There is a common, although questionable, viewpoint that tourism has great potential for improving intercultural relationships. However, research on positive attitude change in tourists visiting a given location (Amir; Anastasopoulosand Milman) questions this claim since contradictory results point to the existence of theoretical gaps. Only in some cases are the results positive. But in the majority of research, attitude change is negative, maybe because attitudes previous to traveling are negative and the format of organized trips does not contribute to contact between tourists and residents. The lack of clearer conclusions might have its source in the non-inclusion of certain other determinant or concomitant factors effecting attitude change. Fisher and Price (1991) developed a model that includes such factors. Their model includes the reasons for traveling as factors for determining the amount of intercultural interaction of tourists with the place visited. This intercultural interaction influences the perceived level of satisfaction with holidays and the positive change of attitudes toward the place visited. The latter is also influenced by the satisfaction level of the tourist. However, the cited work has some limitations, such as, its cross-sectional approach and its methodological weaknesses regarding the analysis of causal relations.

The current study follows the Fisher and Price model and is based on their recommendations for future research. A longitudinal investigation was carried out in the area of the Costa del Sol in Spain. Some new variables that complete the model proposed by Fisher and Price were added. For example, to assess tourists’ attitudes towards the Spanish, respondents were asked about their stereotype of Spanish people. At the beginning of the holiday they responded to a questionnaire about their beliefs about the Spanish character (such as being passionate, warm, sensual, happy, rude, funny, lazy and hospitable). At the end of their stay they responded to a similar questionnaire after interacting with Spanish people. These new variables are a different and more indirect way to assess their attitude. The other new variables are the amount of tourist activities during their stay including assessing the quality of service and infrastructures. The importance of these additional constructs arise from studies (Ryan 1997) exploring the influence of the nature and characteristics of the destination regarding satisfaction and attitude change. These new constructs were used as explanatory variables of the level of satisfaction with their holiday and a change of attitude towards Spaniards ( Figure 1). The extended model, for reasons of parsimony, only includes direct influences. Specifically, the model proposes that the influence of intercultural interaction, tourist activities, and service quality on attitude and stereotype is completely indirect, mediated by holiday satisfaction.

In order to test the model, 164 French and Italian tourists were studied. They stayed in Torremolinos for an average of 10 days. The questionnaire was filled in by 73 males and 91 females aged between 16 and 76 (the mean age was 43.5 years). On arriving at the hotel, the tourists were given a questionnaire in which the aim of the research was briefly described. The questions were grouped in two parts: the first was to be filled in immediately and the second on the last day of their stay. Following previous research on tourism motivation (Fakeye, P. and Crompton, J., 1992. Importance of Socialization to Repeat Visitation. Annals of Tourism Research 19, pp. 364–367. Abstract Fakeye and McGehee) three types were distinguished: cultural, destination attraction (pull), and psychosocial needs (push). In addition, the stereotype tourists held of Spanish people was evaluated. The second part of the survey contained questions divided into six factors: the level of intercultural interaction, the amount of activities engaged in, evaluation of the quality of service and infrastructure, holiday satisfaction, attitude change towards Spaniards, and stereotype of Spaniards at the end of their stay.

The model in Figure 1 was analyzed using LISREL 7 software ( Jöreskog and Sörbom 1989) and estimated by Unweighted Least Squares. This figure also shows standardized structural coefficients and global results that indicate a reasonable fit of data to the proposed model. The attraction of the destination has no effects. Cultural motivations increase the quantity of activities engaged in. Psychosocial motivation has only significant effects on intercultural interaction. The original stereotype of the Spanish has a positive influence on holiday satisfaction and on the final stereotype, but not on the change of attitude. Holiday satisfaction is positively influenced by the quantity of activities, intercultural interaction, and the quality of services. Finally, holiday satisfaction strongly increases positive attitude change towards the Spanish. It also improves, although in a less intense way, the final stereotype of the Spanish.

Generally speaking, Fisher and Price’s model has been verified with the extensions utilized in this research. Contrary to the traditional motivation ideas at the Costa del Sol, it is the cultural one which best explains the activity displayed by tourists during their visit. Obviously, this activity is linked to some strong interactions with the residents which, in turn, makes them good indicators of post-vacation satisfaction. Psychosocial motivations were thoroughly fulfilled by the interaction with Spaniards and the quality of the services provided. It should be remembered that push factors tend to be good predictors of satisfaction and repeating the trip (Fayeke and Crompton 1992). As in the research cited earlier, the interaction with the host country is a vitally important aspect of tourism experiences. Similarly, pre-vacation attitudes are crucial in the explanation of changes following the holiday (San Martín 1997). It is also significant that there is more influence on positive attitude change toward the Spanish than on improving the stereotype. The indirect nature of this last measure makes the replies less biased by social desirability than in the case of attitude change mentioned by tourists. Therefore this could be a better indicator of attitude change. In addition, it is possibly a more reliable measure of the tourists’ true attitude towards Spanish people. The use of indirect and non-general measures of attitude are recommended for future research.

Recent decades have seen increased interest in finding out what motivates tourists to behave the way they do. In common with consumer behaviorists in general, however, there has been difficulties in choosing appropriate methods. Thus, a number of different approaches have been adopted. In an effort to ascertain just how interchangeable the more commonly used methods are, a survey was undertaken. This three-part instrument purportedly measures tourist motivation, but the sections do so in different ways.

First, representing the stream using an indirect approach, respondents were asked to write about both a positive and a negative holiday experience. The exemplar scenarios (provided as a guide to the level of information desired) replicated those given in Pearce and Caltabiano’s (1983) study. While the depth of information attained with this method was good, analysis was problematic. Responses were content analyzed with descriptions coded in terms of Maslow’s (1943) hierarchy of needs theory. Initial inter-coder reliability was low with some difficulty apparent in determining which was the dominant theme of the description. Once resolved by a further two judges, it was obvious that the level of data obtained from such a method limited the potential for comparison with other, quantitatively based instruments (discussed later).

