The Tourism Trends In Mauritius Tourism Essay
Nowadays tourism has become the major focus, mainly for small developing countries which have an effect on local people in terms of socio-cultural, environmental and economical impacts. Resident’s perceptions are very important and there is a need to understand how these perceptions can contribute towards tourism development. The reason of this study is to provide a theoretical background for assessing local people attitudes on the impacts of tourism development in Bel Ombre, Mauritius. Tourism and sustainable development are interrelated; and has been usually identified with the fast rising demand of tourists acting together with the natural environment. Tourism has the capability to protect as well as to destroy a destination. Studying the impacts of tourism is a critical element of accepting how tourism affects the economy, socio-cultural and environment aspects in Mauritius. A well elaborated literature shows the character of the main interaction of tourist and host, uniqueness of host-tourist relationship and their connection with the impacts generated by tourism development. Researchers were more interested towards the interaction between the tourists and the local people. Though, there are preceding studies that have considered the issue from tourist perspective. To achieve the purpose of this study a questionnaire was designed and a survey was undertaken among the local residents. Concerning the analysis part, quantitative approach was useful and the aim and objectives were related to the majority of relevant literature.
1.2 Problem statement
The main reason for doing this study is because tourism is one of the major sectors in many countries, including Mauritius, with the highest growth potential. It is the world’s largest employer and one among the major sources of substantial foreign exchange earnings (Blank, 1991; Richards, 2003; Mwandosya, 2007). It is through this observation that many people believe that the industry is well placed as one of the major means through which development of local communities can be achieved (Scheyvens, 2002; Beeton, 2006). One approach to enhance this development through tourism is to involve local communities and ensure that their potential role is tapped and maintained through active participation in the industry (Beeton, 2006). It is imperative to note that involvement and participation of these communities is central to the sustainable development of the industry not only because tourism has had a close connection with the local communities, particularly as hosts and guides (Scheyvens, 2002), but also because “the destinations of tourists are communities and it is in the community that tourism happens” (Blank, 1989 p.115).
Participation is a process through which stakeholders, among them the local communities who are often the intended beneficiaries of community tourism, influence and share control over development initiatives and the decisions and resources which affect them (Havel, 1996). Participation, therefore, seeks collaboration or partnerships and the commitment necessary to ensure sustainability of tourism development initiatives (Wolfensohn, 1996). Paradoxically, the outcomes of participation are usually a reflection of a certain level of involvement of relevant stakeholders in the decision-making process which in turn enables people to make informed commitments to a particular tourism project (Havel, 1996). According to Akama (1999) as cited in Manyara and Jones (2007, p.629), “local communities are hardly involved in tourism development” and they are usually without a voice in the development process (Havel, 1996). This situation according to Mbaiwa (2005) is contrary to the principles of sustainable tourism
development which, among other things, emphasize the involvement and participation of local communities.
1.3 Aims and Objectives of the study
The aim of this study is to assess the resident’s attitudes and perceptions about the impacts caused by tourism development in Bel Ombre.
The objectives of the study are:
To assess the extent of local people’s perceptions and attitudes in the tourism development
To assess the positive and negative impacts of tourism development
To assess the extent of local people’s involvement and participation in tourism development in their local areas
To investigate if local people are aware of the impacts of tourism development.
1.4 Tourism trends in Mauritius
Since the 1990s, Mauritius adopted economic reforms aimed at establishing a market-based and private-sector-driven economy that marked significant growth in many sectors of the country’s economy. Such reforms for example, helped to improve the performance of the country’s tourism industry and enhanced growth of the sector through improved marketing and promotional campaigns, improved tourism services, improved air access to Mauritius, accommodation facilities, and other tourism supporting infrastructures. More specifically, growth in the Mauritian tourism industry can be measured by looking at the trends in tourism receipts, tourist arrivals, tourism annual growth, number of hotels and hotel rooms, contribution of the sector to country’s GDP, and direct jobs created by the industry. To give a clear picture of the performance of the tourism industry in Mauritius and to be able to gauge the achievements already realized by the industry.
