Residents’ Attitudes toward Tourism Development and Impacts in Koti‑Kanasar, Indroli, Pattyur Tourism Circuit of Uttarakhand State, India

              © PASOS. Revista de Turismo y Patrimonio Cultural. ISSN 1695-7121
Vol. 14 N.o 1. Págs. 23-39. 2016
www .pasosonline.org
Abstract: Indian Himalaya is characterized by tourism potential which provides good opportunity for
economic development in long run. Considering vast potential for tourism development, Koti­‑Kanasar,
Indroli, Pattyur circuit of Uttarakhand has been identified as an area for rural tourism promotion by Indian
Ministry of Tourism. Since the circuit is in involvement stage of development, it is important to ensure
sustainable development of tourism for which understanding of residents’ attitude is very essential. This
study examined attitude of residents towards tourism impacts and influence of demographic attributes
on their attitude. The study reveals that infrastructure facilities, design and package of rural tourism
products, skill development programs for stakeholders and specific marketing campaigns are essential to
tourism development. Findings indicate that residents understand the extent of tourism impacts in their
mountainous region with respect to economic, social and environmental dimensions. Study also reveals that
although locals want to increase tourism gains with corresponding effort to reduce consequences deprived,
their perceived impacts of tourism vary across their demographic variables.
Keywords: Rural Tourism; Local Residents; Attitude; Tourism Impacts.
Las actitudes de los residentes hacia el Desarrollo del Turismo y su impacto en Koti­‑Kanasar,
Indroli, Puttur Circuito Turístico de Uttarakhand Estado, la India
Resumen: Himalaya indio se caracteriza por el potencial turístico que ofrece una buena oportunidad para el
desarrollo económico de largo plazo. Teniendo en cuenta un gran potencial para el desarrollo turístico, Koti­‑Kanasar,
Indroli, circuito Pattyur de Uttarakhand ha sido identificado como área para la promoción del tur-ismo
rural a través del Ministerio de Turismo de la India. Puesto que el circuito está en la etapa de desarrollo la
participación, es importante para garantizar el desarrollo sostenible del turismo para el que es muy esencial la
comprensión de la actitud de los residentes. Este estudio examinó la actitud de los residentes hacia los efectos
y la influencia de los atributos demográficos en su actitud de turismo. Un estudio revela las instalaciones de in-fraestructura,
diseño y envases de productos de turismo rural, programas de desarrollo de habilidades para los
interesados ​y campañas de marketing específicas son esenciales para el desarrollo del turismo. Los hallazgos
indican que los residentes a comprender la magnitud de los impactos del turismo en su región montañosa en
las dimensiones económicas, sociales y ambientales. Estudio revela también que, aunque los lugareños quieren
aumentar las ganancias del turismo con el correspondiente esfuerzo para reducir las consecuencias privadas,
sus impactos percibidos de turismo varían a través de sus variables demográficas.
Palabras Clave: El Turismo Rural; Los Residentes Locales; La Actitud; Los Impactos del Turismo.
Residents’ Attitudes toward Tourism Development and
Impacts in Koti­‑Kanasar,
Indroli, Pattyur Tourism Circuit of
Uttarakhand State, India
S.C. Bagri*
University Srinagar Garhwal, Uttarakhand (India)
Devkant Kala**
Himgiri Zee University, Dehradun, Uttarakhand (India)
S.C. Bagri, Devkant Kala
* Professor, Centre for Mountain tourism and Hospitality Studies School of Management, HNB Garhwal Central University
Srinagar Garhwal, Uttarakhand, India; E­‑mail:
prof.bagri@gmail.com
** Assistant Professor, Department of Management, Himgiri Zee University, Dehradun, Uttarakhand, India; E­‑mail:
devkala@
gmail.com
PASOS. Revista de Turismo y Patrimonio Cultural. 14 N° 1. Enero 2016 ISSN 1695-7121
24 Residents’ Attitudes toward Tourism Development
1. Introduction
India is synonymous with great culture, unique civilization, glorious history, ancient traditions and
natural attractions. The country’s diversity, rich cultural heritage, art and architecture, historical,
culinary, religious and spiritual association, and many more opportunities continue to draw in tourists
from all over the world. Its twenty­‑nine
states and seven union territories are filled with various tourism
attractions which entices all kinds of tourists across the globe. Uttarakhand state, commonly known as
Devbhoomi (the land known for its association of Hindu Gods and Goddesses since time immemorial)
is located in the northern part of the country sharing international boundary with Nepal and Tibet
(China) in the north, Himachal Pradesh state in the west and north­‑west,
Uttar Pradesh state in
the south and Nepal in the east. Uttarakhand is a multi­‑destination
state of India with a variety of
tourism resources. Its cultural heritage, nature, wildlife, pilgrimages, yoga and meditation, peaks and
forests, valleys, glaciers, rivers, flora and fauna, the religious Hindu pilgrimage places Badrinath and
Kedarnath, the world heritage site Nanda Devi Biosphere Reserve, the first national park of India
­‑
Jim Corbett National Park, temples and 18th and 19th centuries built buildings give wide exposure to
Figure I: Roadmap of Koti­‑Kanasar­‑Indroli­‑Pattyur
Circuit
PASOS. Revista de Turismo y Patrimonio Cultural. 14 N° 1. Enero 2016 ISSN 1695-7121
S.C. Bagri, Devkant Kala 25
visitors about its socio­‑cultural
and natural background (Bagri et al, 2010). Both domestic and foreign
tourists visit different parts of this state almost the whole year and the tourist traffic is consistently
increasing in the region.