A second stream of research has seen tourist motivation researchers ask respondents to rate the importance of various reasons for travel. Shoemaker’s (1989) set of reasons was selected as representative here, partly because it appeared to comprise all major dimensions of motivation, and also because its relative brevity made it appropriate for inclusion in a self-completion mail questionnaire. The only change made to Shoemaker’s list was the omission of the item “to play golf”, as this was felt to be specific to the older pleasure market on which Shoemaker’s study focused. With respondents being asked to circle a number between one and five, interpretation and subsequent analysis of responses was not a concern.

The third instrument included was Cossens, J. 1989 Positioning a Tourist Destination: Queenstown—A Branded Destination? Unpublished dissertation, University of Otago, New Zealand..Cossens’ (1989) list of 16 destination attributes. His scale was developed after a comprehensive review of the destination choice literature and self-completion mail surveys were sent to a similar population. As with the scale measuring the importance of different reasons for traveling, respondents were asked to indicate the importance of each attribute in their decision. From such ratings, underlying motives have then been inferred.

To test the assumption that scales such as Shoemaker’s and Cossens’ are both measuring the same construct (tourism motivation), canonical correlation analysis was employed. If the two scales are substitute measures of the same concept, the canonical redundancy analysis should show a high proportion of the variance in the attributes being explained by the set of canonical variables extracted from the reasons scale and vice versa. The 13 canonical variables extracted from the attributes set of data explained 88% of the original variance. (This is due to a smaller number of canonical variables being extracted because of there only being 13 items in the reasons scale.) What is more important is that the canonical variables extracted from this scale explain only 24% of the variance in the attributes data set. That is, the scale of reasons does not appear to be measuring the same construct as the scale of attribute importance. In a similar fashion, the total variance of the reasons data explained by the canonical variables extracted from the attributes set was 23%. Again the implication is that measuring the importance of various destination attributes is not a substitute for obtaining importance ratings of reasons as to why they go on holiday.

To enable the level of association between the content analysis responses and the other two methods to be tested, cluster analysis was undertaken for both the attributes measure and the reasons (separately). The resulting clusters were then cross-tabulated with the Maslow-based motivational categories and Cramer’s V used as an indicator of association. At R<0.05, the only significant association observed was between the positive experiences categories and the five reasons-based clusters. While significant (P=0.01), the level of association was weak (Cramer’s V =0.17). The only other relationship to near significance was that of the motivations inferred from the negative responses and the reasons for going on holiday. Cramer’s V was again low (0.16 and P=0.09).

Therefore, the results obtained lend support to the proposition that it is wrong to compare results obtained from attribute importance studies with those based on ratings of reasons’ importance. In other words, there is no empirical basis on which to assume they are measuring a similar construct. Additionally, motives inferred from indirect questioning are not strongly associated with the findings of the other two instruments, despite all having been used to measure tourism motivation in the past. While such a finding does not lead one any further towards identifying the “best” way by which to measure tourism motivation, it does sound a note of caution regarding the comparison of results obtained by different methods. If motives are truly to be understood, the search must continue for a theoretically sound, validated instrument.

After decades of rapid growth in tourism, Austria and its neighboring regions in Germany, Switzerland and Upper Italy have over the past three years experienced sustained declines in the number of tourists visiting their destinations. While the alpine Central European regions may be a special case, all of Europe has experienced a decline in its world market share from 66% to 59% (Eurostat 1995). This has rekindled the public debate over the possible causes of this decline with price and price related factors (such as exchange rates) and quality being the major explanatory factors. Contrary to the past when price and income explanations have dominated (Keane; Schulmeister; Smeral and Witt) quality or value for money are now moving as possible explanations to the forefront (Mazanec 1996). As for the traditional activities of alpine tourism such as hiking and skiing and traditional quality attributes such as accessibility and friendliness, they no longer seem to suffice to attract a large number of tourists to areas such as Switzerland, or the alpine parts of Austria and Northern Italy, as can be evidenced by the declining number of overnight stays over the past years.

A number of researchers have in this context written about changing attitudes and behavior of tourists and their service quality expectations (Opaschowski, 1996; Poon; Ryan and Weiermair, K. 1994 Quality Management in Tourism: Lessons from the Service Industries. AIEST Congress on Tourism Research: Achievements. Failures and Unresolved Puzzles, pp. 93–114. St Gallen, Switzerland.Weiermair, 1994). If their hypotheses are correct, one should be able to observe, even among those who have already made destination choices, possible service quality deficits with respect to such new quality attributes as animation and fun or freedom of choice. Survey research will be presented which has been carried out in 11 winter sport resorts in Austria and Northern Italy involving a sample of 1,822 tourists vacationing during various periods in those resorts in the winter season of 1994–95. The survey aimed at obtaining correct quality measures for service quality broadly defined in seven domains of tourism activity: food and accommodation, sports activities (other than skiing), animation and culture, transportation aspects to and within resorts, skiing and related activities, enjoyment with nature and landscape, and shopping activities (Table 1).

The design of quality attributes and associated quality measures of alpine tourism has been heavily influenced by a rich and growing literature on the construction and use of quality attribute measures in services (Brown; Chase; Fick and Parasuraman). The final choice of quality attributes and related questions had to be tempered with the chosen mix of the seven tourism activities. These seven attributes emerged as the most valid dimensions of service quality to be used for alpine winter destinations (Table 2). Pretests were undertaken both with respect to a set of quality attributes originally derived from Parasuraman, Zeithaml and Berry (1985:47) and with the different wording of questions addressing these quality dimensions. The pretests involved tourists, tourism operators, and tourism official

Tourist judgments on service quality

Some authors have suggested that attribute importance can be used as a proxy for measuring expectations (Dall’ Aglio, 1996 and Kohli:124; Toy, Rager and Guadagnolo 1989). Hence, as a methodological starting point, the SERVQUAL model, which measures the gap between expectations and perceptions of the service by the consumer, as an indicator of service quality, was employed (Parasuraman and Zeithaml).

