Community Tourism Conference 2013

GAINING COMMUNITY SUPPORT FOR TOURISM IN RURAL AREAS OF PORTUGAL

Lúcia de Jesus

Polytechnic Institute of Viseu

Outline

Introduction

Literature Review

Methodology Study Regions

Procedures

Discussion of Results Descriptive analysis

Test of hypothesis

Conclusions

Introduction

Introduction

Tourism

As a dynamic and exchange process involves a direct relationship between producers and consumers of the tourism product

The interaction component, is often the principal element which characterizes the tourism experience (Brida et al., 2011), can have both positive and negative effects

Tourists

Host Community, since tourism experience is (partly) produced and consumed in the destination

Introduction

Local community

Are key to the success of tourism development, particularly in rural areas

Knowledge of their perceptions and attitudes helps the process of planning and marketing a destination (Jurowski & Gursoy, 2004)

And to steer present and future tourism development programmes

When residents are involved in planning, developing the destination will tend to be more sustainable in that its effects will be considered more appropriate by the host community (Robson & Robson, 1996)

Introduction

The Study focus

On perceptions and attitudes toward rural tourism in rural communities of Portugal and how those perceptions influence the support of residents to tourism development

These relationships involves four constructs, namely:

Personal benefits, positive and negative perceptions, satisfaction, support

Literature Review

Literature reviewCommunity based Tourism

Community Based Tourism

Focus on the involvement of the host community, in planning and maintaining tourism development in order to induce the sustainability of the activity (Hall, 1997)

Permit host communities to break away from the power of large and tour companies and the oligopoly of some tour elites at a national level

Seeks develop the industry in harmony with ‘needs and aspirations of host communities in a way that is acceptable to

them, sustains their economies, rather than economies of others, and is not detrimental to their culture, traditions or, their day-to-day convenience’ (Fitton & Price, 1996, p. 173)

Literature reviewCommunity based Tourism

Local Communities

Integrate the touristic product

Since their culture, traditions, and history serve as tourist attractions

Influence tourists´ experience

Kindness

Apathy

Literature reviewCommunity based Tourism

Laggard regions

Tourism has generally been controlled by large companies

Which have given little attention to local economic and sociocultural conditions (Timothy & Loannides, 2002)

Many have lack power, making them prone to decision-making beyond their control (Timothy, 2002)

Is the case where local people are simply used for tourism development

Gap between discourse and practice

Literature reviewModels integrating residents´ perceptions and attitudes

Several theoretical models

Since 1990s, have proposed explanations for the variations in perceptions and attitudes toward tourism (e.g Andereck et al., 2005),

Nonetheless, they use similar constructsPerdue et al., 1990

… Personal benefits, Perceived Positive Impacts, Perceived Negative Impacts, Support for Additional Tourism …

Ko & Stewart, 2002

… Personal benefits, Perceived Positive Impacts, Perceived Negative Impacts, Community Satisfaction, Attitudes for Additional Tourism Development…

Mcgehee & Andereck, 2004

… Personal benefits, Perceived Positive Impacts, Perceived Negative Impacts, Support for Additional Tourism …

Oviedo-Garcia et al., 2008

… Personal benefits, Positive Impacts, Negative Impacts, Global evaluation, Support for Tourism Development….

Proposed Model to study Residents´ Support

Personal benefits

Perceived positive impactsH1A

Satisfation

Perceived negative impactsH1B

H2

Support

H4

H3A

H3B

H1: The personal benefits obtained from rural tourism influence residents’ positive and negative perceptions

H2: The personal benefits obtained from rural tourism influence residents’ satisfaction

H3: Residents’ perceptions toward rural tourism determine their satisfaction

H4: Residents’ satisfaction in relation to rural tourism contributes to the support given to the activity

Methodology

Methodology

Framework This presentation is the result of

A broader investigation, inserted in a co-financed doctoral project by the Portuguese Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia (FCT)

A larger Research Project - "The overall rural tourism experience (ORTE) and sustainable local community development", financed by the Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia (co-financed by COMPETE, QREN e FEDER) (PTDC/CS-GEO/104894/2008) and coordinated by Elisabeth Kastenholz

MethodologyStudy Regions and Procedures

Study Regions

Dão-Lafões Region and Douro Region

Present symptoms of interiority and poverty, with few job opportunities

Due to their resources, these two regions hold an enormous tourism potential

DLR has the most attractive spas of the country

DR is a World Heritage Site , since 2001

MethodologyStudy Regions and Procedures

Procedures The data on residents’ perceptions and support was collected with face to

face questionnaires (190) in 2010

Including open, closed and likert scale questions

In the regions the number of surveys to be conducted was determined by sampling by quotas (which took into account the criteria of residents’ gender and age)

Data was treated with SPSS software General description of results

Test the hypothesis that affect residents’ support - were tested with Mann-whitney and Spearman rho tests, for = 0.050

Discussion of Results

Discussion of ResultsDescriptive Analysis

VARIABLES n %GENDER

FemaleMale

10981

42,6

AGE< 2425-3435-4445-5455-64> 65 years

341819364043

17,99,51018,921,1

LITERACYDo not know read or write

1.º Cycle (1-4 years)2.º Cycle (5-6 years)3.º Cycle (7-9 years)General secondaryHigher educations

