is stressed. One country soon becomes much like, and can be substituted for, another. The type of tourist at this stage would, most often, belong to Cohen's (1972a) category of the "mass/individual institutionalized" tourist, including the "organized drifter" (Cohen, 1973). The travelling style of these tourists would be "rapid movement" or "fast-paced" (Nolan, 1975) in general. Sociologically, increasing numbers results in growing impersonality of relations (increasing distance) between tourist and host. Contacts between tourist and host continue to be direct but they are no longer face-to-face; they are formal and "intermediate". 1I Applications '7.13. fI'he li terature confirms the preceding analysis, wi th some exce ptions. Moore (19'70) stops short at the third stage -- the villagers of los Be.ntos are on the brink of seeing tourism pass out of their hands into those of developers and interests outside the island. r.Che Guna of San Blas are in the same position as 1'1oore' s villagers (Swain, 19'74) -- they m"ait development of the Los Gruyos project. At Tajos, stage III has been reached (Fraser, 1975). In fl'ahiti, stage III has also been reached (Robineau, n.d.). Smith's J.!.;slcllllO are at sta?;e II (VIi th the exception of Gambell) -- and it is 11 An apt example of an "intermedia.te" relationship is that of purchaser and cashier at a supermarket counter, or room maid and hotel occupant in a large hotel. doubtful, given environmental conditions, whether tourism will ever in develop beyond stage II/Alaska. Bodrum is entering stage III (Packer, 197L~). Probably, the most interesting chronological survey of tourln~ over a 1~~ ~~rlod is t~rt ~~ Mykonos 'F~cker, 1~74: LOUH.:.Lbt.iUS, l'::J'to~ ana Haagland, l.,:/'(b). Packer's analysis traces the favorable first impact of tourism through stages 1 and II, thereafter, with the introuucl.ion or stage lII, tourism passes out 01' t;he hands or local entl·preneurs. The transi tion has not been a mixea blessing. Ln 1"act;, the type of tourism has cuangea. (see LOul{issas, 11)75; HoagLand, l~'(b) and demands are made on t;he .Local aa.tnini[nrat~ ve and soc~al struct;ure, the .local SK.Llls, wruch the resident;s at t;he t;ouriQm dest~nation are incapable o~ mteting. AnaLYs~s '( .14. .L t lull. be nOt;iCed that; the ~mpact 01' toul:~sm is not identical and tha~ it varies between destinations that might be considered at the same stage 01' development (tourism development). For example, although Bali has entered stage III, tourism has had a lesser SOC.L<::l../.. impact tha 7 J it has on Tahi ti. .tsot;n ~slands. Again, tour~ sm appears to have ElI1'ected BOUl'urn Less than, bay, Fuent;errabia tal thougn it rniet1t be suggestea t;na...; .ruenterrabia was at·t·ectea more by indust;rializatlon than tourlsm). Colpiea nas .... r.anged more -- there is a greD. '\jer lOSS 01' local control -- tnan La. Hoche tl:tei tt:;r, 19'(3, 19'/4). Finally, there is t;he exception, Leavenworth, where tourism does not seem to have affected social structure, values, or goals. 79 7.15. Hov,r can this aifferential impact be accounted for, when t1-JO destination areas attr;, a t the ;:.ame stage in touri;:.m developruent;? tu tnoLlgl1 1.1; hal:> been suggesteu IInat one of tests is whether the destination area is on a.n island, this is not necessarily the most fruitful test -- a.s the differential impact in the case of Bali, Tahiti, Antigua (Joshi & Sharpston, 1973), and Mykonos show. Nor do mere numbers of tourists in relation to the total population suffice as the most important test -- Hawaii, Washington,D.C., Fuenterrabia a.nd Los Santos often have tourists far outnumbering their tota.l resident population li:md the effects differ. A careful re-examination of the examples of Leavenworth, Bali, and Bodrum might provide the answer. 7.16. In Leavenworth, tourism was not the main goal of the LIFE project, tourism developed incidentally to the general development of the town. The LIFE project initiated ch~mge but thoU!~h the improvements are used by both residents and touri sts noi'~, the residents still believe that the goals of the Life project have value and are as important as attracting tourists. Further, the community events, which are now attended by tourists as well, provide the greatest opportunity for contacts between residents. In Bali, as McKean points out, a performance has independent meanings for both tourists and the Balinese, and the two are kept perceptually separate. In Bodrum, the skills available are directed to serving a regional population, local demend is considered more important than tourism. The difference between La Roche and Colpied can be found in the greater differentiation of associations in the former village. 80 7.17. 