Resident attitudes inside Victoria's tourism product regions: a cluster analysis.

Publication: Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management

Publication Date: 01-APR-06

Bookmark this article Print this article Link to this article Email this article Digg It! Add to del.icio.us RSS

COPYRIGHT 2006 University of Queensland Press

In the past two decades, there have been 76 published articles that have segmented tourist samples into clusters (Jackson, Inbakaran, & Schmierer, 2003). The principal aims of such research are to better understand tourist characteristics, to identify key variables that predict tourist bebaviours, to assess the value of tourism to an area, to provide knowledge to help develop facilities in designated areas, and to allow tourism marketing to plan strategies such as promotion and product development. In contrast, researchers have appeared to assume that the host population is homogeneous and has a uniform response to an increase in tourist numbers and to future sustainable tourism within the community. This research study used a cluster analysis to segment the host community into four cluster groups. Demographic variables constituted the cluster base. These four cluster groups differed from each other on gender ratio, age, life cycle stage, education, migration status, occupation and current involvement with tourism. A further analysis demonstrated that these cluster groups significantly differed from each other in terms of both attitude towards current tourist numbers and future tourism development. The results of this study are discussed in terms of exploring the underlying causes of both positive and negative attitudes of hosts toward tourism. This research highlights differing attitudes present in various community groups and explores implications for the tourist industry.

**********

Tourism researchers have primarily focused on travellers, their needs, behaviours and their welfare (Brunt & Courtney, 1999; Krippendorf, 1987; Sharpley, 1994). It has been stated that tourism is the largest peacetime movement of people and that tourism has had an astonishingly high annual growth rate to the year 2000 (Upchurch & Teviane, 2000). Through the 1990s, the tourism industry was considered the largest and fastest growing industry in the world with all levels of government (national, state, local) funding tourism boards to promote their locations. Until the end of September, 2004, 3.7 million tourists have visited Australia (Tourism Australia, 2004). Many tourism authors have alerted readers to the possible cultural, ecological, environmental, social and political impacts of increased tourism (e.g., Edgell, 1990).

As a consequence, various community groups have diverging perspectives regarding the impacts of tourism (Lankford, 1994). Hernarndez, Cohen and Garcia (1996) indicated two important reasons to consider residents' attitudes toward tourist development: the tourism industry will develop products in regions where they know tourists will be well treated by the host community, and government policy makers need to balance the economic benefits of tourism enterprises with the social costs/benefits of tourism in the host community.

Review of Literature

Community Focus in Tourism Marketing

In 2001, the Australian Tourist Commission (ATC) published the results of a representative sample of 1451 Australian residents and found 93% perceived some advantage that overseas tourists brought to Australia. The four major perceived advantages were economic benefits (81%), opportunity to showcase Australia (24%), visitors stimulate the culture/life of the Australian community (17%), and tourism boosts Australia's image overseas (14%). While 46% of respondents mentioned a disadvantage, 39% stated there were no disadvantages and a further 15% could not say if there were any disadvantages. The major disadvantages that were cited included threats to safety or security (health risks; tourists attract crime; 12%), growth pressures and increased demands on facilities (6%), crowds and queues (6%), and environmental damage/impact (5%). While this survey indicates Australian residents as a whole are overwhelmingly positive toward tourism, it does not segment the population in terms of perceptions, attitudes and opinions regarding current tourism levels and future growth.

Tourism Research Focus Shift Towards Community Perception

Jafari (1986) reported systematic shifts in the focus of tourism research in terms of impacts. Tourism research focused on the positive aspects of tourism development in the 1960s, the negative impacts throughout the decade of the 1970s, and achieved a balanced view of cost/benefits in the 1980s and early 1990s (Lankford, 1994). Researchers in the early years of the 21st century list an impressive range of both positive and negative impacts on the host community as a result of tourism development (Besculides, Lee, & Fredline & Faulkner, 2000; Gursoy, Jurowski, & Uysal, 2002; McCormick, 2002; Upchurch & Teivane, 2000). The major positive contributions of tourism include creation of jobs and business opportunities (including employment of minorities); increased availability for recreation, shopping and entertainment; increased demand for preservation of historical and architectural monuments; increased knowledge by locals of own culture; and promotion of community pride, tolerance and a stronger sense of ethnic/cultural identity within the host community. The possible negative impacts of tourism development include lack of economic diversification (tourism replaces other industries including fishing, mining, forestry, agriculture); economic strain due to inflation of prices of goods and services, emergence of crowding, congestion (including traffic), all forms of modern day pollution and the extra demands on limited resources (especially water); increase in undesirable behaviours such as prostitution, crime, gambling, alcohol and drug abuse; and modification of cultural practices with a threat to authenticity by staging festivals/events entirely for tourists and the artificial reconstruction of sacred buildings and objects (Bosseiman, Peterson, & McCarthy, 1999; Brunt, Mawby, & Hambly, 2000; Clift& Carter, 2000; Crystal, 1989; Doxey, 1976; Erisman, 1983; Fredline & Faulkner, 2000; French,1997; Greenwood, 1989; MacCannell, 1976; Maragos, 1993; Mathieson & Wall, 1982; Montgomery, 2001; Prideaux, 1996; Stonehouse & Crosbie, 1995; Tahana & Oppermann, 1998).

Both researchers and residents have little difficulty identifying potential positive and negative impacts associated with tourism development on local host communities. Thus, the successful development of a tourism industry requires effective planning that both recognises tourists' demands and emphasises the values of the local host community (Lankford, 1994). To achieve this balance, Murphy (1980) noted a requirement, in part, for knowledge of residents' perceptions, attitudes and preferences. Most current researchers of host communities have identified factors that influence residents' attitudes toward tourism and its future development (Besculides et al., 2002; Brunt & Courtney, 1999; Fredline & Faulkner, 2000; Gursoy et al., 2002; Hernandez et al., 1996; Tye et al., 2002; Upchurch & Teivane, 2000; Weaver & Lawton, 2001; Williams & Lawson, 2001).

These factors are briefly discussed in the following categories: demographics, person factors, social factors, and tourism-related factors. Demographic factors associated with attitudes of residents toward tourism have been extensively studied. While some researchers (Davis, Allen, & Cosenza, 1988; Liu & Var, 1986; Williams & Lawson, 2001) concluded that demographics do not have a causal influence, other investigators have reported significant relationships between resident demographics and host attitudes. In summary, a more positive attitude toward tourism is related to the following profile: being female, being employed (in general), higher income, high education attainment, higher political/demographic position in society, and living in an urban environment. Working in the industry (and being economically dependent on tourism) leads to a strong positive attitude toward tourism. However, a number of researchers (Brunt & Courtney, 1999; Pizam, 1978; Williams & Lawson, 2001) concluded that residents with an economic reliance on tourism not only had a strong positive attitude toward tourism, but were quick to identify negatives associated with tourism that lead to the expression of strong negative attitudes as well.

Community Attitudes and Tourism Development

While there appears to be no published research linking personality type of residents and their attitudes toward tourism development, there have been findings that increasing perceived control the host community members have over community decisions regarding tourism development increases pro-tourism attitudes (Ap, 1992; Gursoy et al., 2001; Lankford, 1994). Related to this, Davis et al. (1988) found a positive correlation between increased knowledge of the industry and positive attitudes toward tourism. These findings seem linked to demographic data that indicates positive tourism attitudes are related to residents with high incomes, higher education levels, and high social/political status in the local community.

The major research focus regarding social factors has been length of residence. Again, inconsistent findings have been reported. While some researchers reported no...

Read the full article for free courtesy of your local library.