Differences in residents' attitudes towards tourism among mass tourism destinations

Abstract

This article contributes to extant knowledge by analysing differences in the attitudes towards tourism of residents living in several micro‐destinations (cities) within a larger tourism destination and by using a new approach, the Oaxaca‐Blinder decomposition. Results show that a significant part of the gap in attitudes among cities is explained by residents' perceived tourism impacts; the relevance of each of them in generating gaps is also identified and quantified. However, there is also a significant community adjustment to tourism impacts source of gap, different among cities.

Residents’ Satisfaction with Tourism and the European Tourism Indicator System in South Sardinia

“…Many researchers investigated the attitudes of residents toward tourism development [14][15][16]36]. Several different theoretical models were used as frameworks for the research.…”

“…In the following, we briefly mention a list of theories that, in our opinion, provide guidance for the interpretation of the results we obtained. Previous studies [14][15][16]37] provide exhaustive discussions on this topic. One of the most corroborated theories used in the tourism literature is the social exchange theory (SET), according to which individuals tend to support tourism development when the tradeoff between costs and benefits is perceived as positive [34].…”

“…The SET model explains that any adverse socio-cultural impact may be accepted if it is balanced by the realization of economic benefits to the individual [38]. A large amount of evidence supports the assertion that residents with a higher personal economic reliance on tourism are more favorable toward it [14]. Some theorists noticed that individuals may tolerate personal costs of tourism development if broader collective benefits are provided to the host community.…”

“…The involvement of local stakeholders in the realization of sustainable tourism has been increasingly acknowledged and recommended by academia and practitioners [1,2,[6][7][8][9][10][11]. In particular, residents are key stakeholders in local tourism [12][13][14][15][16][17][18]: first, because to be sustainable, tourism must not have a negative impact on host communities, and second, because the attitudes of residents toward tourism are crucial for its successful development [19,20].…”

Explaining residents' attitudes towards tourism and tourists: A new approach based on brand theory

“…In contrast, there are some costs such as the rise of local taxes, damage to the cultural heritage, and environmental degradation. According to previous studies, residents will develop their attitudes towards tourism based on a comparison between the positive and negative effects of the tourism activity in their communities (Dyer, Gursoy, Sharma, & Carter, ; Latkova & Vogt, ; Martínez‐García, Raya, & Majó, ; Zhang et al, ). With this in mind, and adopting a traditional approach to attitudes (Eagly & Chaiken, ), we consider that resident attitudes towards tourism are an enduring predisposition towards the tourism development in their communities that will be positive if residents perceive that the benefits of the tourism activity are greater than its costs or negative impacts over time.…”