1~e four examples evidence that the common principles are ~reater structural complexity, and duality of meanings. The phrase "structural complexityll could be translated into "level of development". Here, however, what is referred to is not merely economic development, but the existence of socially differentiated organisations -- skills expressed in different associations. This is the case in Leavenworth, and, to a lesser extent, in Colpied and Bodru.'Tl. However, in Bali and Bodrum, these skills (and their representation in associations) do not extend very far beyond the traditional occupations. Thus, if in Bodrum and Bali, the numbers of tourists proceed at a pace beyond the capacities of the local population to manage them and!~ are of a type different from those f'br l'lhom present facilities and skills oan cater, the management of tourism will pass out of local hands and the common effects of stage III will appear. 7.10. The second reason why Leavenworth is worth examining is that the LIFE project provided the population of the town with meanings independent of tourism. The events reaffirmed the identity of Leavenworth, separated the population from outsiders, and. were linked to recognized social organisations within the tOi~. In Bali too, dance and art have social roots expressed in organisations that are controlled by the wider village organisations and linked "[i th both common village and temple membership. Similar linkages are also found among the ~1icronesians or whom 4sn.man (n.d.) wrote. 7.1S1. A third essential difference, to be found· only in Leavenworth, is planning. In Leavenworth goals were set, the population took 01 part in both planning and execution~ This aspec~ WiLl oe dealt with in greater detail below. 7.20. 'J.'he pOints made in para 7.17 above have been differently expressed by Finney and Watson (n. d.: 145 - lLl-6). 'l'ney point out thE'.t many .Pacific Island govern:mmn~s who want to imitate Hawail t s tourism development often forget that it was built on a much 11 stronger base than now' exi sts in most other Pacific Islands": i '"G had a developea economy before tourism grew: sugar, p1neapp~es, the military, government, and a well-educated ana skilLed population. And yet, here too, lack of planning (except since very recent tlmes) have caused problems. B. Planning 7.21. Nost authorities stress the neea I'or plann1ng, and point out its general absence. but they are limited in practical suggestions about the seLection of goals, the type and levels of plans, the selection of indices and weights. For instance, Fox sets out the general con~itions requisite for this purpose. He says that the best phmnlnf:; is that formulated in partnership with the people. But there are several preconditions for this: It depends on (i) sufficient ci information to malee intelligent choices~ (ii) part:Ypation in arriving at goals of tourism; (iii) the opportunity to help fonnulate the criteria for measuring progress towards the goals; and (iv) sufficient involvement in the planning and decision-making process to insure compliance with the criteria (see Fox, n.d.). Calvo (1974) is more specific. She recommends greater involvement in the planning, control, and development of the tourism sector in ord.er (32 to aohieve: more harmonious grm'lth of the seotor in relation to locfl.l culture, intep;ration with other sectors, protection of phy.sical resources, revie't'l of incentives and taxation system, re-distribution to provide for distribution of gains, training and research. 7.22. There Rre several levels in planning and several stages as well. At the earliest stages, it would seem that the selection of goals is important (see Kjellstrom, 1974; Doxey, 1976). This would also involve the development of policy, and the selection and weichting of indices. 7.23. Local participation seems to be essential at all stages. TIlere are t't'lO examples of such successful participation': at Leavenworth, and in the Great Smoky 110untains National Park Project (Falk & Brodte, 1976). It might be suggested that both these instances relate to developed countries. This is true. Local participation may be more complex and time-consuming when a large percentage of the affeoted and "impacted" (to use Falk & Brodie's term) population is dispersed and illiterate. It is in this area that sociologists can assi : in identifying the traditional forms of organization and the meems by which decisions are arrived at. To deny that local residents have no opinions and are incapable of involvement -- which failure to co nsult would imply -- is to deny their humanity. 7.24. Any plan must also clearly choose and weieht social indices. An example of the factors to be considered here, since admittedly they are not indicators, is to be found in Doctoroff (1976). It is difficult to find literature relating to weighting of indices in tourism 83 since, in large measure, this would be linked to the goals and differ from country to country. 