Situated at a distance of 121 kms from Uttarakhand state capital Dehradun and 380 kms North­‑East
from national capital New Delhi, the Koti­‑Kanasar,
Indroli, Pattyur tourism circuit is unique in its
natural surroundings and have all the qualities to attract tourists, potential to successfully compete with
other Himalayan destinations and generate a substantial volume of income to local people. The circuit
provides enough opportunities for trekking, hiking, rock climbing, eco­‑walk,
bird watching, photography,
nature trailing, adventure sports and many other nature based recreational activities to quench the
desires of tourists. Tourism related activities in the area have grown rapidly over the past years and
the circuit has potential to become the tourist hub of the region. Considering the vast potential for rural
tourism development, the circuit has been identified as an emerging area for ecotourism promotion by
Ministry of Tourism, Government of India (Bagri et al, 2013). Koti­‑Kanasar,
has got the privilege to
have some of the oldest and thickest deodar (Cedrus deodara) trees of Asian subcontinent. The people of
this area are commonly known as Jaunsaris (a local tribe). The Jaunsaris claim to be the descendants
of Pandavas of the Mahabharat period i.e; 1200BC to 1000BC as suggested by archaeologists on the
basis of thermo luminescence dating method on painted grey­‑ware
pottery (Lal, 1955).
In the vicinity of Devban Medicinal Plant Conservation Area, Indroli village has two famous temples:
Mahakali (dedicated to Hindu Goddess Durga) and Mahasu (dedicated to one of the forms of Hindu
god Lord Shiva). Tiger falls and Devban are other major tourist attractions. Situated at an alleviation
of 2100m from the sea level, Pattyur is the most distant located village. The main attractions of this
village are mountain meadows at Mundali which has potential for snow skiing during winter season.
Mundali can be approached by covering a trekking distance of five kilometers from Pattyur village
or can be accessed by covering 39 kms by road from Chakrata town. Owing to its natural attractions
and cultural heritage, tourism opportunities in the region is growing rapidly and much of the people
of towns of Uttarakhand and nearby states have started to visit these places for camping, adventure
sports and nature based recreational activities, eco­‑walks,
trekking trail, bird­‑watching,
rock climbing,
viewing organic farms, apple orchards and Medicinal Plant Conservation Area.
Table I: Number of Tourists Arrivals
Year Uttarakhand State Chakrata Koti­‑Kanasar,
Indroli,
Pattyur Circuit
2009 22041037 36943 29554
2010 30333288 59560 47651
2011 26070907 61673 49338
2012 26951884 65054 52037
2013† 20038811 38636 21574
Source: Tourist Statistics, Uttarakhand Tourism Development Board, Dehradun.
† In 2013, a very low flow of tourist was recorded due to natural disaster occurring in Kedarnath and other
parts of Uttarakhand state.
As per the statistics updated by the Uttarakhand State Tourism Development Board, it seems that
present tourism circuit doesn’t cater to a good number of tourist arrivals (table I). Since the rural
tourism circuit has moved from preliminary or exploration phase to involvement phase, it seems
imperative to create infrastructure such as roads, accommodation units, interpretation centers and
museums showcasing the natural and cultural heritage in order to increase the number of tourist
arrivals. Appropriate designing and packaging of rural tourism products, developing and conducting
skill development programs for stakeholders and creating activity specific marketing campaigns
are considered essential for further tourism promotion. With this article we aim to demonstrate the
importance of residents’ attitude and their demographical characteristics in promoting tourism and
developing tourism related activities in an emerging tourism destination. The sequence of the study
PASOS. Revista de Turismo y Patrimonio Cultural. 14 N° 1. Enero 2016 ISSN 1695-7121
26 Residents’ Attitudes toward Tourism Development
is organized as follows. First, the literature review is discussed. In addition, hypothesis pertaining to
the relationship between residents’ demographical characteristics and perceived tourism impacts are
developed based on literary information obtained from related literature. The description of research
methodology, questionnaire development, and data collection process are discussed in the next section
followed by empirical results, discussion and conclusion.
2. Literature Review
Over the years rural tourism has been identified as an important ‘niche’ in the tourism literature
to ensure economic and socio­‑cultural
development (Kuuder et al., 2013). Geographical locations,
microclimatic conditions, existence of water, natural vegetation and wildlife, geomorphologic structure,
local cuisines, festivals and pageants, traditional agricultural system, local handicrafts, regional dress
culture, historical events and people, heritage appeals, architectural variety, folk dances and artistic
activities form a major base for rural tourism (Catibog­‑Sinha
and Wen, 2008; Kiper, 2011). It contributes
to conservation of biodiversity, sustains the well­‑being
of local people, involves responsible action on
the part of tourist and the tourism industry, promotes small and medium tourism enterprises, requires
lowest possible consumption of natural resources, stresses local participation, ownership, and business
opportunities, particularly for rural people and above all includes the learning experiences (Kiper, 2011).
Over the past several years a number of studies have been carried out in Europe, Australia, New
Zealand, the South Pacific, Asia, Africa and America to examine the attitudes of local residents towards
tourism and its impact on local community (Ap and Crompton 1993; Haralambopoulos and Pizam,
1996; Andereck and Vogt 2000; Kayat 2002; Sirakaya et al, 2002; Harill, 2004; Jurowski and Gursoy
2004; McGehee and Andereck, 2004; Andereck et al., 2005; Petrzelka et al., 2005; Zhang et al., 2006;
Dyer et al., 2007; Lepp, 2007; Sharma, et al., 2008; Diedrich and Garcia­‑Buades
2009; Marzuki, 2009;
Rastegar, 2010; Brida et al., 2011; Nunkoo and Ramkissoon, 2011; Vargas­‑Sanchez
et al, 2011; Deery et
al., 2012; Nunkoo and Gursoy, 2012; Dimitriadis et al., 2013; Seyfi et al. 2013; Simão and Môsso, 2013;
Snyman, 2014). However, little is known about attitudes of local community for tourism development
in India. In Indian context, studies of Rao et al. (2003), Bagri and Mishra (2005) and Singh, Mal and
Kala (2009) in Nanda Devi Biosphere Reserve, Singh and Mishra (2004), Kuniyal and Vishvakarma
(2004) in Kullu, Richa (2007) in Manali, Geneletti and Dawa (2009) in Ladakh, Karanth and Nepal
(2012) in Kanha, Nagarahole, and Ranthambore in India and Chitwan in Nepal, Chand and Vivek
(2012) in Manali, Bagri et al. (2013) and Gupta and Prakash (2014) in Garhwal Himalaya attempted
to examine the attitude of local residents towards rural tourism. In context of Uttarakhand, however,
only few studies (Rao et al., 2003; Bagri and Mishra, 2005; Singh, Mal and Kala, 2009; Bagri et al.,
2013; Gupta and Prakash, 2014) were found to have examined the attitude of residents in relation to
tourism development.