While the tourism industry continues to be one of the key foreign exchange earners in Mauritius, the industry depends primarily on the flow of international tourists to the country. The country’s main source markets are Britain, Germany, the United States, Italy, France, Spain, and some new markets emerging around China and Asian countries. The majority of international tourists come to Mauritius for cultural, adventure and beach resort all together making Mauritius a quality destination.
It is, however, interesting to note from the statistics below that, in Mauritius, earnings from international tourism have grown more rapidly than tourist arrivals in nominal terms due to the to promote Mauritius as a high quality destination. Arguably, the increasing tourist numbers to Mauritius may be a convincing indication of increasing opportunities for local communities to earn revenue from tourism and these revenue opportunities could eventually contribute significantly to greater local interest in the development of the industry (Victurine, 2000).
Table 1:- Tourist arrivals, nights and receipts, 2009 – 2012
Year
Tourist arrivals (Number)
Tourist nights (000)
Tourism receipts 1 (Rs million)
2009
871,356
8,639
35,693
2010
934,827
9,495
39,456
2011
964,642
9,730
42,717 3
2009
1st Qr.
232,908
2,250
10,265
2nd Qr.
180,596
1,791
7,984
1st Semester
413,504
4,041
18,249
3rd Qr.
195,381
2,280
7,436
4th Qr.
262,471
2,318
10,008
2nd Semester
457,852
4,598
17,444
2010
1st Qr.
249,971
2,943
11,021
2nd Qr.
189,179
1,855
8,788
1st Semester
439,150
4,798
19,809
3rd Qr.
207,506
2,275
8,358
4th Qr.
288,171
2,422
11,289
2nd Semester
495,677
4,697
19,647
2011
1st Qr.
262,626
2,960
11,949
2nd Qr.
201,978
1,975
9,355
1st Semester
464,604
4,935
21,304
3rd Qr.
209,779
2,325
8,845
4th Qr.
290,259
2,470
12,568 3
2nd Semester
500,038
4,795
21,413 3
2012 2
1st Qr.
261,995
2,950
13,768 3
2nd Qr.
205,158
2,010
9,780
1st Semester
467,153
4,960
23,548
Source: www.gov.mu
1.5 Outline of Study
Chapter 1- Introduction
This chapter gives an overview of the study and the outline of the dissertation. It includes the introduction, problem statement, aims and objectives of the research.
Chapter 2- Literature Review
The literature review entails the theoretical background; the main aim in writing this is to assess existing literature related to the study, what other researchers have done, including empirical evidence to provide a foundation to the study. It consists of all the theoretical aspects like the perceptions and attitudes of local people towards tourism development. The impacts of tourism development are also discussed along with how the community participation can reduce or increase these tourism impacts.
Chapter 3- Methodology
This comprises of the methodology of how the research was conducted, the questionnaire design, method used to collect the data, sampling techniques used, the data analysis and limitations of the study.
Chapter 4- Results and Discussions
In this chapter the data collected through the use of questionnaires, will be analysed by making use of graphical, mean and standard deviation. Package for the Social Science (SPSS) Software was used to make these analyses.
Chapter 5- Recommendations and Conclusions
The last chapter identifies the possible solution to come across for the problems of the poor involvement of locals. The perceptions of residents on the impacts generated from tourism development, thus leading to the conclusion of the project.
CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Introduction
This chapter seeks to address a number of issues related to community involvement and participation in the tourism industry by examining some key points emerging from various studies, reports and other sources of information. It starts with a discussion about the perceptions and attitudes of host community towards the impacts of tourism development. Some critics about Doxey Irridex Model and Butler Tourism Area life cycle will also be discussed. The chapter also identifies factors which influence local communities and attract their participation in the tourism industry. It continues with a discussion about the tourism impacts that arise due tourism development in a small community. The chapter concludes by highlighting key issues raised by the literature that form the basis of this research.