7.25. Plp..nninc; involves a choice of alternatives -- not merely bet~'Teen tourism and other methods of development (see Kloke, n.d.) but also, assuming tourism is selected, in what areas local populations (and governments) should concentrate (see LeFevre, n.d.). Hm"lever, it is difficult to agree ''lith the statement of Gearing, Sl"lart and Var (1976) who pay lip service to the necessity of considering the potential sociological consequences of tourism ~nd ~en su/mest that the "the question of tourism t s sociological impact is essentially academic" when lithe tourist 1..ndustry may appear to be the only available alternative for development ll (1976: 32). Both C8.lvo (1974) and Joshi and Sharpston (1973) who disagree with this vim'J appear to be more accurate -- sociological consequences can be foreseen, monitored, and the negative impacts softened by careful investigation of the sociocultural patterns of the destination area. 7.26. Planning for tourism also raises the question of linkages. Kanellakis, for instance, sU'?:;2"ests that tourism is not o. viable method of economic development for Greece because tourism is mainly a service industry \,li th no linkaGes (backward linkages) with the rest of the econvm;. (see Kanellakis, 1973). Kj ellstrom partie.lly answers this by sayinG that Vlhile it is true that tourism is basically a service industry, this is "quite irrelevant" because "Ba..!li c industries with limited outlets are not likely to be viable. Both kinds of activites he.ve their warranted place in a comprehensive and consistent development plan. The heterogeneity of tourist demand greatly reduces the risl{s of tourism becomin[i an enclave ••• Wi th a broad range of baclcward linl{age effects, tourism provides convenient and continuous outl.ets for many types of local production .. i t can be helpful in eularr;iug the local markets for several products, sometimes even beyond the ci1itical threshold level •• " (126). It must, however, be pointed out that lIinstitutionalized" tourism, as the literature presently evidences (see, for instance, Calvo, 197.3), rarely provides such linl{ages and the absence of planning combined vIi th import incentives continues the lack of backward linkages (see Esh & Rosenblum, 1975~· Joshi & Sharpston, 1974). 7.27. Tourism plans should also determine the type of tourists that '1111 be allm'led to visit (see Doxey, 1976). This is essential since it is related to the type of facilities that will be necessary and the encounter the.t will take place between tourist and host. Iusti tutionalized tourism may be a viable means cf develop:::ment 1IJhere the main purpose of tourism is related to physical facilities (for example, beaches in the Gambia) and there is a minimal contact that can be maintained between tourist and host, and tourist "visibility" is low. It nay also be necessary for some countries to consider this form when they are c:'ose to their markets (Cohen, 1974) -- Hawaii has been extremely successful in this. Yet, even here, as Aerni (1972) yoints out, local resentment because of lack of contact can become important. 7.2U. Finally, there is the problem of the pace of development of tourism. Joshi and Sharpstol1 (197.3) and Greenwood (1972) suggest that the problems of Antigua and Fuenterrabia, respectively, are the 85 consc.~quence of too rapid a pace of unplanned development. Another way of expressing this is that the absorptive capacity of the destination area '\'JEtS inadequate to meet the tourism demand. Yet another tem is Hcarrying capacity" -- which environmentalists have popularized. Dasmann, Hilton, and Fr~9man (1973) define this as "8 measure of the number of individuals of any spec1es that a particular envi"r'onTl1.ent c~n sup1')ort" (1973= 33). They recognize that types of tourism demand different different/types of facilities and an assessment, in each case, of the cGrryi 11r; capacity. Thus, for instance, the Center for Economi c Research in Greece estimated that two million tourists during the peak month (July) Nas the opt1mum beyond which the Greek way of life \'ITOuld be threatened (see Kanellak1s, 1973). Of this Dasmann, H1lton, and Freeman say thnt it 'VJQuld be quite conservative compared to the densities "on Copacahana beaches on a peak Sunday" (1973: 132). Probably the most reasonable observations on "carrying capaCity" (and optimum numbers) W~ expressed by Belt Collins and Associates L1mited ann others (1973) when they opined that the exercise would only be just1f1ed if tour1sm is the sole economic base. Otherwise, they believed that the exerc1se '!iITaS meaningless since so many factors l'lere involved -- for instance, the socioeconomic differences between residents and visttors, the type and locat10n of'v1sitor accommodation, the degreee to which the local residents receive the benefits and control tour1sm investment and management. But even they a[?;ree that it would be a useful exerc1Ei@ to estimate the number of ...,ls.1 tC'!B at anyone time (not a total for the yerl.r) 1n relation earlier 11 to the local population. It has been suggestftiJ/ that this 1s not the 'no:~i: i"l":)ortant factor. \fuat, 1t is suggested 1s important, and iJ See para. 7.15 above. 