The quality observations in the study reported here were scored with a five-point Likert scale. Each questionnaire contained sociodemographic and other background information on the tourist in addition to its partial and final assessments concerning the seven quality dimensions found in each of the domains of activity: tourists were asked to indicate the importance of each attribute in each of the seven activities yielding 49 partial quality assessments. In addition they were also asked to assess the final importance of each of the major activities and seven quality dimensions. Similarly they were requested to provide the same partial and final quality assessments in terms of experienced satisfaction. Using different multivariate analyses the paper attempts to explain final satisfaction and importance scores based on partial quality scores in each of the seven domains of tourism activity. Put differently, the exercise was to statistically estimate theoretically defensible weighting schemes for each of the single quality judgments across all activities, thereby explaining or interpreting tourists’ final quality assessments.

On the use of quality judgments of tourists: some theoretical issues

Following a number of researchers, the service quality construct was arrived at by comparing a service quality level which the consumer expects to receive (“importance” is used as proxy indicator) and the service quality level which he/she has experienced (“satisfaction” is used as proxy indicator). According to the model, the higher the level of expectation relative to the perceived quality experience the lower the level of perceived quality and vice versa (Gr; Parasuraman; Parasuraman and Parasuraman Sasser; Zeithaml and Heskett). The main theoretical and empirical issue of this paper rests with tourists’ varied assessments of service quality but once a major holiday decision has been made and tourists find themselves vacationing in a particular destination, one cannot entirely exclude prepurchase/preconsumption decision criteria and behavior. Expectations or importance “standards” are formed for the most part prior to the decision making process and thus have a bearing on the subsequently used SERVQUAL measurement tool for service quality. As has been pointed out in the literature, customers may have different expectation levels regarding quality attributes ranging from desired to adequate to equitable and/or best brand norms (Stauss and Seidel 1995) thereby influencing the absolute measure of discrepancy between quality expectation and quality experience (i.e., perceived quality).

By most estimates, the economic impact of tourism is huge. According to Euromonitor, average tourist spending in 1996 was US$559 per person and even that figure is expected to grow by 8% per year till 2000. The World Travel and Tourism Council (as quoted in The Economist 1998) estimates that the total 1996 economic value of goods and services attributable to tourism was 10.6% of the gross global product. The importance of tourism as an area of academic investigation stems from the large contribution that it makes to the national income of several countries and the potential that it offers for generating output and employment growth.

The study of tourism involves two aspects. First, there is the growth in demand, reflected both in continually rising arrivals and also in the increasing amounts spent, on average, by tourists. The study of demand side issues occupies an important place in the tourism literature (Gonzalez; Smeral; Song; Witt; Witt and White). The second aspect relates to the growth in infrastructure to cope with rising demand. The capacity for buoyant and rising tourist numbers to generate higher incomes and employment in the host country depends critically upon how the supply of infrastructure responds to this demand. In the presence of capacity bottlenecks, demand increases will result in price rises and there will not be any concomitant output and employment increases. The greater the investment in expanding capacity, the more will demand growth translate into output and employment growth.

Infrastructure relevant to tourism takes a variety of forms. There is the question of transporting tourists to their destination and, once they are there, of providing them with the means to move about. Probably nothing has changed the face of tourism (making even the furthest-off place accessible) than inexpensive air-travel. In part this has been the result of deregulation, which has spawned, in both Europe and the United States, affordable “no-frills” airlines; in part, the cause has been airline partnerships (such as KLM-Northwest and United-Lufthansa) which allow the partners to reap economies of scale by sharing facilities. A parallel development has been the linking of car rental firms to air transportation so that passengers with a particular airline receive favorable rates from the car firm(s) with which it is linked.

Then there is the question of providing tourists with activities when they are at their destination. The provision of restaurants, shops, amusements, and culture, along with access to places of natural beauty and/or cultural importance, are some of the components of such infrastructure. Harrison (1997), for example, investigated the relationship between museums and tourism and concluded that the strongest attribute of a museum, in the eyes of tourists, was the fact that it was truly “local”.

There is still the question of providing beds for tourists, and it is with this aspect that the present paper is concerned. The provision of accommodation is an important part of the totality of activities that go to make up the tourism industry. For example, Zhou, Yanagida, Chakravorty and Leung (1997) showed, using a computable general-equilibrium model, that the industries that would be most affected by a 10% reduction in tourism demand, in terms of a reduction in factor demand from base, were hotels (?9.7%), restaurants and bars (?8.3%), and transportation (?7.3%). Earlier studies of the hotel sectors have been provided by Lundberg, Krishnamoorthy and Stavenga (1995) who detailed the different types of hotels, their financial and organizational structure, and their operating methods; by van Kraay (1993), who, in an analysis of the hotel and catering sectors in the European Union, was concerned with the measures adopted by the European Commission to assist these industries; by Smith (1995); and by Zimmerman, F.M., 1995. Tourism in Austria: Instability of Demand and Innovations on the Supply Side. Geographische Rundschau 47, pp. 30–37. View Record in Scopus | Cited By in Scopus (2)Zimmerman (1995). This paper complements these studies by focusing on the econometric analysis of supply responses in the hotel sector. It attempts to estimate the supply of guest rooms by relating supply decisions to price and to other, non-price, factors.

Hotel room supply

The analytical framework for estimating the supply-curve of the hotel sector, and the results from applying this framework to data for each of three tourism regions of Queensland, Australia, are reported in this part, by outlining the analytical framework for the study, by discussing the econometric methodology employed, by describing the data, and by presenting the estimation and inference results. The data for carrying out this study was provided by the Government Statistician’s Office at the Queensland Treasury. The office supplied the author with data, for the quarter one 1986 to quarter four 1994 period, relating to hotels, motels and guest houses (hereafter, collectively referred to as “hotels”) in the Gold Coast, Whitsunday, and Cairns.