2.2 Sustainable Tourism Development
Sustainable tourism development (STD) is a long-term approach that cultivates economically viable tourism without harming residents’ environment or society while simultaneously ensuring fair distribution of costs and benefits (DBEDT, 2006a). Decisions are based on economic, environmental, and cultural impacts; how wealth is generated and distributed; and the relative power and interactions among the stakeholders (Bramwell, 2006; Twining-Ward & Butler, 2002). STD balances industry’s goal of profit with the needs of the environment and stakeholders (Bramwell, 2006). Stakeholder cooperation is necessary for sustainable tourism; otherwise only the most powerful will benefit (Dyer, Gursoy, Sharma, & Carter, 2007). To keep stakeholders satisfied with tourism development and their community, the environment and culture must be protected (Ahn et al., 2002; Hjalager, 1996). When tourism development enhances, rather than erodes the natural environment, a more sustainable tourism product can be offered to support the destination’s economy (Batra & Kaur, 1996).
A government that effectively manages tourism creates benefits for all stakeholders (Jamal & Getz, 1995). Effective management is avoiding negative impacts through a combination of general protective measures; regulations to control development; and financial restraints (Cohen, 1978; Hjalager, 1996). Improvement of the environment can be achieved by ensuring that development is harmonious with the overall plan for the destination (Batra & Kaur, 1996). Necessary tourism infrastructure such as roads, airports, parks, and visitor centers are also the responsibility of government (Jamal & Getz, 1995). Maintenance of infrastructure and facilities is expensive and residents, through property taxes, should not be the only group to bear this burden (Wong, 1996). Residents benefit when tourists spend money in the local economy and create jobs, as well as from the development of infrastructure that residents also utilize (Wong, 1996).
Residents in mass tourism destinations such as Hawai’i depend on tourism for their standard of living (Liu, Sheldon, & Var, 1987). Because tourism development usually involves a tradeoff between economic benefits and environmental or cultural costs, residents cope by downplaying the negative impacts based and emphasizing the economic gains to maintain satisfaction with their community (Dyer et al., 2007; Cavus & Tanrisevdi, 2003; Faulkner & Tideswell, 1997). Residents with the most economic gain are the most supportive of the tourism industry (Harrill, 2004).
Cavus & Tanrisevdi (2003) found that the development process controlled by planners was the primary factor in residents’ negative attitudes towards tourism. When residents perceive that the costs of tourism outweigh the benefits, feelings of resentment and irritation towards tourists can develop and lower community satisfaction (Doxey, 1975; Faulkner & Tideswell, 1997; Ko & Stewart, 2002). Residents who feel that they have a voice in tourism planning are more positive towards tourism (Cavus & Tanrisevdi, 2003). According to Choi & Sirakaya (2005), sustainable tourism is the development pathway to minimize the negative impacts of tourism. There are many ways to make tourism more sustainable but few tools for evaluating and testing a sustainable tourism framework (Choi & Sirakaya, 2005). Audits and resource valuation evaluate tourism’s costs and benefits so that they can be fairly distributed to stakeholders (Warnken et al., 2004; Wen, 1998). Limiting tourism growth (such as carrying capacity or limits of acceptable change) can also make development more sustainable (Cohen, 1978; Butler, 1980; Gossling, Peeters, Ceron, Dubois, Patterson, & Richardson, 2005; Christensen & Beckmann, 1998; Ahn et al., 2002). In these approaches, government management and stakeholder cooperation are necessary to reach a consensus for how to manage future tourism development. This is why Understanding residents’ perceptions are critical to fairly distributing the environmental, social, and economic costs and benefits of tourism; thus, ultimately increasing sustainable tourism development (Twining-Ward & Butler, 2002).
2.3 Host Community Attitudes and Perceptions about Tourism Development
This study aims at identifying the relationships between residents’ socio- cultural, economic and environmental aspect and their attitudes towards tourism by focusing on a small community where tourism is in the development stage. By conducting this research, the author hopes to come across the residents’ attitudes and capture their current perceptions about tourism development in their area. Moreover, this research is being done because most authors agree that initial community attitudes toward tourism are critical to community involvement in the industry (Murphy 1981), the formation of destination image (Echtner & Ritchie 1991).