86 should be estimated in plan formulation is the type of tourists, the extent of looal skills and faoilities, and the number of tourists in relation to the preoeding two items. carrying oapaoit1 will vary both with referenoe to the type of tourism, and the nature of the skills available. VIII. AN END AND A. BEGINNING 8.00. This ohapter will oomment generally on the literature, with partioular referenoe to a few ke,v issues; ennumerate topios deserving of further investl88tion; and make recommendations with practioal implications tor Bank projects. A.. Gene~al observations on the literature 8.01. There is a widespread ambivalence in the sociological literature about the use of tourism as a technique for eoonomio development. On the one hand the ohanges attributed to tourism, partioularly the "negative aspeots", are deplored and there is an undercurrent theme that people in the destination area .hould be "kept as they are"; on the other, there 1s a grud&1ng adm1ss1on that in many oases tourism is the only viable means tor promoting economic development. What is left unexamined is that change 1s inevitable and the goals and hopes of the host population should pla1 the most important role in determining the direction of change and the means 'Wy which this can be attained. 8.02. A. corollary ot the preceding stateaent is that there is no assessment of whether the alleged changes attributed to tourism are peouliar to tourism or whether they accompany all "modernization" 87 processes -- tor example, 1ndustr1a11zat10n. There 1s no oomparat1v.e . study a ••1lable wh10h throws l1ght on th1s quest10n. In th1s regard. the statement of Josh1 and Sharp. ton (1973) regard1ng the 1mpaot of tour1sm 1n Ant1gua 1s appos1te. The, be11eve that the changes result1ng trom tourism would have taken plaoe with the development ot any other lead1ng seotor. 8.0). Assum1ng that there 1s "modernizatlon" as a result ot tourism, the l1terature does not olearly assess whether .be traa81tion trom the "trad1tional" to the "modern" 1nvolves ohanges in soolal struoture, attltudes, and values, or ohanges 1n soolal "'noture and att1tudes alone. In other words, 1s lt extemal to.s that alone ohange, does the host populatlon mezel, re-assess the methods by whlch 1t attains its goals, wh1le tbe goals and values rema1n unaltered. The entire "modem"l"trad1tional" d10hotoDlJ. whioh started as an analyt1cal oonstruot but ... re1tied. ls ourrently undergo1ng agoniz1ng re-appra1sal. 8.04. Once 1t 1s aocepted that the "tradtt10nal" oan be found 1n "modern" garb, the analys1s and understanding oC the impaot of tour1sm 1s fa01l1tated. It would a~80 be recogn1zed that oultural homogen1zatlon need not neoessar1l, result trom e~erbal man1testat1ons ot "modern1zat1on". As the sul,s1s 1n the preoed1ng ohapters has shown, the relat10nsh1p between tourism and resultant ohanges 1n the host so01ety has rarely been drawn w1th olarity. In the oase ot values, the impaot is indireot and med1ated. it requ1res an aooepted agent, who is not usually a "tourist". With regard to 88 heightening raoial peroeptions and oonfliot, pre-existing eoonomio and sooiooultural oonditions have not been weighed oarefully. Even in the sooioeoonomio realm, the aooeptanoe of new ways of living, the inoreased oonsumption of goods and servioes, must be related to the goals and values of the destination area and the models whioh the wider sooiety portrays as aooeptable. 8.0S. What appears to be really oruoial is the prooess of the "institutionalization" of tourism that takes plaoe when the destination area aohieves a measure of popularity. First, it affeots the type of tourists that visit the destination area. The literature is oonfusing in its loose employment of the term "mass" tourist to desoribe the type that predominates with institutionalization. The more aooeptable diohotomy would be that between "institutionalized" and "non-institutionalized" tourists. Implioit in the term "institutionalized" are numbers. What the term "mass tourist" misses are the important elements of standardization and routinization. Seoond, institutionalization demands types of fao1l1ties, sk1lls, and adapt1ve behavioral ohanges that are otten beyond the capaoities of the population in the destination area, and also