These authors have explored that attitudes tend to fall into three basic categories: economic, socio­‑cultural
and environmental. A comprehensive review of studies suggests that each tourism impact
category includes positive and negative effects and sometimes residents’ attitude are contradictory. The
economic impacts of tourism are mainly perceived by residents as a mean to generate job opportunities
for local communities, develop local economy, increase investments in the area and improve tax revenue
earnings, personal income, and economic quality of life (Haralambopoulos and Pizam 1996; Sirakaya et al,
2002; Harrill 2004; Huh and Vogt 2008; Diedrich and Garcia­‑Buades
2009; Vargas­‑Sánchez
et al. 2011).
Conversely, on the negative side, residents seem to perceive an increase in prices of goods and services
thus increasing cost of living and an unequal distribution of the economic benefits (Haralambopoulos
and Pizam 1996; Andereck and Vogt 2000; Andriotis 2005).
The environment, a central theme of tourism, continues to be an important subject of debate in a time
when the global policy is aimed at ecological problems such as pollution, depletion of natural resources
and deforestation (Kuvan and Akan, 2005). In view of this, the potential of tourism activities in achieving
the objectives of environmental preservation and conservation have been widely studied (Jurowski and
Gursoy 2004; Andereck et al. 2005). Such studies demonstrate that residents favor tourism promotion
because it initiates the creation of more parks and recreation areas, improves the quality of roads and
public facilities, stimulate environmental conservation awareness and does not contribute to ecological
decline. However, tourism can cause significant environmental damage because it is often developed in
areas that have attractive but fragile environments (Andereck and McGehee, 2008).Tourism also causes
traffic congestion, parking problems, disturbance and destruction of well­‑preserved
flora and fauna,
PASOS. Revista de Turismo y Patrimonio Cultural. 14 N° 1. Enero 2016 ISSN 1695-7121
S.C. Bagri, Devkant Kala 27
illegal construction of building such as accommodation and dining units, air and water pollution, and
littering (Jurowski and Gursoy 2004; Andereck et al. 2005; Jago et al. 2006).
Researchers also suggested that tourism can also impact positively towards socio­‑cultural
aspects of
local residents and community by increasing community services, recreational and cultural facilities,
performing and participation in cultural events and festivals, cultural exchanges, meeting interesting
people, learning about the world and exposing community to new perspectives (McCool and Martin 1994;
Brunt and Courtney 1999). Tourism also plays an important role in social and cultural preservation,
rejuvenation of traditional culture and promotion of indigenous arts and crafts industries in the region.
On the other hand, some studies have identified certain concerns regarding loss of traditional cultures
and values, increase in crime, drugs and alcohol abuse, sudden hike in the cost of accommodation and
the waiting time to deliver services (Haralambopoulos and Pizam 1996; Andereck et al. 2005; Martin
2008; Diedrich and Garcia­‑Buades
2009). Tourism also causes a change in local people habits, daily
routines, social lives, beliefs, and values. Puczkó and Rátz (2000) have emphasized about unplanned
tourism development that can lead to a negative change in destinations’ socio­‑cultural
and physical
characteristics.
There have been several other factors identified as influencing residents’ attitudes toward tourism
such as age (Tomljenovic and Faulkner 1999; Cavus and Tanrisevdi, 2003; McGehee and Andereck,
2004; Pappas, 2008), education (Iroegbu and Chen, 2001), gender (Mason and Cheyne, 2000; Harrill
and Potts, 2003; Pappas, 2008), income (Snaith and Haley, 1994; Pappas, 2008), community attachment
(Lankford and Howard, 1994; McCool and Martin, 1994; Snaith and Haley, 1994), economic role of
tourism (Andereck, et al., 2005; Huh and Vogt, 2008), economic reliance on tourism (Madrigal, 1995;
McGehee and Andereck, 2004), involvement in decision making (Madrigal, 1995; Kayat, 2002), knowledge
about tourism (Lankford and Howard, 1994; Andereck, et al., 2005), length of tourist stay (McGehee
and Andereck, 2004) and personal benefits from tourism (McGehee and Andereck, 2004; Andereck,
et al., 2005). Since individuals’ needs, understanding and attitudes are generally influenced by their
demographical characteristics, these characteristics are considered as major factors that shape their
attitudes and perceptions towards further development.
Furthermore several theoretical frameworks including Irridex’s Model of Doxey (1975) explains that
attitudes of locals change over time, becoming more negative as tourism development and tourism flux
increase. The stages of this model are: enthusiasm, apathy, annoyance and antagonism. Butler (1980)
model explains the evolution of destination through the stages of exploration, involvement, development,
consolidation, stagnation, and decline or rejuvenation. As per the prevailing situation the present tourist
circuit comes under apathy stage of Irridex’s model or involvement stage of Butler model. Tourism
evolution in present tourism circuit requires mutually acceptable policies and strategies in order to
consolidate related stages of destination life cycle. In order to attain effectiveness in development policies
and maintain destination life cycle, efforts are to be initiated to examine and analyze the attitudes of
local residents. The present study, thus, seeks to add to the literature of rural tourism by investigating
the attitudes of residents of Koti­‑Kanasar,
Indroli, Pattyur circuit towards tourism.