Attitudes are defined as “a state of mind of the individual toward a value” (Allport 1966, p. 24) and as “an enduring predisposition towards a particular aspect of one’s environment” (McDougall & Munro 1987, p. 87). Attitude of host community to tourism based development can improve if there is a boost in the tangible and indescribable settlements the host community can receive by being in based development (Choi & Sirakaya, 2006). As Attitudes are based under this understanding, this is why some researchers came to a conclusion that residents’ attitudes toward tourism are not simply the reflections of residents’ perceptions of tourism impacts, but the results of interaction between residents’ perceptions and the factors affecting their attitudes (Lankford et al.1994). Some preceding researches have proved that some most important impacts of tourism are identified along with its variables, however the theory is underdeveloped: “Currently there is limited understanding of why residents respond to the impacts of tourism as they do, and under what conditions residents react to those impacts” (Ap 1992, p. 666). Husband (1989) also addressed this issue by saying “There is, so far, no theoretical justification of why some people are, or are not, favorably disposed to tourism”.
Various issues can persuade perceptions of the host community about positive outcomes of tourism development. Support will depend on the degree of benefits perceived. The participation of community will be discussed later on in the literature review. The acceptance of local values can also be an important factor that leads to the achievement of a tourism based development (Alexander, 2000). However over a certain period of time many findings detected that host community perceptions’ in the direction from tourism may have more positive attitudes. People who depend on tourism industry or having a better economic benefit may possibly have a higher degree of positivity than other inhabitants who do not benefit from a tourism development (lankford and howard, 1994; Jurowski, Uysal, and willimas, 1997; Sirakaya , Teye and Sonmez,2002 ).
Lindberg and Johnson (1997) mentioned that people having higher economic impacts from tourism may have more positive attitudes. However Travis (1984) has stated that it’s not only an economic characteristic such as the opportunity for jobs creation or capital generation that needs to be considered by the host community. The socio-cultural and environmental aspects are also very important. For Choi and Sirakaya (2005), the most community should also have a better environment in term of infrastructures and improved amenities such as leisure and recreational activities. They describe tourism as consisting of various supports and any development in the tourism field should ensure the protection of the culture of host community, alongside the protection of the environment.
In order to clarify the relationship between the impacts of tourism and residents’ attitudes toward tourism, several models have been developed. One of the most influential models is Doxey’s Irridex model (1975) which suggests that residents’ attitudes toward tourism may pass through a series of stages from “euphoria,” through “apathy” and “irritation.” to “antagonism,” as perceived costs exceed the expected benefits. This model is supported by Long et al.’s (1990) research results, which indicate residents’ attitudes, are initially favorable but become negative after reaching a threshold.
To have a better comprehension about the relationship between the impacts of tourism and residents’ attitudes toward tourism, several models like Butler Tourism Life cycle Area and Doxey Irridex model have been developed. One of the most dominant models is Doxey’s Irridex model (1975) which suggests that residents’ attitudes toward tourism may pass through a series of stages from “euphoria,” through “apathy” and “irritation.” to “antagonism,” as perceived costs exceed the expected benefits. This model was supported by Long et al.’s (1990) research results, which indicated that residents’ attitudes are initially favorable but become negative after reaching a threshold. The Irridex model indicates that residents’ attitudes toward tourism will change overtime. It suggests that residents’ attitudes and reactions toward tourism contain a sense of homogeneity (Mason et al. 2000). Conversely, this concept was challenged by some research findings that reported heterogeneous community responses and diverse residents’ attitudes simultaneously existing in a community (Brougham et al. 1981,Rothman 1978).