affeot the host population to a muoh greater degree than non-institutionalized tour1am. Third, and most tmportantly, the nature of the encounter between tourist and host is entirely altered. It is not numbers of tourists per ~ that are the oause, nor is it the paoe of inorease in tourist visitors that has the greatest impaot on the host population. It is the rapid inorease of institutionalized tourists taken together with the laok of local 89 skills and facilities that is responsible for the prevalence of resentment, socially deviant behavior, and increasing impersonality of relations. Institutionalized tourism seems to develop a life of its own, with outsiders playing a major role. Institutionalized tourism has the same effect on destination areas irrespective of the stage of tourism development at which the destination area may be, and independent of the degree of cultural differences that may exist between tourist and host. Institutionalized tourism, therefore, is a qualitative, not merely a quantitative, change in the type of tourism. There is an extreme paucity ot literature on the non-institutionalized tourist today, a gap that deserves to be closed. 8.06. It should be emphasized that where surveys of host populations have been conducted, most of the interviewees have expressed the view that tourism is desirable and desire more tourism. This is-the case even when, on occaSion, resentment has been expressed. This resentment is generally directed not so muoh at the tourist per 4!, but at the type ot tourism. More often, it is an expredsion ot frustrat10n usually tound at the 1nst1tutiona11zed stage of tour1sm. At this stage, the host population partioipates in tour1sm as agents of decision-makers beyond looal control who aot without local oonsultation. The tourist, ever more distant, appears to be treated with greater favor than looal residents; the looal resident is often deprived of physical reSQurces that he believes he is entitled to use; there is increasing oompetition tor the goods he consumes and the employment he considers himself entttled to; the monet.r.y rewards 90 slip out of local hands. Although there is a good deal of theorizing about tourism as a new form of economio n80-oolonialisa, rew have paused to oonsider whether, in faot, the very process ot modernization involves inoreasing loss ot looal oontrol; whether, in other words, funotions tormerly performed within a small traditional group are taken over by the wider sooiety. The very basis ot modernization involves mass produotion, through eoonomies of soale, and the substitution of aohievement for asoription as a test ot status. Although there is evidenoe that the greater eoonomic opportunities that tourism brings does oontribute to this egalitarianism, the evidenoe is not adequate. 8.07. What is more important, is the neoessity tor gathering evidenoe of the way in whioh tourism affeots sooial struoture as a result of ohanges in inoome distribution, and new opportunities that may result from it. Apparently tew sooiologists have ventured into this field. We also have little data about the impaot of migration to the destination area on social patterns. Data on these two areas would usefully supplement hypotheses, presently untested, about the effect of tourism on sooial strata and oooupational mobility. 8.08. There is no extended oomparative analysis on why tourism has a a greater impaot on some sooieties and not on others. What has been presented in the immediately preoeding chapter are hypotheses, in the nature of "hunohes", based on the evaluation of the evidence oontained in the literature. It has been postulated that there are three oruoial elements whioh allow for balanced growth without radioal ohanges in sooial structure, the possibility of social anomie, 91 and loss of local control (giving rise almost inevitably to resentment). They are: (i) organisational flexibility and differentiation; (ii) duality ot purpose in events and aotivities -- so that tourism supplements, and also that each has memJings independent of the other; and (iii) plann1ng with the affected people combined w1th cons1stent execution. The t1rst element oould 'be translated as "level of development", but what is imp11ed here is not so muoh the level of eoonom10 development as the Skills, and organ1sat10ns expressing those skills, that are prevalent in the destination area. It is not, then, a question of whether the dest1nat10n area 1s on an island or on a continent. The further growth of tourism would then be planned to develop consistently with the three elements. It would be desirable if these hypotheses were tested. 