Step 3: The Advisory Bodies
2.2 Extrinsic and intrinsic factors The factors affecting people’s attitudes towards
tourism or changes initiated or facilitated by tour- ism can be divided into two categories – extrinsic and intrinsic factors (Jimura, 2007). Bramwell (2003) argues that the responses of local com- munities to tourism are best understood when they are investigated in relation to various rela- tionships influencing them. This section summa- rizes key extrinsic and intrinsic factors affecting local communities and people’s views towards tourism, and changes caused or advanced by tourism after WHS listing or WH status.
2.2.1 Extrinsic factors
In this book, ‘extrinsic factors’ denote the causes that are outside of each local resident but which exist within local communities. The following elements are key extrinsic factors that can influ- ence local communities’ views of tourism and the changes caused or accelerated by WH status and/or tourism after WHS inscription.
•
History of tourism. Local communities within an established tourism destination would not have major issues in accommo- dating tourism impacts compared to those within a relatively new tourist destination (Horn and Simmons, 2002). Concerning WHSs, Jimura (2015, 2016b) asserts that the impact of WH status on tourism and lo- cal communities is likely to be more exten- sive for WHSs with limited presence as a tourist destination before WHS listing than for those with established recognition as a tourist destination.•
Level and/or scale of tourism develop- ment. Sharpley and Sharpley (1997) as- sert that, generally, an increase in the scale and level of tourism development often leads to greater antagonism towards tour- ism among local communities. This is sup- ported by Goggin and Long (2009) who examine the relations between hotel and/or casino developments, and local communi- ties’ responses. Concerning WHSs, the speed and size of tourism development after WHS inscription may be too speedy and too large for local communities to cope with (Jimura, 2007, 2011).•
Diversity in local communities. People living in a great diversity of communities seem to be positively disposed towards tour- ism (Andereck and Vogt, 2000). This im- plies that WHSs consisting of or located in multicultural communities could manage the changes caused by WH status better than those consisting of or situated in rela- tively homogeneous communities.•
Cultural differences between local communities and visitors. In principle, larger cultural differences between hosts and guests are more likely to lead to misun- derstanding and friction between two parties (Reisinger and Turner, 1998). Concerning WHSs, enhanced publicity of a site thanks to WH status may bring more international tourists and day trippers to the site, and this might increase cultural differences between hosts and guests.•
Seasonal patterns of tourism activi- ties. If tourism activities do not occur throughout a year, local communities’views towards tourism might not be posi- tive as it cannot provide them with a stable source of income and constant employ- ment opportunities year-round. Although it is applied to many tourist destinations, including WHSs, there are a certain num- ber of WHSs whose tourism is less seasonal compared with before WHS designation, thanks to a strong brand of WH status in the tourism market and a series of events throughout a year, particularly during off-seasons (e.g. The Magic of Christmas event in Historic Fortified City of Carcas- sonne (cultural WHS in France)).
2.2.2 Intrinsic factors
In this book, ‘intrinsic factors’ mean factors that are inside each local resident. According to Draper et al. (2011, p. 64): ‘Over the past 40 years, researchers have examined local residents’ at- titudes toward tourism based on demographic (e.g. age, gender, education), socioeconomic (e.g. income, ethnicity, length of residency and economic dependency) and spatial (e.g. physical distance between residents and tourists) varia- bles.’ The following elements are the main in- trinsic factors that can affect local people’s attitudes towards tourism and the changes
caused or promoted by WH status or tourism since WHS designation.
•
Place to live. According to Pearce (1994), city centre residents see tourism less fa- vourably than those living further away.On the contrary, Akis et al. (1996) claim that local people living in higher tourist density areas with more exposure to visitors tend to be more positive towards tourism.
Regarding WHSs, Jimura (2007, 2011) suggests that local people who live in or around a Japanese cultural WHS are more likely to have privacy issues than those who live far from the WHS as most visitors do not recognize the boundaries between public and private premises. However, this tendency cannot be confirmed among local residents living in or around a cultural WHS in the UK (Jimura, 2007).
•
Length of residence. Brougham and Butler (1981) proclaim that local people who have lived longer in a community are more positive about some types of visitors than those who have lived there for a shorter period of time.Regarding WHSs, there has not been a study that reports significant positive or negative re- lationships between the length of residence of local people and their attitudes towards a WHS or tourism at the WHS.
•
Age. Ritchie (1988) concludes that older residents are less positive about tourism.However, regarding WHSs, older residents may see the changes in natural environ- ment after WHS listing more positively than younger residents (Jimura, 2007), al- though it cannot be proved that this applies to all WHSs.
•
Gender. Some studies suggest that there is no significant relationship between local people’s gender and their perceptions of tourism (e.g. Petrzelka et al., 2005), whilst others note that gender can be seen as an element that affects people’s attitudes to- wards tourism (e.g. Huh and Vogt, 2008).For example, males would be more involved in tourism than females (Andereck and McGehee, 2008). Concerning studies on tourism and WHSs, no studies have demon- strated clear relationships between local residents’ gender and their thoughts on a WHS or tourism at the WHS.