2.4 Critics about Doxey Irridex Model and Butler Tourism Area Life cycle
Butler (1980) took a more complicated approach. He argued that tourist areas go through a recognizable cycle of evolution; he used an S-shaped curve to illustrate their different stages of popularity. Butler stated that there are six stages through which tourist areas pass. These include the exploration stage, involvement stage, development stage, consolidation stage, stagnation stage, and decline stage. His study also reveals that evolution is brought about by a variety of factors, including changes in preferences and needs of visitors, the gradual deterioration and possible replacement of physical plant and facilities, and the change of the original natural and cultural attractions, which is responsible for the initial popularity of the area. Furthermore this model is supported by Murphy’s (1983) research results, which reveal the distinct attitude differences among residents, public officials, and business owners in three English tourist centers. Although Butler’s model addresses the difficulty of residents’ attitudes toward tourism, researchers still lacked theories explaining relationships between residents’ attitudes and tourism impacts until Ap (1992) applied social exchange theory to tourism.
2.5 Social Exchange Theory
According to the theory, exchange will start, only when there are irregular inaction forms. Ap (1992) suggests that “residents evaluate tourism in terms of social exchange, that is, evaluate it in terms of expected benefits or costs obtained in return for the services they supply” He also argued that when exchange of resources is high for the host actor in either the balanced or unbalanced exchange relation, tourism impacts are viewed positively, while tourism impacts are viewed negatively if exchange of resources is low. Social exchange theory has been examined as a theoretical framework by researchers to describe residents’ attitudes toward tourism impacts (Perdue et al. 1990, McGehee & Andereck 2004).
However mason and Cheyen (2000) stated that that the representation of Butler ‘assumes a degree of homogeneity of community reaction’. Butler (2006) supported his model by suggesting that ‘a consistent evolution of tourist area can be conceptualized’. Different phases at a particular destination may not be understood without mistakes. The demonstration hence should be concerned only to some extent as the phase itself differs from one tourist area to anotherb(Tosun,2002).
The Doxey irridex model gives a clear view of how host community attitude changes over a period of time. It mentions host community perceptions, reactions and attitudes in the direction of tourism (Manson et al.2000). This can be a conflicting principle because some research came to a conclusion that various host community attitudes and perceptions may exist in the community, (Brougham et al.1981, Rothman 1978). Akis, Peristanis & Warner (1996) disapprove the Irridex Model and The Tourism Life Cycle and view it as too simple, because both models give a few hint of changing host community perceptions and attitudes over time. Other researchers like Lankford and Howard (1994, P.135) opposed against the model of Doxey(1975) because positive and negative factors that affect the perceptions and attitudes of host community are not given much consideration.
As the tourism industry keeps on changing, this may be a reason why we must give this industry continuous support for its related development. Andereck & vogt( 2000) stated that it is considered that optimistic attitudes towards tourism may entail the encouragement for further tourism development. If there is any delay in tourism project development this can be due to frustration towards tourists. Mill and Morisson (1984) even mention that, ‘an acceptance of tourism cannot be built unless the benefits of tourism are made relevant to the community’. Attitudes and perceptions of host community at a destination is of utmost importance in the accomplishment of tourism development alongside the development of the industry at large also, (Hayword,1975), (Heenan, 1978), and Hiller (1976).
There is a broad belief perception and attitudes of host community in the direction of tourism outcomes are apt to become essential planning and policy concern for flourishing development and expansion of existing and potential tourism programs, (Ap,1992). Host community attitudes and perception is very important as it will influence their behavior towards tourism, (Andriotis and Vaughan, 2003).
2.6 Host community involvement and participation
Community participation has become a common element in many development initiatives, such as community-based programmes, which assume participatory methods and has been promoted by development organizations, notably the World Bank, to address the inefficiency of highly centralized development approaches particularly in the developing world (Baral and Heinen, 2007).