3. Objectives
•• To examine the status of existing hardware and software components of tourism.
•• To determine attitude of local residents towards economic, socio­‑cultural
and environmental
impacts of tourism.
•• To examine the relationships between residents’ demographic attributes and their attitude toward
impacts of tourism.
4. Hypothesis Development
It is observed that individual age of local people has played a determining role in residents’ attitude
toward impact of tourism development on community. Studies of Cavus and Tanrisevdi (2003) and Harrill
(2004) found a significant relationship existing between age and attitude, as older residents were likely
to have more negative attitude toward tourism development. Studies of Anthony (2007) and Wang
and Pfister (2008) have found that younger respondents held more positive attitudes towards tour
activities. This may be because many younger people have better education background than older
PASOS. Revista de Turismo y Patrimonio Cultural. 14 N° 1. Enero 2016 ISSN 1695-7121
28 Residents’ Attitudes toward Tourism Development
people and poor inclination towards nature tourism. Rastegar (2010) argued that younger residents
of tourist destinations show high expectations of tourism, while older residents look at it with more
doubt because of the cultural changes that tourism may bring to the area. Conversely, Tomljenovic and
Faulkner (1999), McGehee and Andereck (2004), Zhang (2006) and Snyman (2014) found older residents
more positive about tourism than younger residents. Considering these issues into consideration, the
first hypothesis was framed to examine the relationship between age and perceived impacts of tourism.
H1: The perceived impacts of tourism do not differ across the age of local residents.
In view of gender’s perception towards tourism impacts, Mason and Cheyne (2000) found that even
though female residents recognized positive tourism impacts, they had a tendency of being against
tourism development than men when examining perceived negative tourism impacts. Petrzelka et al.
(2005) and Wang and Pfister (2008) noted both gender differences in resident attitudes towards benefits
of tourism. Their study determined that comparatively women perceived greater benefits from tourism
than that of men. In contrast, the study of Harrill and Potts (2003) studied in context of Charleston,
South Carolina, USA, who noticed that gender plays an important predictor while examining perceived
economic benefits of tourism. They concluded that women seem to be more negatively disposed towards
tourism development than men. Similarly, Iroegbu and Chen (2001) found that male and college­‑educated
were most likely to support tourism development and perceived positive impacts of tourism. Therefore,
the second hypothesis was framed as:
H2: The perceived impacts of tourism do not differ across the gender of local residents.
Educational level with outside exposure also seems to affect residents’ attitudes toward tourism
impacts. Past studies have found that increased educational level impacted positively on attitudes
towards tourism (Teye et al. 2002; Shibia 2010; Snyman, 2014). It is because educated people seem
to be more familiar or aware of the potential benefits than those with less educated mass. In his
study in Washington, Wang and Pfister (2008) concluded that education level of local residents is
positively associated with perceived benefits of tourism. In one of Manali based research work located
in the western part of Himachal state of India, Chand and Vivek (2012) found that there is a strong
and positive association between education and sustainable tourism development. However, Milman
and Pizam (1988) noted that residents’ support for tourism does not vary significantly among different
educational levels. In view of this, third hypothesis was designed to examine the relationship between
educational level and perceived impacts of tourism.
H3: The perceived impacts of tourism do not differ across the educational level of local residents.
5. Research Methodology
Six villages namely, Koti, Kanasar, Devban, Indroli, Pattyur, and Mundali, were selected for the
research work because these settlements were the major tourist destinations of the circuit and were
receiving the satisfactory numbers of tourist arrivals. The population of the study composed of local
residents and was selected by using both the convenience and snowball sampling techniques. As the
number of people living in the rural areas is relatively small, snowball method was identified as the most
appropriate sampling measure for generating an appropriate sample size. Each prospective participant
was initially approached and invited to participate and a total of 200 local residents participated in the
study. The sample work was undertaken from June to August 2012. A questionnaire consists of two
sections was structured for the purpose of measuring the attitude of local residents towards tourism
development and its perceived impact on community. As indicated in literature review, many studies
support that age, gender and level of education of local residents are considered as crucial factors for
the creation of significant differences in the perceived attitude towards tourism impacts. Thus, in
the first section, basic details about local residents, which include gender, age, education level and
occupation, were obtained. The second section included 22 items that were related to the existing
PASOS. Revista de Turismo y Patrimonio Cultural. 14 N° 1. Enero 2016 ISSN 1695-7121
S.C. Bagri, Devkant Kala 29
tourism initiatives and attitude of local residents towards economic, socio­‑cultural
and environmental
impacts of tourism in five­‑point
Likert­‑scale
where ‘1’ indicates strongly disagree and‘5’ indicates
strongly agree. The existing literature helped in the preparation of the second section of questionnaire
and included questions were selected based on related studies of residents’ attitude towards tourism
impacts in emerging tourist destination. Specifically, it was based on the research works of Teye et al.
(2002), Cavus and Tanrisevdi (2003), Harrill (2004), McGehee and Andereck (2004), Andereck, et al.
(2005), Dyer et al. (2007), Andereck and McGehee (2008), Wang and Pfister (2008), Brida et al. (2011).
Some questions were then modified by the researchers in order to focus on specific information about
the present destination.
Informal discussions were also employed to get a better understanding of attitudes and perceptions
of local residents towards tourism impacts. Discussions provided local residents the opportunity to
express their opinions without restraints. The pilot study was carried out to ensure reliability and
validity of the instruments and the data to be collected therein. The initial questionnaire was given
to a group of referees to judge its validity according to its contents, the clarity of its items meaning,
and suitability to avoid any misunderstanding and to assure its linkages with the main study objec-tives.
In order to validate the reliability, questionnaires were initially distributed to 30 residents,
representing 15% of the total sample size of the study population. The value of Cronbach’s alpha was
found to be 0.874, which suggested an acceptable level of reliability of the research instrument. Data
thus received was systematically arranged, tabulated and analyzed. Analysis of data was performed
using SPSS version 20.
