A sustainable urban tourism indicator in Malaysia

Abstract

This paper presents a critical review on indicators for measuring sustainable urban tourism development in Malaysia. It has been debated that the contribution of urban tourism in the economy and local community's development are difficult to be determined due to the multiple discipline that clouds the existence of urban tourism as an independent sector. Arguably, these indicators failed to measure the level of achievement for urban tourism activities, and the economic terms are less justified. Since the concept of sustainable tourism is introduced, the role of indicator is increasingly important in measuring economic and social advantages, thus the development of the city also needs to be monitored with suitable indicator. The idea is to assess and monitor changes in urban economies for tracking the progress towards sustainable development. Therefore, the center of debate in developing urban tourism indicators are (1) to identify and measure the entire range of interrelated environmental, social and economic impacts in tourism development, and (2) to obtain accurate information for responsible decision. Several approaches have been made in the context of Malaysia although the indicators are not directly related to the perspective of urban tourism, such as Malaysian Quality of Life Index (MQLI) and Malaysian Urban Indicators Network (MURNINet). For example, MURNINet identified heritage and tourism as a sub-component of the indicator. As there is need to improve these indicators, situational analysis based on literature review in this paper will highlight the use of existing sustainable indicators and their relevancy to urban tourism development and economy.

A Literature Review of Low-Carbon Urban Tourism Indicators and Policy

“…Increasing demand for urban tourism has begun over the past few decades. Urban tourism refers to activities conducted in areas with extensive amenities, such as transportation, hotel infrastructure, and events (Kitamura et al, 2020;Razali & Ismail, 2014). According to H. N. Ismail (2016), the main important context for urban tourism is to develop large-scale infrastructure, especially airports, transportation systems, and indoor accommodation.…”

“…They damaged some monuments by scratching, painting, and stealing (N. Ismail et al, 2014). Razali and Ismail (2014)…”

Tourism Development and its Effects on the Urban Economic Environment: Indexed Studies Analysis in Scopus Database

“…No entanto, o fato da atividade ser uma complexa atividade econômica sistêmica, existem dificuldades e discussões sobre a possibilidade da medição dos impactos causados especificamente pelo turismo, ou para o estabelecimento de indicadores que levam ao controle sustentável do desenvolvimento econômico não só urbano, mas como regional e nacional, o que pode levar à carência de planejamento e à carência de previsões de cenários (Martí et al, 2017;Razali & Ismail, 2014). Dentre os estudos selecionados, Martí et al (2017) desenvolvem estudos Guizi, A.A. (2019) Outras questões, tendo como base os papers selecionados na base de dados Scopus, são destacados a seguir, observando-se efeitos tanto positivos quanto negativos do desenvolvimento da atividade turística sobre a cidade, em processos de mudanças na realidade econômica e social.…”

A systematic review of indicators for sustainability of urban heritage sites

“…Thus, "indicators" are tools to show the level of sustainability in urban heritage (Cambridge Dictionary, 2021b). In other words, indicators are quantitative or qualitative signs ( UN-Habitat, 2017) to show or observe the changes of something (Oxford Learner's Dictionaries, 2021); monitor or trace the progress, performance and impact towards development (Razali and Ismail, 2014); evaluate, report and reorientate the journey to urban sustainability (Ibrahim et al, 2019). Indicators can refer to observation and measurement in countable and reportable ways on urban changes from the past, current and future; to reach progressive targets and achievements.…”