The analytical framework

Consider a hotel sector in a particular region that contains K hotels indexed k=1…K. Suppose hotel k has Nkt rooms at the beginning of period t. The price that concerns consumers and, therefore, determines the demand for hotel rooms is xkt, the amount paid per occupied room. On the other hand, the price that concerns suppliers, and thus determines the supply of guest rooms, is wkt, earnings per available room since that represents the rate of return on the hotel’s stock of rooms. In other words, demand and supply decisions with respect to guest rooms are made with reference to different prices. The relation between the “consumer” price and the “producer” price can be seen clearly from the following equation. If Rkt is the revenue of the hotel over period t, earnings per available room, wkt, are:

where: Mkt is the average number of rooms occupied over period t; zkt=Mkt/Nkt is the average occupancy rate of rooms in the hotel in period t and xkt=Rkt/Mkt is average earnings per occupied room.

Interposing between the two prices (wkt and xkt) is a “wedge” represented by zkt, the room occupancy rate. (The idea that zkt acts as a wedge is analogous to the wedge that taxes drive between the labor costs that employers pay and the money that workers take home.) The room occupancy rate may be thought of as the rate of utilization of the hotel’s stock of rooms: when this stock is fully utilized, that is zkt=1, then wkt=xkt; for less than full-utilization of stock, that is zkt<1, wkt<xkt. Following from this are two aspects of hotel behavior: the behavior of individual hotels and the behavior of the sector in its entirety.

The sub-title of this paper, “The Brotherhood of Coconuts” is taken from the Swahili methali (proverb) “Udugu wa nazi hukutani chunguni” which means, “the brotherhood of coconuts comes about in the pot”. Like most Swahili methali, this one has a number of possible meanings. As interpreted here it means that different self-contained entities unite under stressful conditions, such as the heat of the pot. This unity of different entities is artificial, being brought about by the action of placing them together in the pot. The significance of this methali and indeed the context of its usage, is borrowed from Mark Swartz’s recent ethnography of the Swahili, The Way the World Is: Cultural Processes and Social Relations among the Mombasa Swahili (Swartz 1991). Its third chapter, entitled “The Brotherhood of Coconuts,” provides a detailed description of the organization of Swahili “tribes” and the cultural and historical relevance of Swahili identity. Swartz uses the methali to denote the difficulty of presenting a unifying picture of the often fragmented, decidedly ambiguous nature of Swahili ethnic identity and the idea that this identity shatters and consolidates depending on social and historical context. The methali is adapted somewhat in this discussion of ethnicity and social change in Malindi, Kenya in order to fit this very old East African proverb into the nomenclature of 20th century Western intellectual tradition by suggesting that “the brotherhood of coconuts is formed in the melting-pot”. This paper extends that idea to Kenyan ethnicity in toto within the context of tourism. Briefly stated, the central issue examined here is the ways in which tourism, occurring in conditions of inter-ethnic contact among hosts, mediates, or exacerbates ethnic conflict. This issue is explored through an analysis of several case studies from a highly multi-ethnic community that is also highly dependent on tourism.

A triad of mini-case studies, or “critical incidents”, examines some of these overlooked consequences in the context of the local tourism industry. Kenya, and particularly the town of Malindi, offer revealing venues for research in this area for several reasons. The Kenyan population is highly multi-ethnic consisting of dozens of groups and sub-groups. Ethnicity in independent Kenya has often been highly politicized as witnessed by both the history of governance and competition over political resources and the recent multi-party elections that were ultimately cast as ethnic competitions, with attendant ethnic violence. In fact, in 1992 when this fieldwork was conducted, the first multi-party elections in Kenyan in over 28 years were being held and ethnic “clashes” resulting in the loss of lives and property were part of the climate of political competition. Significantly, as one of the primary sources of foreign exchange for the nation, tourism’s development is given high priority by the Kenyan government and has left many communities, including Malindi, critically dependent on its continued growth.

Ethnicity and tourism

The focus on ethnicity in the tourism literature has typically emphasized the interaction between the industry and the re-creation of ethnic symbols and material culture (van den Berghe and Keyes 1984), the crisis of identity of the local peoples relative to their identity as the objects of touristic pursuits (MacCannell 1984), and the issue of authenticity and culture change as a result of contact with tourism (van den Berghe 1992). Relatively little has been written on the impact on local communities when this contact occurs within the framework of a multi-ethnic community (for a notable exception, see Picard and Wood 1997). There are several theoretical implications of tourism in multi-ethnic communities that warrant further research. If, for example, tourism demand is focused on the production of ethnic crafts or ethnic performances, will long lasting competitive advantages accrue to local groups that specialize in the production of these products? If local ethnic groups differ by some fundamental trait, such as religion or physical features, do these traits become meaningful in negotiating within and between group relationships? Are previous inter-ethnic relationships, especially where historical conflict exists, exacerbated or negotiated when the tourism economy necessitates cooperation at some level? One fundamental characteristic of this industry is that it is the primary means of mass inter-ethnic contact and cross-national contact (van den Berghe and Keyes 1984). It stands to reason that, like other types of mass migrations, invasions or other situations involving inter-ethnic meeting, the impact of tourism contact involves deep-seated ramifications for the host population, especially local identity and social relationships. The resulting impacts on local ethnic relations can have multiple effects beyond the mutual understanding or misunderstanding generated by direct communication between hosts and guests.