6. Results
6.1. Demographic Profile
The demographic characteristics of respondents shown in table II reveals that 14% respondents
were less than 18 years, 38% were within the age group of 18 ­‑
35 years, 35% were from 36 ­‑
50 years
and the remaining were above 50 years. The analysis indicates that males dominate the sample with
60% representation by them. The men were more informed than women and were more willing to share
their views.13% individuals interviewed were illiterate, 38% were metric pass, 12% obtained 10+2,
24% were graduates and 13% had obtained graduate qualification The poor representation of higher
educated sample resulted because of low level of education percentage. The sample was split almost
evenly between married and unmarried with the majority of individuals interviewed being married.
The analysis indicates that farming (50%) and animal husbandry (45%) were the primary occupation
of the local residents.
Table II: Demographical Profile
Indicators Variables No. of
Respondent Indicators Variables No. of
Respondent
Age
Below 18 28
Gender
Male 120
18­‑35
76 Female 80
36­‑50
70 Marital
Status
Married 102
Above 50 26 Unmarried 98
Education
Illiterate 26
Occupation
Farming 100
Metric 76 Animal
husbandry 90
10+2 24 Other 10
Graduate 48
Numbers of Respondents 200
Post Graduate 26
PASOS. Revista de Turismo y Patrimonio Cultural. 14 N° 1. Enero 2016 ISSN 1695-7121
30 Residents’ Attitudes toward Tourism Development
6.2. Residents’ Attitude
Table III projects the perceived impacts of tourism and it was measured by 22 impacts factors
categorized into three major categories namely economic, socio­‑cultural
and environmental impacts. The
results of mean indicate that some items have stronger effect on the community than others, while some
of them were positive and negative. Respondents perceived that tourism would improve the economic
conditions of local residents (3.11), may provide job opportunities (3.98), and play a significant role
in the economy of the community (2.99). However, it was perceived that tourism have not attracted
investment opportunities (2.82) and better shopping facilities (2.13).
Table III: Residents’ Attitude
Impacts Mean SD
a. Economic Impacts
Tourism has positive impact on the income 3.11 1.21
Tourism has improved job opportunities 3.98 0.66
Tourism industry attracts investment opportunities 2.82 1.18
Tourism has caused increased prices 2.58 1.31
Tourism sector plays a major role in local economy 2.99 1.12
Better Shopping opportunities 2.13 0.94
b. Socio­‑Cultural
Impacts
Tourism has improved the destination image 2.88 0.50
Tourism has improved public infrastructure 4.00 1.13
Tourism has negative impact on local traditions 3.41 1.61
Tourism has improved the living standard of local community 3.40 0.55
Tourism accelerated social evils 3.48 1.34
Meeting tourists enhance the valuable experiences of locals 3.83 0.50
Tourism is potential to strengthen and rejuvenate local values 4.12 0.69
Tourism offers opportunities for financial incentives 3.63 1.24
Tourism has enhanced the opportunities for cultural exchange 2.58 1.31
c. Environmental Impacts
Tourism has increased the problem of garbage disposal 2.82 1.18
Tourism is the major cause of the illegal construction 2.13 0.94
Tourism development results the loss agricultural fields 1.15 0.36
Tourism leaves negative impact on the natural environment 2.52 1.34
Tourism leads to traffic congestion and pollution 3.09 1.20
Tourism encourages heritage and environmental conservation 3.11 1.19
Tourism negatively affects the quality of life 2.35 1.34
Concerning socio­‑cultural
impacts of tourism, respondents believed that tourism development
strengthens, rejuvenates and commercializes local customs, traditions and folk arts(4.12), improves
the conditions of public facilities/ infrastructures (4.00), provide incentives to local people to stay in the
area (3.63) and is also helpful in enhancing the standard of living of local residents (3.40). Respondents
PASOS. Revista de Turismo y Patrimonio Cultural. 14 N° 1. Enero 2016 ISSN 1695-7121
S.C. Bagri, Devkant Kala 31
also thought that meeting with tourists from different parts of the country and the world would be a
valuable experience and mutual opportunity to understand and exchange the ideas and thoughts of
respective society. On the other hand, the residents perceived that tourism development may negatively
erode the values, social traditions and culture (3.41) and increase the ugly behavior including thefts,
alcoholism, and drug abuse (3.48). With respect to environmental impacts, respondents perceived
that tourism development may negatively affect the mountain environment by traffic congestion
and pollution (3.09), increasing litter and garbage (2.82), construction of illegal buildings (2.13) and
adversely influencing the habitat’s flora and fauna (2.52). On the positive side, local residents considered
that sustainable tourism development and promotion would be an added value for the heritage and
environmental conservation (3.11).
6.3. Demographic Profile and Tourism Impacts
There have been considerable factors identified as influencing residents’ attitudes toward tourism.
The demographic characteristic of the residents is one of the determinant factors that generally influence
the attitude towards emerging impacts. Notable works in this direction include Iroegbu and Chen,
2001; Cavus and Tanrisevdi, 2003; Harrill and Potts, 2003; McGehee and Andereck, 2004; Andereck,
et al., 2005; Petrzelka et al., 2005; Anthony, 2007;Rastegar, 2010;Snyman, 2014 who have examined
the relationship between perceived impact of tourism development and demographical characteristics
of local people. Bearing these issues in mind, the present study examines the influence of demographic
factors of local residents on their perceived impacts of tourism development.
One­‑way
ANOVA analysis was carried out with the assumption that the perceived impacts of tourism
do not differ across the age of local residents. From the table IV, it is noticed that calculated value of F
(3, 196) is greater than the tabulated value of F (2.60, α = 0.05) for economic and socio­‑cultural
impacts.