Today, many development initiatives solicit the participation of all concerned stakeholders, at the relevant level, not only for the sake of efficiency and equity of the programmes, leverage of donors and demands of local communities, but also for sustainability of these initiatives (Ribot, 2004). Consequently, the real outcome for soliciting such community participation is to create and produce an enabling environment needed by these stakeholders, especially local communities who have been vulnerable to negative impacts of tourism attributed partly to the fact that many tourism resources occur in their areas, to have a real stake in development activities (Havel, 1996; Songorwa, 1999). This requires involving local communities in decision-making and strengthening their ability to act for themselves. One approach to achieve this is “through investments in human capital, such as education and health, investments in social capital such as local-level institutions and participatory processes, and support for community based development efforts planned and implemented from bottom up” (Havel, 1996, p.145). However, given the fact that the central point underlying people’s participation may be the degree of power distribution, these efforts are less likely to succeed unless responsive institutions and the legal and policy framework that facilitate and support local participation are in place (Havel, 1996; Tosun, 2004; Wang and Wall, 2005).
It is probably important to insist from here that a key consideration in tourism development is sustainability, which cannot be achieved without community support (Vincent and Thompson, 2002). While sustainability is the core objective of community participation (Vincent and Thompson, 2002; Johannesen and Skonhoft, 2005), proponents of community tourism further argue that community participation seeks to improve the welfare of the local community and, perhaps most importantly, win their support in conservation of tourism resources (Songorwa, 1999). This means community participation is inevitable and imperative for tourism development because most tourist attractions lie within local communities or in their vicinities and in most cases co-exist side by side with the communities, for instance, in wildlife areas.
Community participation via decision-making is an essential determinant to ensure that the benefits that local communities get from tourism are guaranteed, and their lifestyles and values are respected. It is, however, important to note that community participation in decision making is not only desirable but also necessary so as to maximize the socio-economic benefits of tourism for the community. It is perhaps one of the most important elements of tourism management to enable communities who often serve as tourist destinations and for that matter suffer from the negative impacts of tourism, to get involved and eventually participate in planning decisions regarding tourism development. This is important in order to create better handling of the negative impacts of tourism development (Li, 2004; Tosun, 2000). It is equally important to note, therefore, that integration of local communities into the decision-making process is “not a final goal itself” but only one of the many ways through which community participation can be achieved (Li, 2005, p.133).
Another way to involve and attract community participation and ultimately their support in tourism development is through local job creation (Zhao and Ritchie, 2007). Since tourism offers better labour-intensive and small scale opportunities (Chok and Macbeth, 2007; Scheyvens, 2007) and since it happens in the community, arguably, it is thought to be one of the best placed potential sources of employment opportunities for local communities, inclusive of women and the informal sector (Blank, 1989; Li, 2005; Johannesen and Skonhoft, 2005; Scheyvens, 2007). Community participation via employment opportunities, as workers or as small business operators, can be a catalyst to the development of tourism products and services, arts, crafts and cultural values, especially through taking advantage of abundant natural and cultural assets available in communities in developing countries (Scheyvens, 2007). Tosun (2000) stated that community participation through working in the tourism industry has been recognized to help local communities not only to support development of the industry but also to receive more than economic benefits.
However, it is important to understand that in some cases community participation is seen as a way of getting people to carry out activities or share their costs while the benefits are not clear to those expected to participate (Havel, 1996). This implies that a key factor to the success of any community-based tourism project is the incentive to benefit sharing which is usually attractive enough to make people highly motivated to participate. As Havel (1996) asserted “people will not participate unless they believe it is their interest to do so”
Involvement and participation of the community in decision-making is advocated so that communities can have some control over tourism resources, initiatives and decisions that affect their livelihood (Wang, and Wall, 2005). On the other hand, the idea of involvement and participation of local communities in the tourism benefits is easily reflected in increasing incomes, employment, and education of local communities about tourism and entrepreneurship (Timothy, 1999). One way to accomplish this is to increase public awareness of tourism through education campaigns and train local communities for employment in the industry. While increased public awareness creates a more hospitable environment for tourists and improves the image of the destination, providing entrepreneurial training empowers local communities and ultimately increases their capacity to receive significant benefits from tourism (Timothy, 1999). This enables tourism-oriented businesses and locals such as taxi drivers, guesthouse managers, restaurant owners, and street vendors, th
