The Effect of Concentration
Inter-relation with other Impacts
It is widely acepted that the alocentric tourist will have a lesser sociocultural impact than will the psychocentrics but this is not always the case. The lone back packer visiting a remote mountain village may eat, live and communicate with the hosts and, in so doing, adopt their ways and culture. Never-the-less, the very fact of the visitor being there will introduce the hosts to an alien culture and accoutrements, i.e. cameras, clothing and habits. This same person visiting a settlement not too dissimilar to their own will have no discernable impact, e.g. European to the US.
‘Tourism development effects people’s habits, daily routines, social lives, beliefs and values’, (Dogan 1989:217). Sociocultural impacts are inter-twined with economic and environmental impacts, and are inseperable. For example: In St Katherine’s Monastery, Mount Sinai, (founded at the site of the Biblical burning bush), the resident monks, wish to retain their secular cultural and social purity, and do not make an entrance charge to the 1000 visitors/day. The local Bedouin run St Katherin’s Monastery thriving cafés and souve [Source: www.randomhouse.com/] nir shops, thereby generating an induced economic impact, and they in turn are supplied by other businesses. The cascading supply of jobs and money is termed the “Multiplier Effect”.
The welcome afforded tourists varies over time and frequency of visists, changing from initial excitement, through familiarity to contempt or hostility. Many of the referenced authors cite Doxey’s Irredex to explain the changing levels of tourism acceptability, Fig 3. Fig 3. Level of Host Irritation EUPHORIA Initial phase of development Visitors & investors welcome Little planning or control
Mount Sinai is also a sacred pilgrimage site for Muslims, Jews and Christians, but the increasing volume of pilgrims traversing identical routes and over-nighting on the mountainside to observe the dawn has caused severe environmental damge through erosion, litter and water run off. Also, It is reported that the constant traffic fumes are detrimental to the integrity of the ancient monastery walls, (Shackley 2001:69-71, 126-128).
APATHY Visitors taken for granted Host & Guest contact formalized Commercialization prominent Planning concerned with marketing
ANNOYANCE Saturation points approached Residents have misgivings Policy to increase infrastructure rather than limiting growth
Summary
ANTAGONISM Irritation openly expressed Visitors seen as cause of all problems Deteriorating reputation [Source: Modified from Doxey1975 in Page et al 2002:284]
This analysis is, however, too simplified as it implies that all members of the host community will be effected to the same degree and at identical rates of change. This is clearly not so as those benefitting most with regular social contact will be the slowest to reach antagonism, whilst those gaining no financial or material benefit will rapidly resent changes to their traditions and lifestyles. All societies are different and have elements that will be effected at differing rates.
Tourist will always seek out new destinations and in so doing will influence the hosts culture as well as being influenced by them. The degree of impact depends on many factors, not least the tourist’s willingness to escape the bubble, respect the host’s culture, cause less offense or denigrate their sacred sites and heritage. Hosts also benefit but may be adversely effected by too many tourists in too short a time leading to commercialization and exploitation, followed by resentment at their loss of culture and traditions. Heritage is fragile and easily lost. If hosts are to preserve their heritage and culture, (the original reason for the tourist’s visit), it is imperative that they are proactive in tourism development, and thet tourists emerge from their myopic bubble to be less psychocentric.
References & Bibliography BBC RADIO 4, The Today Programme, 12 th March 2004 COOPER, C., FLETCHER, J., GILBERT, D. AND WANHILL, S. (1998), Tourism – Principles and Practice, Second edition, Longman, London. DOGAN, H. (1989), Forms of Adjustment: socio-cultural impacts of tourism, Annals of Tourism Research, Vol.16,No.2,pp216-236. MATHIESON, A. AND WALL, G. (1982), Tourism: Economic, Physical and Social Impacts, Longman, London. PAGE, S., BRUNT, P., BUSBY, B. AND CONNELL, J. (2001), Tourism: A Modern Synthesis, Thomson Learning, London. RINSCHEDE, G. (1992), Forms of religious tourism, Annals of Tourism Research, Vol.19, No.1, pp51-67. SHACKLEY, M, (2001), Managing Sacred Sites, Continuum, London. SMITH, V.L. (Ed) (1978), Hosts and Guests, Blackwell, Oxford. SWARBROOK, J. (2000), Sustainable Tourism Management, CAGI Publishing, Oxon. WILKINSON, P. (1989), Strategies for tourism in island microstates, Annals of Tourism Research, Vol.16, No.2, pp153-177