4103935278

2,1

4,718,414,24,2

RELATION WITH TOURISMYesNo

35155

18,4

INT. LOCAL ASSOCIATIONYesNo

3187

1,6

Socio-demographic profile of residents

57,4

22,6

54,2

81,6

98,4

Discussion of ResultsDescriptive Analysis

Positive perceptions ±S

Sociocultural

Stimulation of cultural initiatives 2,57±0,53Preservation of local customs and traditions 2,24 0,63Support of handicrafts and traditional crafts 2,15±0,51Investment in local economic activities 2,06±0,34Global score

EnvironmentalImprovement of environmental/green zones 2,84±0,92Renovation of historic heritage 2,72±0,87Improved image/appearance of the community 3,01±0,94Global score

SocioeconomicLocal job creation 2,22±0,72Development of new services 2,00±0,27Improving economic conditions of residents 2,27±0,70Global score

XPerceções negativas ±S

SocioeconomicEconomically benefit a small number of people 3,93±0,59

Accentuate the differences between rich and poor 3,62±0,77

Global score

EnvironmentalDamage to plant and animal life 1,99±0,19

Increased pollution 1,98±0,14

Global score

SocioculturalExploitation and alteration of local customs and traditions 2,09±0,37

Global score

Residents´ perceptions

2,16±0,41

2,86±0,80

2,16±0,44

3,77±0,58

1,99±0,14

2,09±0,37

Discussion of ResultsDescriptive Analysis

Satisfaction ±S

I am pleased to have rural tourism in my community 2.9±0.85

X

Resident´ satisfaction

Residents´ Support

Support ±S

I would like to collaborate with rural tourism 2.8±0.84

It seems that

residents´ attitudes

are neutral…

Discussion of ResultsTesting hypothesis

Positive perceptions

Personal Benefits Rank P Negative

perceptionsPersonal benefits Rank P Satisfaction Personal

Benefits Rank PSociocultural No 93,0 Sociocultural No 94,8 0,11 I am

pleased… No 92,7yes 136,2 Yes 106,3Enviromental No 91,3 Enviromental No 95,4 0,84yes 155,1 Yes 96,6

yes 140,45Socio-economic

No 93,2 Socioeconomic No 97,6yes 132,8 yes 61,6

Rho Sperman Environmen-tal benefits

Socio-economic benefits

Sociocultural benefirs

Environmental benefits

R ,313 ,462

p ,000 ,000

Socio-economic benefits

R ,313 ,274

p ,000 ,000

Sociocultural benefirs

R ,462 ,274

p ,000 ,000

I am pleased…R

p

Rho Sperman Environmental costs

Socio-economic Costs

Sociocultural costs

Environmental costs

R ,047 ,016

p ,524 ,831

Socio-economic Costs

R ,047 -,214

p ,524 ,003

Sociocultural costsR ,016 -,214

p ,831 ,003

I am pleased… R ,000 ,033

p ,999 ,656

Relationship between personal benefits and residents´ perceptions and residents´ satisfaction

Relationship between residents´ perceptions and residents´satisfaction

,455 ,304 ,284

,000 ,000 ,000

-,315

,000

0,02

0,02

0,00

0,00

0,04

Discussion of ResultsTesting hypothesis

Rho Sperman I am pleased to have rural tourism in my community

I would like to colaborate to rural tourism

I am pleased to have rural tourism in my community

R

p

I would like to collaborate to rural tourism

R

p

Relationship between satisfaction and Support

,421,000

,421,000

Conclusions & Suggestions

Conclusions & Suggestions

Descriptive Analysis

Results suggest that probably the population has been neglected in the process of tourism development

We observed that residents don´t have a great and positive perceptions toward tourism

Accordingly, it seems that tourism, “benefits only a small number of people”, thereby accentuating differences between rich and poor

Thus, like Cristovão (1999) we argue that tourism is yet an elitist activity, developed by people that belong to higher social groups at a regional or national level

The tourism that exists is not the tourism that local people want (cf. Valente & Figueiredo, 2003)

Conclusions & Suggestions

Test of Hypothesis

Personal Benefits and positive perceptions are important in predict tourism satisfaction and support – the four hypothesis are confirmed, at least partially

These results are in line with the social-exchange theory

That is, people who receive benefits from the activity develop more positive perceptions than those who do not

It ´s important develop strategies that benefit the community in some way to get their support in order to develop the sector , but also the host community

Conclusions & Suggestions

Local entities should Define a strategy for the tourist development Integrate stakeholders and thus community in the process of

tourism development

Culture Traditional

AgricultureSongs and

Traditional

DancesDesporti

ve Activities

Traditional

Cuisine

Traditional Crafts

Local Heritage

Conclusions & Suggestions

Future Research Complement Quantitative data with Qualitative

Data With Data Triangulation or a Study case

In order to understand better the feelings of people and interpret their opinions and suggestions

Indeed, this is being done in ORTE Project

ORTE Project

Thank you for your attention!

Contacts: mljesus@sapo.pt

Please visit http://cms.ua.pt/orte

This presentation is part of a larger Research Project - “The overall rural tourism experience and sustainable local community development”, financed by the Fundação

para a Ciência e Tecnologia (co-financed by COMPETE, QREN e FEDER) (PTDC/CS-GEO/104894/2008) and coordinated by Elisabeth Kastenholz.

UNIÃO EUROPEIAFundo Europeu de Desenvolvimento Regional