The observed p­‑value
(Sig. = 0.00) is well below the chosen alpha of 0.05 (0.00 and 0.008). However,
in case of perceived environmental impacts of tourism, calculated value of F (3, 196) is less than the
tabulated value of F (2.60, α = 0.05) and the observed p­‑value
(Sig. = 0.697) is above the chosen alpha of
0.05. Hence the null hypothesis is rejected in case of economic and socio­‑cultural
impacts, indicating that
there is a significant difference in the age of sampled residents in terms of economic and socio­‑cultural
impacts of tourism. Whereas the null hypothesis is accepted, indicating that there is no significant
difference in the perceived environmental impacts across the age of respondents.
Table IV: Perceived Tourism Impacts with different Age group of Respondents
Impacts
Mean ANOVA
< 18 18­‑35
36­‑50
> 60 F Value p Value
Economic 2.9643 2.8728 3.0143 2.8718 6.745 0.000
Socio­‑Culture
3.4762 3.4357 3.5016 3.5641 4.014 0.008
Environmental 2.4388 2.4624 2.4327 2.4945 0.479 0.697
Df = 3, 196; F Value =2.60 and p Value = 0.05
One­‑way
ANOVA analysis was also carried out with the assumption that the perceived impacts of
tourism do not differ across the gender of local residents. From the table V, it is evident that calculated
value of F (1, 198) is less than the tabulated value of F (3.84, α = 0.05) for economic and socio­‑cultural
and
the observed p­‑value
(sig. = 0.00) is above the chosen alpha of 0.05 (0.088 and 0.093). However, in case
of environmental impacts, calculated value of F (1, 198) is greater than the tabulated value of F (3.84,
α = 0.05) and the observed p­‑value
(Sig. = 0.003) is well below the chosen alpha of 0.05 (0.003< 0.05).
Hence the null hypothesis is accepted, showing that there is no significant difference in the economic
and socio­‑cultural
impacts across the gender of respondents. Whereas, in case of environmental impacts
the null hypothesis is rejected, revealing that there is a significant difference in the gender perception
on environment impacts of tourism.
PASOS. Revista de Turismo y Patrimonio Cultural. 14 N° 1. Enero 2016 ISSN 1695-7121
32 Residents’ Attitudes toward Tourism Development
Table V: Perceived Tourism Impacts with Gender of Respondents
Impacts
Mean ANOVA
Male Female F Value p Value
Economic 2.92 2.98 2.945 0.088
Socio­‑Culture
3.49 3.44 2.847 0.093
Environmental 2.48 2.37 8.843 0.003
Df = 1, 198; F Value = 3.84 and p Value = 0.05
One­‑way
ANOVA analysis was also carried out with the assumption that the perceived impacts of
tourism do not differ across the education level of local residents. Table VI indicates that the calculated
value of F (4, 195) is less than the tabulated value of F (2.37, α = .05), but the observed p­‑value
(0.427)
is above the chosen alpha of 0.05 for perceived economic impacts. However, the calculated value of F is
greater than tabulated value and the observed p­‑value
is less than the chosen alpha of 0.05 in case of
socio­‑cultural
and environmental impacts. Hence the null hypothesis is rejected in case of socio­‑cultural
and environmental impacts, making a significant difference in the educational level and socio­‑cultural
and environmental impacts of tourism. Whereas the null hypothesis is accepted, showing that there is
no significant difference in the perceived economic impacts across the educational level of respondents.
Table VI: Perceived Tourism Impacts with Education of Respondents
Impacts
Mean ANOVA
Illiterate Metric 10+2 Graduate Post
Graduate F Value p Value
Economic 2.90 2.96 2.89 2.95 2.90 0.966 0.427
Socio­‑Culture
3.43 3.45 3.49 3.54 3.52 2.926 0.022
Environmental 2.48 2.44 2.63 2.35 2.48 5.966 0.000
Df = 4, 195; F Value = 2.37 and p Value = 0.05
7. Discussion
Owing to its cultural ecology, Koti­‑Kanasar,
Indroli, Pattyur tourist circuit offers opportunities of
various kinds of tourism activities and shows potential to successfully position itself as an emerging
rural tourism destination. The tourism potential can be reaped by promoting basic amenities and
properly highlighting the area in tourist market. Tourist sightseeing activities in the area have grown
rapidly over the past one decade, especially in and around Koti­‑Kanasar
that serves as the base for most
visitors. Being in the close proximity to the tourist market, the study circuit has potential to become
the tourist hub but offers limited attractions. Therefore, new tourist products should be developed
to add value and appeal to a wider range of tourists. Considering the tourist potential, researchers
propose a variety of tourism related activities for the niche tourist market which includes nature
and community­‑based
tourism, local villages, nature trails, local historical temples, culturally and
architecturally rich settlement patterns, adventure activities like trekking and hiking, bird watching,
nature photography and educational trips. These should suitably be incorporated into offered tourist
packages with a variety of other activities.
It was also found out that majority of the local residents were aware of and feel proud of ecotourism
destination status, granted by Ministry of Tourism, Government of India. As on date there is a gradual
increase in tourist arrivals resulted in the employment opportunities. In context of level of satisfaction
of residents with existing tourism development, the majority of residents feel satisfied with current
PASOS. Revista de Turismo y Patrimonio Cultural. 14 N° 1. Enero 2016 ISSN 1695-7121
S.C. Bagri, Devkant Kala 33
tourism development activities performed by various stakeholders. They believe that tourism is the
best alternative for local residents for gaining economic benefits. Researchers have noticed that the
level of satisfaction among local residents about the nature of development coming up nowadays is
positive and locals believed that these efforts would change their villages in terms of adequate road and
transport facilities, opportunities of jobs, improvement in economics conditions and publicity of their
areas, culture and traditions. However, local residents were annoyed with the government’s apparent
poor performance. Survey of the area and interaction with the residents make it evident that very
less work has been done for the development of roads, capacity building, installation of solar plants
and lighting, waste disposal, signage for the convenience of tourists etc, though provision of funds was
made for its development.