•
Economic dependency on tourism. Lo- cal people or those whose family members are economically dependent upon tourism have more positive attitudes towards tour- ism than do other residents (e.g. Wang and Pfister, 2008). In a few exceptional cases, local people who are economically depend- ent upon tourism may report more negative impacts than other local people (King et al., 1993). In the case of surveys with local communities near a casino development in South Korea, the respondents’ support level was directly influenced by the benefits they received from tourism (Lee and Back, 2003). The positive relationship between the level of local people’s economic depend- ency on tourism and their support for tour- ism is also confirmed at WHSs, although this might not apply to all WHSs.•
Knowledge of tourism. Greater knowledge of tourism is associated with more positive perceptions of tourism (e.g. Olya and Gavilyan, 2016), whilst other researchers argue that great knowledge of tourism or tourism de- velopment means that such local people would be more aware of both the benefits and costs of tourism (e.g. Látková and Vogt, 2012). This seems to apply to some WHSs, for example George Town, which is part of Malaka and George Town, Historic Cities of the Straits of Malacca (cultural WHS in Malaysia) (Rasoolimanesh et al., 2017).•
Level of education. Some studies suggest that there is no significant relationship between residents’ educational level and their perceptions of tourism (e.g. Wang and Pfister, 2008), or the strength of the rela- tionship is rather weak (Chand, 2013). Other studies claim that local people’s education- al level is related to their perceptions of tourism (Andriotis and Vaughan, 2003).For instance, Snyman (2014) notes that local people with a higher educational level tend to demonstrate a greater support for tourism. Nunkoo and Ramkissoon (2010) examine Port Louis, which contains Aap- ravasi Ghat (cultural WHS), and examined local people’s attitudes towards urban tourism in Mauritius. According to their study, the educational level of local residents does not influence their attitudes towards tourism.
•
Birth place. Residents who were born in a tourist destination are more positive about tourism than newcomers (Davis et al., 1988). On the contrary, Xie et al.’s (2014) study presents that native residents are more concerned about possible negative impacts of tourism, such as loss of local traditions and norms and environmental degradation than are non-native residents. The destina- tion Xie et al. (2014) looked at is Huangshan, China, which has Mount Huangshan (mixed WHS). Therefore, natives may be more wor- ried about the negative impacts of tourism on their cultural and natural resources than non-natives, as natives would have a certain level of attachment to these resources.2.2.3 Summary
Numerous studies examine the relationship be- tween extrinsic and/or intrinsic factors and local people’s views of tourism and changes caused or facilitated by tourism at tourist destinations, in- cluding WHSs. There are few consistent findings on the relations between these factors and peo- ple’s attitudes (Draper et al., 2011). At least, however, it could be stated that most researchers agree that the higher the degree of economic de- pendency on tourism the more supportive are people’s views of tourism and alterations insti- gated by WH status or tourism after WHS listing.
3 Introduction to Four Kinds of Changes in Local Communities This book explores the influences of WHS in- scription on local communities by each area of the TBL from the standpoint of local communi- ties, concentrating on WH status and tourism after WHS designation. Moreover, Section 4 in- vestigates the impacts of WHS listing on local people’s minds (attitudinal changes). Before in- vestigating attitudinal changes, these four types of changes are outlined. More importantly, the reasons why this book discusses these four kinds of changes are explained.
Overall trends in tourism studies exploring tourism impacts, changes caused and communi- ties’ views towards these changes have been changing since the mid- or late 1970s. Histori- cally, however, initial tourism studies focused
chiefly on economic changes instigated by tour- ism and local communities’ perceptions of them.
In fact, in the early 1980s, Mathieson and Wall (1982, pp. 3–4) argued that ‘until recently, atten- tion has concentrated on more obvious economic impacts with comparatively little consideration being given to the environmental and social con- sequences of tourism’. Since then, the changes triggered by tourism in two other areas of the TBL (sociocultural and environmental), and local people’s views towards them, have been increas- ingly examined from a standpoint of relevant dis- ciplines. In the author’s view, the timing of this shift is synchronized with the timing of changes in the mainstream in various subjects relevant to tourism, particularly development studies.
This trend in tourism studies as a whole can also be confirmed in those on a specific type of tourism such as cultural and heritage tourism (Jansen- Verbeke, 1995) and urban tourism (Law, 2002).
Many destinations of these types of tourism would also be WHSs or would include a WHS within the destination (e.g. Historic Centre of Lima (cultural WHS in Peru)).
The magnitude of the studies examining so- ciocultural and environmental changes as well as economic changes triggered or advanced by tourism, and local residents’ perceptions, have been raised gradually and steadily since the mid- 1980s (Long and Hecock, 1984; Hunter and Green, 1995; Law, 2002; Jimura, 2011). As Jansen-Verbeke (1995) asserts, the changes in- stigated or boosted by tourism should be moni- tored though surveys on a regular basis. That is because residents’ perceptions of tourism impacts would change over time (Sharma and Gursoy, 2015). If excessive focus is given to the economic benefits of tourism it can lead to seri- ous sociocultural and/or environmental damage for local communities. The significance of inves- tigating a variety of changes produced by tour- ism impacts is also noted by researchers (e.g.
Page, 2015). By exploring the aforementioned four types of changes from the viewpoint of local communities in and around WHSs, this book in- tends to achieve complete understanding of the impacts of WHS designation and tourism on local communities after WHS inscription, cover- ing local people’s views towards these changes.
The next section focuses on the psychological im- pacts of WH status and tourism after WHS listing on local people’s minds (attitudinal changes).
4 Psychological Impacts of World Heritage Status and Tourism after WHS
Designation (Attitudinal Changes) 4.1 Introduction
The climax of this chapter is the investigation of the changes in local people’s minds caused by WH status and tourism after WHS inscription (attitudinal changes). Attitudinal changes occur in each resident’s mind and are very personal.
Compared to local people’s views towards economic, sociocultural and environmental changes, attitudinal changes are more difficult to understand and tend to be more overlooked.
Nevertheless, understanding attitudinal changes of local inhabitants caused by WH status or tour- ism after WHS listing is vital in terms of their support for tourism development and conserva- tion activities at WHSs. Given previous studies on tourism and WHSs, the following alterations can be regarded as noteworthy changes in the minds of local residents who live in or around WHSs or in a tourist destination having a WHS.
4.2 Attitudes towards tourists