One of the most noted social impacts of tourism is that it can indirectly strengthen identity internal to one ethnic group through the promotion of its arts and performances that were seen as dying or passe (Graburn and van). This is perhaps the most frequently commented upon impact as it relates to ethnic identity. The revival of X practice among the Y people is stimulated by new tourist interest and demand for the performances. Balinese religious rituals, for example, help preserve the tradition of the local villages that perform them (despite the fact that the tradition is modified to account for tourist taste) and thus this situation helps preserve an ethnic marker of the people (McKean 1989). Sherpas in Nepal, finding themselves the focus of tourism interest by trekking Westerners, have led the industry in this country to emphasize the Sherpas uniqueness, and consequently they have intensified their own ethnic identity (Adams 1992). Costume, folklore, and even language are preserved in the Cantel region of France in direct response to tourism (Abram, S., 1997. Performing for Tourists in Rural France. In: Abram, S., Waldren, J. and Macleod, D. Editors, 1997. Tourists and Tourism: Identifying with People and Places Berg Press, Oxford.Abram 1997). In each of these instances, this demand for cultural products helps to stave off the disintegration of the community and thus its ethnicity.

Tourism can also support ethnic cohesion by providing a common threat for which a unified response is required or demanded. The religious/ethnic basis of Islamic fundamentalists in Egypt targets tourism as the threat to Muslim culture and values in the region and has acted significantly and tragically toward containing its expansion (Aziz 1995). In Mallorca, the growing popularity of the island as a destination has created a backlash of ethnic solidarity among Mallorcans against Germans, Italians and even other Spaniards (Waldren 1997). In Goa, India, a diverse collection of local residents organized an action group (the Jagrut Goencaranchi Fauz—JGF) expressly devoted to limiting tourism growth and the negative social impact believed to be associated with it (Lea 1993). The belief in each case is that this industry poses the threat of risky contamination of cultural values by outsiders who do not share those values or the threat of political and economic displacement by a more numerous, wealthy, and politically powerful group of outsiders.

The types of local responses to tourism noted above have been most often explored in situations that can be said to be largely uni-ethnic, where a single indigenous ethnic group dominates the local community and the basis for unification founded on positive or negative views of tourism is relatively easily mobilized. In situations of multi-ethnicity, where no one group clearly and substantially dominates the local landscape, the impact of tourism may also have fusion or fissioning effects (Wood 1997). Ethnic boundary theory predicts that local groups will look for areas of cross-cutting cleavages when the need for cooperation makes it in their best interests to do so (Barth 1969). Thus fusion is most likely to take place in situations where individual differences can be relativized. Therefore, Group A is less likely to see the differences between itself and Group B as important when a mutual goal or mutual threat is realized. This process may be further facilitated if that threat comes from Group C, which is even more distinctive than the first two and is also vying for access to resources. A and B may thus “see past” their individual differences in the face of the threat from C.

On June 30, 1997, the people of Boracay Island, Philippines were shaken by the news from the Department of Environment and Natural Resources that the crystal clear swimming waters off Boracay’s internationally renown Long Beach were contaminated with high levels of coliform blamed on inadequate sewage treatment. As a result, the dramatic 100% increase in tourist arrivals between 1995–96 was nearly matched by a dramatic 70% decline in the months that followed the announcement (DOT 1997). The livelihoods of residents who had grown dependent on tourism suddenly became imperiled, billions of pesos in capital investments were threatened, and the image of Philippines’ tourism suffered (Figure 1).

The announcement came in the midst of the Philippines Department of Tourism’s (DOT) attempt to implement a program of sustainable tourism on Boracay. In December 1996, through a partnership with the Canadian Urban Institute (CUI), The Canada–Philippines Cooperative Program on Sustainable Development for Boracay Island began a community-based and participatory approach to local development. The program was predicated on sustainable development principles widely discussed at the 1992 Rio Conference on Environment and Development and highlighted in Agenda 21 (ICLEI 1996). Although there is still debate over the definition and significance of sustainable development, most experts emphasize the need to change human conduct in light of massive global environmental degradation and socioeconomic inequities (Trousdale 1997a). Clearly, change is needed to move tourism towards sustainability, as indicated by its many well-documented adverse impacts (Archer; Cohen; Ioannides; Mieczkowski; Pearce; Smith; UNESCAP and WTO). Change in the near term will likely be subtle as the industry largely considers sustainable tourism within the predominant paradigm of economic growth (Nelson, Butler and Wall 1993). From this perspective, sustainable tourism can be defined as expanding development to intentionally improve the quality of the host community, provide a high quality experience for the tourist, and maintain the quality of the environment upon which they both depend (Eadington and WTO). Paramount in this approach to development is the identification and contribution of a full range of stakeholders (Gunn 1988) and participation by the residents in planning and decision making (Gunn; Hitchcock; Innskeep; Long and Pearce) in order to determine the community’s long term interest rather than the limited short term goals of an elite minority (Brohman 1996).

Despite the need for more sustainable development in tourism, there remains a large and growing gap between sustainability doctrine and actual achievement in the developing world. Some of the more salient reasons are highlighted in the work of Morah (1996). He cites nearly a half dozen program assessments going back to 1964, all concluding that implementation and administration were the most significant challenges in developing countries. Similarly, Richter (1989) has identified political and administrative action as a key determinant of the success or failure of tourism. The international development community has recently subsumed politics and administration under the concept of governance, where it is beginning to receive attention. More cash is now being spent by development organizations (such as the World Bank) on creating institutions, improving management skills and building governance capacity (The Economist, 1994 and Frischtak, 1994). Governance is defined as the ability to coordinate the aggregation of diverging interests to promote policy, projects, and programs that credibly represent the public interests. Public involvement, institutional development, transparency of decision making procedures, interest representation, conflict resolution, limits of authority, and leadership accountability are all issues of governance (Frischtak 1994). This case study of tourism on Boracay Island supports the assertion that governance is the critical issue in moving development towards sustainability.