While evaluating tourism infrastructure, all the villages lack primary amenities which is the major
constraint in circuit tourism promotion. Although all major areas of tourism potential in Uttarakhand
state have been upgraded in terms of transportation and accommodation, still there is serious dearth
of easy accessibility, sufficient accommodation units, hygienic eateries, well equipped visitor inter-pretation
centres, hygienic rooms for tourists and site museum showcasing the natural and cultural
heritage. Besides Chakarata­‑Kanasar
link road, most of other roads leading to tourist attractions are
in poor state. As most of the tourist attractions are part of the forest department, it’s major connecting
roads could not get a facelift without proper permission from forest department. Problem of local
transportation still persists and the desired tourist locations can be covered only by hiring jeeps or light
motor vehicles. Researchers opined that effective synergy between forest department and public works
department may ensure proper road maintenance enabling visitors to experience hassle free travel
to tourist destinations. Another major constraint is the availability of accommodation units. In the
name of accommodation, Forest Rest Houses (FRHs) are the best available option for accommodating
the arriving visitors. Four FRHs are on operation and can be booked through the Divisional Forest
Officer and rest of the tourist arriving over there may pitch their tents on available camping sites. It
is most ironic that each FRH provides merely two bed rooms and that too are booked in advance and
poor tourists on not finding accommodation remain helpless except to return back to Dehradun­‑
the
only tourist town with all amenities and facilities. A couple of log huts are also available for the Indian
Forest Service probationary at Kanasar and Budher. Uttarakhand state forest department is required
to increase the bed capacity for the nature enthusiasts interested to stay at destinations like Devban,
Budher and Mundali.
The outcome of field survey and close interaction with other stakeholders further revealed that in
2002, forest department had constituted an Eco­‑Development
Committee (EDC) with the cooperation
of local villagers to properly utilize and conserve existing forest resources. The MOU signed between
Uttarakhand Forest Department and EDC says that 40% of the total earnings from the existing FRHs
shall go to EDC members to meet the recurring expenses. The duties and responsibilities of EDC members
are to provide guide services, escorting and luggage handling to visitors, besides running FRHs. In
compliance to this, five percentage of the total earnings of EDC members from camping is to be remitted
in favor of forest department as a token of fee for utilizing forest resources for tour purposes. However,
poor coordination continuously persists between Forest Department and Regional EDC. The low level
of participation of EDC members has been primarily attributed to the low volumes of tourist arrival
as well as untimely payment of 40% share to EDC members by the department concern. A transparent
system is expected to come into existence shortly and this may enhance the possibility of local people
participation for community based ecotourism.
Residents of the study circuit felt that tourism development activities would bring both, positive
and negative impacts in economic, socio­‑cultural
and environmental aspects. Some respondents had
strong reservation that local residents do not enjoy benefits from the industry to a great extent as
quite a large number of local people are engaged in seasonal jobs including transport facilitators, food
service providers, agri­‑based
products and cultural performers etc. A resident of Indroli eco­‑circuit
zone expressed his feelings differently and stated that, “Although the job here is not very good for us,
it is enough; because we have nothing, only energy…so this job fits me.” Another respondent was of the
view that, “We have no other special skills, and no educational qualification, so we people are satisfied
to go with small eatery.” However, most of the respondents expressed their displeasure over the nature
of tourism jobs available for them. Their major concern was not only low paid compensation for their
hard work and ability, but the nature of job they are asked for to accomplish.
One of the residents categorically stated that locals solely depend on agriculture and tourism because
of not having any further means for their livelihood. In the same line, another resident shared his
PASOS. Revista de Turismo y Patrimonio Cultural. 14 N° 1. Enero 2016 ISSN 1695-7121
34 Residents’ Attitudes toward Tourism Development
thoughts almost in the same way, by putting the responsibility of tourism development on the shoulders
of old age persons in the absence of youths, who have migrated to urban areas in search of bread and
butter, is not the right approach to promote tourism. He further anticipated that Koti­‑Kanasar
tourism
circuit should be developed quickly in order to check outmigration of local youths. A few local people
had deep concerns about its negative aspects. A resident of Kanasar region is apprehensive about the
loss of cultural heritage once the present form of tourism takes place. The ancestral villages may lose
the very heritage of local traditions and cultural milieu. In recent years, efforts have been made to
initiate tourism development plan but ironically local residents have suffered many negative impacts.
Residents also had reservation how increased flow of tourists have increased the costs of living. One
of the residents advocated that once agriculture land was undertaken for tourism infrastructural
facilities, there is a possibilities of facing reduced food production as well as increased living standard.
Local residents also believed that tourism promotion would strengthen, rejuvenate the product life
cycle of tourist attractions by improving the conditions of public facilities such as roads, accommodation,
way side eateries, electricity, water, public convenience facilities and finally helping them to improve their
standard of living. There is also a small segment of locals that perceived positive side of tourism which
is going to change their life. Meeting with local people of existing villages was a valuable experience
and opportunity to understand their culture and to get an insight into the heritage of their culture and
tradition. Few residents considered tourism as an effective way to make the people aware about their
traditions and customs worldwide. Residents also considered that tourism development would be an
incentive for the socio­‑cultural
conservation of community and would provide motivational factor for
local people to stay in the area. Although the study circuit is in the involvement stage, local residents
also perceive that there is a possibility that the young mass may mingle with tourists and lose their
traditional values. Villagers of Pattyur village have developed apprehension about tourists arriving
in surrounding villages and their interaction with locals may erode the local culture. They were also
afraid about adolescent likely to change their mindset and beliefs on being in contact with strangers.
Some of the residents assumed that the study circuit is conservative in nature and therefore, may
not be fully compatible for tourism promotion. Due to the closed culture, locals are not used to deal
with tourists especially foreigners, and they may react aggressively with them which may result in
demarketing of area.