8.09. The preceding paragraph raises three interrelated questionsl planning, linkages, and eduoation. While it is generally accepted , that the most effeotive plans are plans with, not for, people, there are remarkably few instanoes where this bas ooourred. There is an excellent example of what oan happen where there is no planning and eoonomic foroes are left to work out without restra1ntsl Mykonos. Of l; this island it has 'been said that 1t was "a sacrificial lamb to tourism" , Tourism was permitted unfettered growth here, while restrict10ns y were plaoed on tourism in other islands. Planning may be more g I am indebted to Bas1l Asaimakopoulos for this apt phrase. y Loukissas, oommenting on Mykonos, said that when other Greek islands had alternatives other than tour1sm, they ohose other alternatives tor eoonomio development. 92 diffioult and time-oonsuming with economioally underdeveloped sooieties t but it is not impossible. Plans tend too often only to determine the number of tourists desired, rarely do they define what kind of tourist and what kind of tourism a country needs and wants. Again, few plans direotly link the development of other seotors -~ eduoation, land use patterns, and agrlosulture are the most important -- with tourism development. While the goals of most oountries usually refer,to inoreasing:&.equitable distribution, raising living standards, providing for disadvantaged sections of the people, these goals are rarely effectuated in tourism plans. In effect, the benefits of tourism (usually expressed in terms of . foreign exchange earnings) oan only indireotly effect eoonomic and social development. It would be desirable if sooiologists j like eoonomists, examine more often and with oare, the relationship between I· expressed goals, and their social impact: who is benefitted why, to what extent, what sooial ohanges oocur. 8.10. Finally, a note on the definition of a "tourist". Some advanoe has now been made with Cohen's (1914) article. It is a first step. But it would seem that any operational def1nition of this species must take into account both the objective elements and the subjective perceptions of the host population. Undoubtedly, the term would have to be fleXible, and would also change but it would appear for the time being to include three elements: (i) tourism i. not the normal, everyday avooation of the person called a "tourist"; (ii) it is a Journey undertaken for a variet, of reasons --"pleasure'" Cohen's description of the purpose of the jouaney, appears to be both 93 narrow and hedonlstlo; and (111) some orltlolsm could be levelled at the emphasls on dlstanoe (fla re1atlve1y long .... ). It would seem that as long as the vlsltor stays temporarlly, . uses 100al resouroes, and ls treated as an "outslder" by the host populatlon on most oooaslons he would be olassed as a "tourlst" -- one ls not dea11ng wlth oases, obvlous1y, of lnvadlng armles or resldent forelgners. B. Toplos for further lnvestlgatlon 8.11. Thls part brlef1y out11nes some toplos whloh are be11eved to be deservlng of further study: (l) Dlaohronl0 studles of tourlsm development: Wlth few exoeptlons (Moore, 1970; Fraser, 1975; Paoker, 1974) mos't studles do not analyze tourlsm development over tlme. Both Moore's (1970) and BoblDeaa's (n.d.) artlo1es are too brlef. Greenwood (1970, 1972, 1974, 1976) has attempted some long-range ana1ysls. Thls suffers, however, from the faot that admltted1y hls data on tourlsm are extrapolated, and that he dld not lnvestlgate the flshermens' quarter in Fuenterrabla where most of the tourlsts reslde. Soclo1ogists who often return to the area of orlglna1 study oould profltab1y use notes to analyze ohanges ln tourlsm over a perlod of years (see Smlth, 1974). (li) A comparatlve study of the lmpaot of tourlsm and another sector (for example, lndustry). The dlfflcultles faolng the researcher would maln1y reslde ln the cholce of an area with the same level of economlc development and slml1ar cultural background. But thls would be an extremely useful studT, lf lt could be oarrled out. Mexioo ls probably the most frultful country for thls purpose. 94 . TUrkey and Yugoslavia oould also be oonsidered. (iii) Comparative studies of the impaot of tourism on , destination areas where there is organisational differentiation and/or tourism merely independent meanings for tourist and host. tlupplements everyday activities which nave . . / This is mainly to test the hypotheses referred to in parae.