A key consideration in promoting sustainable tourism through effective governance is the development context, including factors such as historical experiences, market forces, sociocultural influences, politics, and legislation. Emphasizing context helps avoid the criticism that many researchers have over-generalized findings assuming that their conclusions are widely applicable (Wall 1993). Therefore, the discussion and analysis in this article revolves around the changes that are taking place on Boracay and how they can best be managed. The research presented here is based on analysis, a review of relevant literature, and broad-based participatory research including over 60 interviews, meetings, and workshops. It satisfies the need for more case study research that examines institutional and organizational development (such as Selin, S. and Beason, K., 1991. Interorganizational Relations in Tourism. Annals of Tourism Research 18, pp. 639–652. Abstract | View Record in Scopus | Cited By in Scopus (27)Selin and Beason 1991), a need that is especially important in the developing world. Work highlighting the role of local politics and governance is rare, making this case study of Boracay valuable for other rapidly developing destinations. Understanding sustainable development in the Philippines is especially relevant and important from a regional perspective. Arguably the most democratic nation in Asia, and considering progressive national legislation that gives greater power to the local residents, the Philippines is providing an Asian model for participatory government.

Boracay and tourism

Boracay is a small island, only seven kilometers long and slightly over 1,000 hectares (see Figure 2). It is most famous for Long Beach (also know as White Beach), four kilometers of white powder sand gently extending into the crystal blue waters of Sibuyan Sea. It can be accessed by air from Cebu, Manila, and Palawan in less than an hour. Larger planes land in the provincial capital of Kalibo, one and a half hours to the south. Smaller planes land in Caticlan, directly across the strait from Boracay. Sea transport is possible from locations all over the Philippines, and ground transportation is possible throughout the large island of Panay. A short 20 minute pump-boat ride is required to get from the main island of Panay to Boracay.

This paper considers the status of ecotourism within Costa Rica and Kenya, two less developed countries (LDCs) which have acquired a high profile in this respect. Both case studies are examined in relation to ecotourism profile, magnitude, spatial patterns, and impacts, and this is followed by a discussion of the outlined patterns and their implications. Initially, this paper provides a more general context of definitional issues, a critique, and the place of ecotourism within the broader tourism setting.

At present, there is no consensus on the definition of the term ecotourism (Buckley and Orams), and both its meaning and usage remain associated with a great deal of confusion and disagreement (Blamey and Nelson). To a large extent, this reflects its recent origins as a focus of discussion, and thus indicates a phenomenon whose parameters and terms of reference are still evolving. However, there is widespread agreement that ecotourism consists of three core criteria, and these constitute the basic definition employed in this paper: the primary attraction is nature-based (such as flora and fauna, geological features), with cultural features constituting a secondary component; the emphasis is on the study and/or appreciation of the resource in its own right, as opposed to the use of the resource as a venue for other activities (as in white-water rafting or sunbathing on the beach); and the activities of the tourists and other participants are benign with respect to their impact upon the physical and cultural environment of the destination. Ecotourism, in other words, should be coherent with the notion of sustainable tourism by adhering to the carrying capacities of the destination and being acceptable to, and supportive of, host communities.

Among numerous definitions and formulations proffered to date, a distinction can be made beyond these core elements between active and passive variations of ecotourism (Orams 1995). The former argue for a more restrictive ecotourism that involves actions conducive to the improvement of the environment. As such, these represent a sustainable form which emphasizes enhancement of the resource base. Active ecotourism is frequently associated with primary-purpose trips of relatively long duration, specialized “ecolodge”-type accommodations, venues closer to the wilderness end of the spectrum, the provision of minimal facilities and services within these venues, and a high degree of commitment and involvement among the participants. In contrast, the passive definitions require only that the activity does not result in negative impacts on the physical or cultural environment. As opposed to active ecotourism, this suggests a mode of sustainable tourism which tolerates the maintenance of the resource status quo. Relatively brief visits (often as just one component of a longer multi-purpose trip) and a greater array of services and facilities, usually of a more conventional (non-specialized) nature, are associated with this more anthropocentric variant.

The often-quoted seminal definition of Ceballos-Lascuraín (cited in Boo 1990) falls on the passive side of the ecotourism spectrum; so does Rymer who defines ecotourism as “centered on tourists’ desire for immersion in a relatively natural environment in which they and their support facilities have low impact upon the environment” ( Rymer 1992:1). Active definitions are provided by Kutay who suggests that “ecotourism is nature tourism which directly or indirectly promotes conservation and supports sustainable economic development” ( Kutay 1989:4); Boo who sees it as “nature travel that advances conservation and sustainable development efforts” (1992:iii), and the Canadian Environmental Advisory Council which perceives ecotourism as “an enlightening nature travel experience that contributes to conservation of the ecosystem while respecting the integrity of host communities” (in Scace, Grifone and Usher 1993:3). Perhaps the most restrictive definition is put forth by James Butler (cited in Scace 1993) who insists that ecotourism must simultaneously satisfy eight descriptive criteria, including consistency with a positive environmental ethos, biocentrism, enhancement of the resource base, attainment of education benefits, and conveyance of high informational and emotional dimensions.

For the purposes of this article, a liberal definition of ecotourism is adopted which incorporates the active-to-passive spectrum. While the active variation might constitute a desirable ideal, the restriction of a working definition to this interpretation alone results in an exclusive and elitist activity whose economic benefits to a destination are limited by the small pool of qualifying participants; it is clear, for example, that very little activity would qualify as ecotourism within the rigorous parameters set by Butler. Most nature appreciation participants, in contrast, cluster within the passive end of the spectrum. According to Kearsley, Hall and Jenkins:

At present, the bulk of demand is less likely to be for the “back country” of wilderness and remote places than it is to be for the “front” country of relatively easily accessible natural settings with a good but unobtrusive infrastructure of basic facilities (Kearsley, Hall and Jenkins 1997:71).

