اجزای توسعه پایدار : دو مورد از ترکیه
|کد مقاله||سال انتشار||مقاله انگلیسی||ترجمه فارسی||تعداد کلمات|
|129||2006||14 صفحه PDF||سفارش دهید||4860 کلمه|
Publisher : Elsevier - Science Direct (الزویر - ساینس دایرکت)
Journal : Annals of Tourism Research, Volume 33, Issue 2, April 2006, Pages 442–455
This paper analyzes the development process and goals of sustainability in two internationally popular cultural destinations in Turkey. A central hypothesis of the study was that the rapid development and high concentration of tourism activities cause negative effects on the natural and cultural environments, and when involvement of locals is minimal or lacking, the outcome would be especially unacceptable to the host community. Residents, tourists, and investors were involved, with perceptional analyses conducted for evaluation of the significance of tourism and environmental attributes for future policies, supplemented with an examination of local involvement in the development process. Findings indicate that coastal locations have met more pressure and encounter greater environmental problems than inland destinations.
From globalization-localization perspectives, tourism has become a significant tool in regional development processes and increasing interest has turned toward making it sustainable especially in main destination areas. The report of the EU Commission mentions that transportation, energy, industry, and tourism are the effective key sectors for the quality of urban environment and sustainable development (CEC 1992). While tourism has enhanced the level of welfare on the one hand, it can strengthen the environmental pressures on the other and thus plays a critical role in sustainable regional development (Nijkamp and Bergh 1990). Whereas the economic aspects are in focus when measuring its achievement, the social, economic, and environmental impacts require extensive investigation. The theoretical framework has been developing via studies on different locations and cases. Even though such investigations help improvements in theory and policy, each case has its own characteristics, processes, and perceptions toward tourism development. Moreover, in literature, methodology and approach focus on the perceptions of the impact of different groups, such as the host community or the tourists. Economic impacts (such as the improvement of employment opportunities) are perceived as more positive than sociocultural and environmental impacts (Ratz, 2000 and Tosun, 2002). When perceived benefits reach an unacceptable level, negative views are likely to emerge (Ap 1992). Studies focusing on the awareness of the host community have put forward that the length of residence in a region, economic dependency, and benefits have a major impact on resident perceptions (Besculides et al., 2002 and Jurowski et al., 1995). The development of the tourism industry also contributes to changes in the quality of life in the host community. However, rapid and intensive development results in less favorable impacts than small-scale development (de Kadt, 1979, Pearce, 1989 and Ratz, 2000). Without the involvement of the local community, rapid growth and the government’s biased policies have planted the roots of unsustainable development (Tosun 2002). Williams and Lawson (2001) suggest that the perceptions of the community are not homogenous and differentiate due to sociodemographic variables. By using cluster analysis, they are given a more targeted examination and a deeper understanding of residential view. In developing and attracting tourism to a community, the goal is to achieve outcomes that obtain the best balance of benefits and costs for both residents and other actors. Studies focusing on the perceptions of the environment have shown that tourists are more sensitive to the direct impacts resulting from, for example, human waste and vandalism (Hillery, Nancarrow, Griffin and Symeet 2001). However, there has been an increasing awareness of interaction with the environment, and these impacts on tourism are still debatable. They focus on levels of foulness such as sewage, oil spills, toxic waste discharge, and air pollution, while ecological issues such as species loss, biodiversity, and critical changes in habitats arise due to the sensitivity of the natural environment (Hughes 2002). However, some locations are more vulnerable in terms of the environment. The difficulties of measuring impacts and the establishment of standards like “magic numbers” are the main issues on limits of carrying capacity (Goodall and Stabler, 2000 and Hughes, 2002). The concept of sustainability mainly considers the ecological dimension and leads to types of alternatives such as nature tourism, ecotourism, and green tourism that are contrary to mass tourism (Boo, 1990 and Valentine, 1993). But the obvious reality in practice is that this industry is mainly located in developed regions and urban areas or that it stimulates development in such regions (Ashworth, 1990, Urry, 1987 and Williams and Shaw, 1995). In order to compete with other destinations, expansion and economic benefits are desirable (Agarwal, 2002 and Hall, 2000). According to Barke and Newton (1995:116), “the concept of sustainable tourism adopted in an urban area must be multifaceted if it is to be successful and must be based on more than a narrow ecological and environmental perspective”. There is no doubt that the environment is the basis for the natural and cultural resources for attracting tourists. Therefore, environmental protection is essential for long-term success. If the natural, historical, and cultural environment cannot be protected, there can be no expectations for sustainability in destination areas. At this point, the questions arise as to how and to what extent tourism should be developed in a local area. Hunter emphasizes, “sustainable tourism should not be regarded as a rigid framework, but rather as an adaptive paradigm which legitimizes a variety of approaches according to specific circumstances” (1997:851). Diversity of interests in various communities is one of the main issues needing to be explored so as to implement successful strategies to maintain development. The framework of this paper is based on the sustainable model developed by the World Tourism Organization, related to a conceptual model on development. While its main principles include ecological, social, cultural, and economic sustainability, tourism is defined as a model form of economic development that is designated to improve the quality of life in the host community, provide a high quality experience