· 7.14 .,;;'t?,.!O, and 8.09 above. (i v) The impaot of tourism on emigration and iDlDligrat10n. (v) The development of sooial indioators. (vi) Analyses of meohanisms of distribution of tourism inoomes. with partioular referenoe to ohanges in sooial struoture, patterns of health and nutrition, and ohanges in life styles. (tli) Studies of non-institutionalized tourists. Comparison between non-institutionalized and institutionalized tourists. (viii) Comparative studies of the differential impaot of types of tourists on destination areas. (ix) The impaot of tourism on traditional land-use and marine explOitation patterns. (x) The role of the oul ture broker. Changing status with the development of tourism through the various stages. Bole formalization. C. The role of the Bank in tourism 8.12. To date. the inolusion of the sooial aspeots of tour1sm in Bank tourism projeots has been intermittent. This has been mainly 95 due to the absenoe of a defined methodology for inolusion ot the sooial aspeots in Bank projeots. Tbe literature of soolology is replete with theorizing, but there is no generally aooepted set of prooedures for the analysls ot tourism. Th1s exerolse, as well as the aemina~are part ot the Bank's oontinu1ng ettort to regularize the 1nolusion of sooial oonsideratloasin proJeots. 8.13. Betore deal1ng with the areas ot Bank operations where the input ot sooiologists would be most trulttul, it would be usetul to set out some "limitations" and desoribe the ditterent levels ot operations. It is believed that the input ot soo10logists, and their utility, will vary with ditferent types ot operat1ons. 8.14. There are two "limitations" 1n Bank ope rationsl First, the oosts ot projeot identifioation, preparat1on, and appraisal plaoe minimum limits on the amounts ot loans or oredits that can be made. This lower limit therefore exoludes Bank interest in projeots, however useful they may be, whioh are too small. Seoond, the Bank usually lends to oountries where tourism has alreadJ' commenoed. Generally, it enters at stage II of tourism development -- often, 1n the transition period between stages II and III. Th1s plaoes further limltations on the extent to whioh the Bank oan influenoe tourism development in a country. The work of the Tourism Projeots Department ln the Bank oan be divided into three ma1n types: seotor studies, projeot appraisal (sometimes inoluAing proJeot identification and preparation), and projeot supervision • . 8.15. Seotor studies oould be detined as the overall assessment Of the role of tourism in the eoonomio development ot a country, the 96 potent1al for further tour1sm development, a pre11m1nary ldent1t1oat1on of geograph1c areas where such further development might take plaoe, and an evaluation of the country's needs (financ1al, organisational, marketing, research) in order to attain suoh development. At this macro level, the role ot the soo101ogist would mainly oover the following areasa (1) Assistance in the development and ranking of Josls for tourism development 1n th e country. (1i) Assessment of the social oonstraints on goal atta1nment. (i1i) Desoription and evaluation ot sooial strata and their relat10nship to goal attainment. (i v) The organisatiollal prot11e of the oountry. (v) Assistanoe in defining the type of tourism tbat the country oan oarry and should encourage. Evaluation of the means by whioh tour1sm targets oan be attained (inoluding the creation of formal organ1sations where neoessary,eand strengthening existing organisations). (vi) Assessment of linkages bevlen formal and informal sooial struotures. (v11) Analys1s of populat10n growth and migration patterns. and (vii1) Assistance 1n the development of sooial indioators,/for the collect10n and mon1toring of so01al data. (ix) Preliminary assessment of potential sooial impact of projects in areas ident1f1ed. (x) Per10dio review to update/modify reoGmmendations made. (xi) Reoommendations regarding the methods by which local residents in the areas primarily 1dentified as being suitable for 97 • further tourism development, can participate in plan preparation and execution. This may involve an arlJ.ysis 01' the formal/informal ohannels of communioation and their relative strengths. Even though the Bank may lend to a oountry during stage II of tourism development, quite often oountries where seotor studies are undertaken do not have tourism plans. It is in this regard that the Bank has a vital role to play: In the assistanoe in plan tormulation oonsistent with the oountry's goals. The assessment 01' the oountry'. needs might give rise to projects in whioh teohnioal assistance is the major component -- assistanoe in detining goals, polioy, researoh, marketing strategies: the development 01' monitoring oapacity; the preparation 01' plans which are based on resou roes; the assistanoe in oreation or organisations that will follow detined prinoiples regarding, for instanoe, land use, aoquisition, and transrer; the formulation of polioy regarding incentives and ownership, and assistance in the abalysis or alternative methods 01' attaining developmental goals. 