Revisiting the relationship between host attitudes and tourism development: A utility maximization approach

Abstract

Host attitudes toward tourists are critical to the sustainable development of the tourism industry. Although numerous studies have focused on investigating host attitudes toward tourists and tourism development, the theoretical support from an economic perspective in this field is still underdeveloped. By following the social exchange theory and applying a utility maximization model, the current study not only explains Doxey’s Irridex model from an economic perspective but also complements the findings of the tourism area life cycle model proposed by Butler. Results show that the public resources at the destination, along with the ability of local community in channeling (foreign) tourism income into productivity advancement, influence the optimal level of tourism development in a destination.

Impact of perceived peer to peer accommodation development on community residents’ well-being

“…They used competitive equilibrium analysis to show hosts in the destination could exchange tourism resources with financial resources from tourists. Fan et al (2018) introduced private consumption, leisure, and public resource into a utility function and proved the SET under the partial equilibrium framework. Their conceptual mathematical model also complements Butler (1980)'s tourism area life cycle (TALC) model and proved that the expansion of public resources does not necessarily lead to rejuvenation of tourism destinations because the ability of hosts to transform the income generated from tourism into productivity is an important determinant of rejuvenation.…”

“…Numerous studies have emerged to empirically examine SET in the tourism field, where impacts were measured from the economic, social, and environmental perspectives (Fan et al 2018;Qiu et al 2018;Zhang et al 2017), using data collected from different destinations. Wang and Pfister (2008) used a rural community in the US as an example and found a positive relationship between residents' perceived benefits and their attitudes toward tourism.…”

“…Similar findings were identified by Bestard and Nadal (2007) in Balearic Island, Gursoy, Chi and Dywer (2009) in Australia, and Vargas-Sánchez Porras-According to Bimonte and Punzo (2016), positive impacts refer to financial resources earnt by hosts from tourists when they consume tourism products. They can also be explained by private consumptions and leisure in Fan et al (2018)'s model as the injection of tourism revenue stimulates hosts' income and productivity of the destination. As a result, hosts are able to expand private consumptions, reduce working hours, and increase leisure time (Liu,6 hosts and positively affect their attitude towards tourism development.…”

“…As a result, hosts are able to expand private consumptions, reduce working hours, and increase leisure time (Liu,6 hosts and positively affect their attitude towards tourism development. On the other hand, negative impacts such as traffic congestion and pollution are referred to as public resources in Fan et al (2018)'s model. As tourist numbers increase, public transportation, road capacity and the environment have to be shared by more people, which decreases public resource per capita for hosts.…”

“…Indeed, as the tension between tourists and residents mounts because of the growing number of tourists brought into residential areas through P2P accommodation, better understanding of the dynamic between residents and tourists, a longstanding topic of interest for tourism scholars (e.g. Jurowski, Uysal, and Williams 1997, Lin, Chen, and Filieri 2017, Fan, Liu and Qiu, 2018 is needed. Using Social Exchange Theory (SET) as a framework, scholars have demonstrated a positive relationship between the perceived positive benefits stemming from tourism and community residents' support for tourism development (Nunkoo and So 2016, Zhang, Fan, Tse and King, 2017Rasoolimanesh et al 2015).…”