for the tourist, and maintain the quality of the environment on which both the host community and the tourist depend (WTO 1993). Sustainable development connects tourists and providers of facilities and services with advocates of environmental protection and community residents and their leaders who desire a better quality of life (WTO 1993). Each group has its constituents as they understand how their interests overlap. They all have common goals and thus will be more inclined to collaborate. Related to sustainability and the development process, two main hypotheses are put forward. First, tourism provides the most harmonious development with the characteristics of the regions and makes known their natural, historical, and cultural values. If there is planned development, there will be a reduction in the loss of natural resources in terms of quantity and quality. Moreover, tourism activities have an opportunity to beautify the local environment and maintain its built assets in place of other economic activities (Hunter 1997). Second, the rapid development and high concentration of activities in certain areas cause negative effects on the natural and cultural environment. Typically, this process does not involve local people/host community and is not acceptable. Developing countries and regions have to achieve economic growth, and also have to protect their environments. Accordingly, tourism is considered a balance sector to target the dilemma and provides an opportunity for the development of these matters. In the places where tourism is relatively new, the aim would be to promote types that rely on the maintenance of a high quality natural environment and its cultural assets (Hunter 1997). In the Mediterranean countries of Europe, which have a significant share of international tourism, the concentration of activities on coastal areas has caused serious environmental problems. Therefore, their market share in the world has been decreasing—as in the case of Spain—while emerging markets have been increasing. Thus, development processes for the significant destinations need to be examined and new approaches sought out. The aim of this paper is to analyze development processes in light of the main hypotheses and goals of a sustainable model in two significant sample destination points for international tourism, to include the heritage in Turkey as a Mediterranean country. Furthermore, the two cases of Urgup and Side have been selected in order to compare the coastal and interior development process. Perception analysis is conducted as a measurement of economic, social, and environmental impacts related to the concept of sustainable development.
نتیجه گیری انگلیسی
Research on the impact of tourism activities at the local level shows that the performance should not be measured only for its economic assets, but also for its social and environmental concerns over the long run. A sustainable tourism model, including the satisfaction of the community, tourists, and investors/managers could yield some explicit environmental ethical premises. In this paper, the perceptions of different components or actors on tourism through sustainable development have been emphasized. Sustainable development should involve environmental concerns and local contributions when a region gets economic gains from tourism activities. In this case, all components (actors) have emphasized that tourism activities should depend on environmental resources. This is an indicator of the increasing awareness of environmental attributes among the components. Another significant conclusion is the importance of locality during the development processes. When activities could not be controlled by the local community, environmental and socioeconomic integration problems appeared in the destination areas. A high concentration and large-scale development of tourism are unacceptable for the host community and a risk for sustainability. But if local entrepreneurship is not enough for stimulating development, a destination needs entrepreneurs from outside the region. On this point, there is a dilemma about the destination areas. Should they wait for support from outside or should they involve themselves in considering the development over the long run? Further, another subject of research might be to decide which types of tourism and development could be more compatible with sustainability in a destination area. Although every destination has its own unique features, there should be common limits of acceptable changes as well. Mass tourism exists in high concentration and with large-scale development along coastal areas in Side, while there is a considerable increase in alternative activities in Urgup. As a result of this comparative study, coastal areas show more rapid development due the priority policy for coastal and mass tourism in Turkey. Thus, it is obvious that coastal destination areas have encountered more pressure and more intensive environmental problems. These cases in Turkey highlight similar trends and problems of other Mediterranean countries especially for the coastal destinations. However, Turkey has an opportunity to observe the experiences of other Mediterranean countries in advance. Therefore, the policy should focus on tourism activities in coastal areas and in inland areas which have important attractions. The environmental problems, which are generated by mass tourism especially in significant destination areas, need new approaches and management. Still, the regions of tourism activities are filled with hope for the conservation of both the natural and cultural environment as noted in the hypothesis. Further research should focus on new tourism demands, diversity of attractions, and possible networks of destinations in the region. It is expected that high concentration and environmental problems might be decreased, providing sustainability of tourism and alternative developments in different destinations. While orienting supply and demand and creating new markets, local actors should not be neglected. Each region has to know and improve its potential and define limits of acceptable change by involving all in the development process. This would give an opportunity to the local authorities to plan activities in their regions. Further research on the perceptions of different groups on tourism development would provide for the participation of all the actors in the process and improve the planning efforts in destination areas. Moreover, using a similar approach and methodology would lend itself to the development of new destinations.