8.16. Projeots, the seoond major area ot the Tourism Projeot. Deparbment's work, generally goes through a cyole of identifioation, preparation, and appraisal betore a loan is made. The prooess involves muoh greater speoifioity to the broad outlines laid down in the sector studies (and in the oountry's plans). It is believed that there are several questions whioh the Bank should ask itself (and answer) before any loan is made. Tbe most important of these ares (i) Is the project consistent with the goals defined in the • 98 country's plans/sector studies. (ii) Who are the target beneticiaries in the proposed project; to what extent do they benetit. (iii) Will the project introduce/increase "institutionalized" tourism. It it will, is the project at all necessary -- are there, tor tnstance, other alternatives such as encouraging family hotels and strengthening these with technical assistanoe to develop oommon services (accounting, marketing, laundering). (iv) Will the proposed projeot introduce ho~.1s which will oompete tor tourists who already use existing hotels. (v) What type ot tourists can the proposed destination area carry. How does the project assist in creating the capacity to oarrr these tourists. In other words, will the project diminish local control in decision-making and management of tourism. Bow can this local control be fostered and strengthened. (vi) Will the project change patterns of. ownership in the destination area, encouraging, for instance, outsiders. (vii) What provisions exist tor the regulation of transfer and acquisition of land. Bow effective are these. What continuing interest do former owners of aoquired land retain in the lands. (viii) What backward linkages does the project create or strengthen with other sectors. By what methods are these to be aohieved (including training). (ix) What traditional (informal/ formal) sooial organisations exist in the destination area. Bow effeotive are these. How can these traditional organisations be linked with project organisations. (x) What is the local value- profile. Is ranking of values possible. How will these values advance or hinder project execution. (xi) What are the existing means of communioation of decisions and plans. Bow representative are these. How can local participation be strengthened or achieved. (xii) What are local attitudes towards tourism. (xiii) 800ial strata . 99 in the project area. (xiv) Occupational profiles. Atttitudes and belief systems relating to different typea of work. (xv) Migration patterns. Will the projeot provide for persona who migrate in searidl of employment. If not, what other provisions will be made. Will the inoreased populat10n in, or near, the project area overburden existing community services, or oontribute to sooial deviance. (xvi) Will the projeot deprive/ourtail the use of faoilit1es whioh the looal population used, or believes it had a right to use. How can the continued right to use these facilities be prov1ded for. (xvii) What provisions does the projeot contain for the oreation or strengthening of the ability to monitor and evaluate the impaot of the project. 8.1? Sociolog1sts oan assist 1n answering all the quest10ns -- exoept, possibly, for (iii) whioh oan only be partially answered. It must, however, be pointed out that, g1ven Bank praotioe, soc10logists should be brought in at the earliest stage Cprefer8bl1 at identifioat10n/preparat1on/pre-appraisal) otherwise projeots tend to get orystallized and the ab1lity ot a sociologist to provide a useful input is reduoed. 8.18. In the third major area of the Department's work -- projeot supervision -- the main rol. of sooiologists Are: (i) assessment of the impaot ot the projeot -- an evaluation of the extent to wh1ch the prognostioations at appraisal have been validated; (i1) the .effectiveness of the organisations in oarrying out the work estimated at appraisal and presoribed by the loan/ore6it doouments; and (i1i) any new trends which may require alterations in the projeot and in , , 100 tuture projeots. ENVOI Most developlng oountrles have adopted ldeals ot equallty ot opportunlty and equltable dlstrlbutlon. For many of them tourlsm ls an lmportant technlque ot achlevlng eoonoml0 development. But often they laok the skl11s and the flnanolal abl1lty to pl..a!"ft.lrt,tourlsm. It ls here that the Bank. and other lnternatlonal organisatlons. can play an lmportant part ln asslstlng these oountrles to promote development conslstent wlth the goals that have been adopted. The problems attendant upon the lnstltutionallzatlon ot tourism are not lnevltable lt there ls oareful plannlng, an aooeptance ot looal partlclpation, a close relatlonshlp between plan targets and looal oapaol ty, and the growth ot organlsatlons capable ot manatlng Q.k.a $ t> c./ a.L tourlsm. Then, lt ls 11kely that eoanoml0l8rowth wl11 be combined wlth the reallzatlon of the ldeals ot tourism: the exchange ot ldeas, and the spread of understandlng between peoples.