The legitimacy of an ecotourism definition that incorporates a spectrum of options is recognized by a growing number of researchers. Lindberg (1991), for example, differentiates between “hard-core” and “dedicated” nature tourists on one hand, and “mainstream” or “casual” nature tourists on the other. The Queensland (Australia) Draft Ecotourism Strategy (Queensland 1995) distinguishes between self-reliant ecotourism (involving groups of less than ten participants, using non-motorized transportation during visits to relatively remote areas) and popular ecotourism (involving larger numbers of tourists using mechanized transport to access readily accessible natural attractions where a significant level of services is available); small group ecotourism is an intermediate category which comprises transitional activity.

One of the most important challenges arising from the goal of sustainable tourism development is destination planning. The traditional boosterism approach to development has been oriented toward reducing barriers and in stimulating market interest (Getz 1987). This emphasis has resulted from importance being placed on the economic benefits of the industry, such as income generation, employment creation and regional development. However, researchers into the impacts of tourism are increasingly noting that the traditional market-driven approach does not always provide the most appropriate or sustainable solution ( Inskeep and Inskeep). Some form of intervention is necessary to protect the environmental assets on which tourism is based, to mitigate social and cultural impacts, and to maximize economic benefits and minimize negative impacts ( Inskeep 1991).

While the most desirable framework for this intervention depends upon the nature of tourism itself as well as political and administrative frameworks, it is increasingly being recognized that development issues should be addressed as part of a comprehensive planning process (Getz 1986, 1988; Inskeep 1991). In addition to market planning, the spatial implications of tourism also need to be addressed ( Fagence; Fagence, 1995 and Gunn). In addressing the pragmatic concerns associated with destination management, Ashworth, G.J. and Dietvorst, A.G.I. Editors, 1995. Tourism and Spatial Transformation CAB International, Wellingford.Ashworth and Dietvorst (1995) argue that it is essential to integrate tourism into local place management policy. That is, tourism is reliant upon a community’s stock of natural and human resources; however, these resources are frequently planned and managed under other statutory and non-statutory planning regimes, such as land use planning, natural resource management and community economic development schemes. Most of these regimes are primarily concerned with other issues and are conducted independently of tourism planning initiatives. Accordingly, if destination place management is to be effective, it should be integrated into existing planning frameworks.

This paper is concerned with the integration of tourism into the physical or land use planning framework. In simple terms, land use planning is a statutory process which aims to identify a vision for the spatial development of an area and to pursue this by designating a preferred pattern of land use. It is a process which is carried out at the local or regional level as opposed to market-oriented tourism planning which is most commonly carried out at the regional level or above. The aim of land use planning requires that developmental issues be spatially interpreted. Frequently however, there is little or no guidance in the form of spatial strategies at higher levels of government (Fagence 1991). In some countries, this hiatus has resulted in a situation where development processes become complicated and protracted as planners attempt to assess projects on an ad hoc basis using planning documents which have been elaborated without full consideration of tourism development issues ( Dredge and Long). It is argued that despite considerable advancements in the development of methodological processes of tourism planning (Getz 1988; Inskeep; Inskeep and Lawson) there is a lack of spatial concepts, models and theories from which the land use planner can draw. This in turn can exacerbate the difficulty in integrating destination place management into the land-use planning framework.

An analysis of spatial models of tourism corroborates this perspective. Pearce (1995) detects considerable fragmentation of spatial tourism models, noting that many have been developed independently of one another, with little or no recognition of or attempt to build on previous efforts. Furthermore, few have been subject to critical appraisal or empirical testing. Fagence (1995) acknowledges that the main contributions of these models lie in establishing the relevance of certain geographical concepts such as spatial interaction between components, distance decay from origins to destinations, nodal hierarchies, tour circuits, and specialization between destinations and nodal interdependency. While these may be important in understanding the geographical nature of tourism, their use for the purposes of identifying a preferred pattern of land use is limited due to their predominantly descriptive or explanatory nature. Mitchell and Murphy (1991:65) argue that “despite attempts to cast spatial and environmental relationships into a broader theoretical framework, there is still a need to integrate such models into more comprehensive paradigms of land-use and tourist behavior” (1991:65). Jansen-Verbeke (1992) observes that despite the plethora of models and concepts to aid in the planning of housing, traffic, industrial, and commercial activities, there are few such models in relation to tourism and recreation planning. The aim of this paper is to sharpen the conceptualization of the core elements which comprise destination regions in order to assist the land-use planning process. In doing so, the paper draws from a number of existing models, concepts, and theories in order to build a framework for improved destination place design in as much as physical planning, land use, and development issues are involved.

Destination place planning and design

Planning is the process of establishing a strategic vision for an area which reflects a community’s goals and aspirations and implementing this through the identification of preferred patterns of land use and appropriate styles of development. Traditionally, the range of concern for planners has been narrowly focused on residential, commercial, and industrial land uses. Tourism, because it involves a wide range of interrelated land uses, has usually not been considered in its entirety, but has been compartmentalized for the sake of expediency. However, the stimulus for local planners to become more involved in destination planning and management stems from changes that have been occurring in the profession over the last two decades. Issues such as sustainable development and community consultation have had an enormous impact on the planners’ self perception and the way they define their role (Forrester 1989). They are increasingly moving away from an insular bureaucratic role to encompass a wide range of other considerations, including environmental protection, commercial and corporate interests and public opinion, that have previously been considered outside their domain.

In an era of growing specialization and differentiation of community interests, increasing public participation and access to the decision-making process, the task of balancing this growing range of issues is difficult. The planners’ role is neither rational nor comprehensive (since it is impossible for all factors to be investigated and considered equally) but is bounded by a number of personal, professional, and political factors (Forrester 1989). These may include the education and training of the individual, personal attitudes and beliefs, understanding of the issues at hand, ability of the planner to present and justify recommendations, and the influence of lobby groups and the professional tools which the planner employs. It is the last factor, professional tools, which is the concern of this paper. Since tourism issues must compete against all other community interests in the development of place management policy, the planner must have available a range of tools in the form of methodologies, concepts, models, and theories to answer critical questions about the most desirable spatial structure of tourism in order to facilitate destination region design and development.

Kenya is one of the leading tourist destinations in Africa attracting about 6% of total arrivals to the continent (Kenya Government 1997). As such, tourism is a major economic and social phenomenon, accounting for over 12% of Kenya’s Gross Domestic Product. However, although its major stakeholders (such as hoteliers, tour agencies, travel companies, and the state) benefit substantially from this industry, most often rural communities where attractions are actually located benefit the least from tourism. The Maasai are a case in point. Located to the Southwest of the country, they live adjacent to such world famous protected wildlife areas as Maasai Mara, Amboseli, and Tsavo (all originally owned by pastoral Maasai, but later protected game parks). These areas are well known for wildlife viewing and photographing in their natural setting; and thus over 40% of the international tourists who come to Kenya visit this region.

The Maasai are prominently featured in overseas tourism brochures, advertisements, electronic media, and other forms of commercials which market Kenya as a leading tourism “Mecca” in Africa. Scenes of the Maasai dressed in red ochre shuka and/or traditional regalia are juxtaposed with the “Big Five” (elephant, rhinoceros, lion, cheetah, and hippopotamus) and are promoted as ideal African wilderness attractions. The Maasai moran (youthful warriors), carrying traditional long spears and clubs, are projected in the media as people who “walk tall” amidst the deadly African “cats”. Scenes of Maasai livestock are also projected in commercials, grazing in harmony with other savanna herbivores such as antelopes, zebra, wildebeest, buffalo, and elephant.

However, these ideal wilderness images of harmonious co-existence between the Maasai and the savanna wildlife may have been tenable in the period preceding the creation of state protected game parks, and the establishment of tourism facilities and infrastructure on land previously owned by the Maasai. In reality, the Maasai are often in severe persistent and accelerating conflicts with park wildlife over grazing and water resources (the wildlife parks were created in important dry season grazing ranges). This social and economic scenario has been accentuated by state tourism and wildlife policies which focus narrowly on the protection of park wildlife for foreign tourists without any involvement of the Maasai in the management and utilization of these resources (Akama, Lant and Burnett 1996). The Maasai incur immediate and direct social and environmental costs from tourism development and wildlife conservation; they suffer damage by park wildlife and forego the opportunity of using this protected land for agricultural production; but insignificant amounts of the country’s tourism receipts trickle down to the Maasai in areas adjacent to the attractions. It has been noted that there is a major foreign presence in almost all of the country’s tourism subsectors, such as marketing and promotion, travel and transport, and hotel and hospitality service ( Akama; Dieke; Sindiga and Sincliar). In consequence, there is high leakage of Kenya’s tourism receipts. Therefore, insignificant amounts of the tourism revenues trickle down to the Maasai and other rural communities. This is despite the fact that Kenya’s most visited wildlife parks are located adjacent to Maasai settlements.

Moreover, most Kenyans who work in the tourism industry tend to occupy low unskilled and semi-skilled positions (Sindiga 1994). These jobs include tour guides, security guards, gardeners, housekeepers, porters, and waiters. These are servile, seasonal, and low paying positions. But even among these low paid jobs, the Maasai are least represented. However, it appears that the only area where there is a relatively high representation of them is security guard positions (watchmen). Not withstanding the fact that those who work as security guards do earn most sought-after income, these forms of jobs tend to reinforce existing stereotypes and perceptions concerning the Maasai. There is a general perception that since they live in the wilderness areas, where they share habitats and interact with dangerous and deadly wild cats, they are thus best suited to provide security and protection to tourists and hotel workers, against any form of real or perceived danger. Thus, whereas employees are safely camped inside well-protected hotels, the Maasai are supposed to stand guard at the entry gates to provide protection against any form of perceived danger.

Further, a few Maasai sell traditional handicraft and souvenirs such as bracelets, necklaces, swords, and head gear. They also perform traditional dances for tourists for minimal fees. However, the Maasai handicrafts and cultural performances have been removed from their authentic social and cultural context, and have been commercialized to suit the whims of mass tourism. These distorted handicrafts and contrived cultural performances serve to reinforce existing stereotypes and negative images of the Maasai, as a “backward and primitive people” who form an additional anecdote to international tourists keen for exoticism and adventure. Worse yet, incidents of tourists paying Maasai women and morans to strip so that they may take the “most exciting” photo have been reported (a recent front-cover photo in the Swimsuit Issue of Sports Illustrated Magazine attests to this). The visitors themselves acquire these forms of illusionary images and expectations from overseas agents who market these images, such as wild and darkest Africa, complete with roaring lions, trumpeting elephants, semi-naked and bare breasted natives in order to increase package sales. The tour operators and travel agents are often driven by the profit margin, and thus the tourism advertisements and commercials are aimed at creating an illusionary wilderness image to lure Western tourists keen for exoticism and adventure.

In addition, various forms of unwanted behavior and vices of mass tourism have been noted in Maasailand. They include incidents of prostitution, alcoholism, smoking, and drug taking. The Maasai youth are especially influenced by tourist behavior and are enticed to indulge in such deviant activities. There have been reports of prostitution as some tourists keep off the well-beaten track of conventional tourism and indulge in commercial sex with Maasai women. Health problems such as sexually transmitted diseases, tuberculosis, and dysentery that were uncommon in the widely dispersed traditional Maasai environment have increased in recent years, as they concentrate in cultural manyattas (local centers where the Maasai assemble to sell handicraft and perform traditional dance). Obviously these incidents of decadence and the breakdown of the social fabric of the Maasai as a result of mass tourism activities need further research and documentation.?