Tourism development is a double­‑edged
sword for local communities, and in view of this, tourism
has both positive and negative impacts on environment. Surprisingly, a small number of residents
hardly have any concerns about environmental changes as in their opinion these are very common
elements in tourism promotion. One resident stated, “If we can earn money, it doesn’t matter that our
environment is damaged a little”. Some of the residents considered that the development of tourism is
a potential way to increase residents’ environmental awareness. On the other hand, few respondents
were apprehensive about the use of their agriculture fields for camping sites if the tourist arrivals
increased in due course of time. Issues such as traffic congestion, pollution, overcrowded destination,
increasing garbage, construction of cemented structures changing local landscape were also pointed
out by residents.
The study also examined perceived impacts of tourism development and promotion across the
demographic characteristics of local residents. The study revealed that residents of different age group
perceived diverse economic and socio­‑cultural
impacts of tourism on the community. These results are
consistent with the studies of Cavus and Tanrisevdi (2003), Harrill (2004), McGehee and Andereck
(2004), Anthony (2007) and Wang and Pfister (2008). Contrary to the studies of Harrill and Potts (2003),
Petrzelka et al. (2005) and Wang and Pfister (2008), the results showed that there was no significant
difference in the economic and socio­‑cultural
impacts across the gender of respondents. However, the
attitude towards environmental impacts varied across male and female respondents. Findings also revealed
that irrespective of educational level, all local residents had similar attitude towards economic impacts
of tourism. Residents attitude towards socio­‑cultural
and environmental impacts were little diverse.
These results are consistent with the studies of various researchers including of Teye et al. (2002),
Wang and Pfister (2008), Shibia (2010), Snyman, (2014) who attempted to understand the attitude
of local residents towards tourism impacts in developing and under­‑developing
tourism destinations.
A focus on systematic infrastructure development, provision for conservation of environment and
culture, imparting soft skills, rationalizing social welfare schemes and increasing local linkages from
tourism operations would go a long way in improving local community attitudes towards tourism.
Handful of residents believed that the community should be involved in the development and planning
PASOS. Revista de Turismo y Patrimonio Cultural. 14 N° 1. Enero 2016 ISSN 1695-7121
S.C. Bagri, Devkant Kala 35
process. Quite a few had suggested that residents should not be involved in the participative process,
their reasons being that it was not realistic for government to listen to everyone’s suggestion, which
is quite time consuming and an inefficient process. Partnership among all relevant stakeholders in
the areas, including government, tourism promotion boards, non­‑governmental
organizations, local
community and local tourism industry should be synergized to ensure that all contribute actively
in the planning and management of emerging tourism opportunities. Community participation and
support should be encouraged and obtained in order to determine strategies and activities which are
beneficial and supportive to the requirements, conditions and culture of the community. Considering
residents as a social object, tourism development authorities should respect them and tourism planners
should involve them in the tourism planning, seek for their opinions, give priority to them in jobs and
strengthen their tourism knowledge and abilities. The examination of residents’ attitude as a platform
for communication is necessary for developing effective plans and helps to manage this emerging rural
tourism destination. Careful strategy for planning and management of tourism are strongly needed
in order to ensure that it is developed on a right path, and hence the opportunities and benefits it can
offer to the locals and other concerned stakeholders, could be increased.
Considering these issues in mind, accommodation, eateries operators, visitor interpretation centre,
museum showcasing the natural and cultural heritage are needed to be developed in order to increase the
number of tourist arrival. A wide range of programs should be conducted to increase tourism awareness,
customer understanding, inter­‑alia
sector support and government involvement in conservation of flora
and fauna and skills development of concerned stakeholders for sustainable tourism development.
Tourism development agencies and local communities must collectively work together to enlarge
tourism attraction area, improve roads and public facilities, invest more to enhance the attractiveness
of rural tourism products and to attract tourists to stay longer and give them a safe and comfortable
rural experience.
8. Conclusion
This research was taken in response to the calls for timely tourism impact research in emerging
tourism destination of rural India. This study was conducted to gain a better understanding of residents’
attitude and provide useful information and suggestions for establishing baseline data of tourism
impacts and lead to holistic development. The circuit is characterized by poorly developed tourism
products, particularly in terms of accommodation, catering and basic infrastructure facilities. Local
community along with concerned stakeholders must promote effective tourism system for attracting
good numbers of tourists. Results of the study are useful in general for further growth since the local
residents understand the extent of tourism impacts. The beneficial economic impacts of tourism have
led the locals to financial prosperity, employment opportunities and better standard of living, but quite
a large number of them were apprehensive about its negative outcomes. Community is keen to promote
tourism and increase tourism gains with a corresponding effort to reduce the consequences deprived by
tourism. Incidentally, different demographical characteristics have diverse attitude towards economic,
socio­‑cultural
and environmental impacts of tourism. It was observed that older residents were less
positively disposed towards tourism and possibly resists changes in economic and social areas because of
their traditional mentality. Male and female residents directly or indirectly involved in tourism industry
advocated tourism promotion for economic and social benefits whereas in environmental context, male
displayed negative or neutral attitudes towards tourism development. Educated residents showed
positive attitudes towards tourism impacts and were supportive for tourism development. This may
indicate that the higher educated residents tend to have higher positive perception towards the areas
improvement in terms of image, facilities and infrastructure improvement as well as cultural promotion.
Concerning to the destination life­‑cycle
model, the responses of local residents confirm that the present
tourism circuit is in apathy stage (Irridex’s model) or involvement stage (Butler model) of destination life
cycle as quite a large number of people openly expressed enthusiasm of tourists visiting the destination.
These findings can assist government, tourism development authorities, policy makers and potential
entrepreneurs and other stakeholders in the implementation of tourism development strategies. Forest
and Wildlife department of Uttarakhand state should constantly watch environmental and ecological
aspects and should maintain the standard level of facilities for tourists and impose appropriate methods
to limit the number of tourist arrivals. Properly monitored tourism development and promotion may
contribute to economic empowerment of the local residents in terms of tourism education, training and
PASOS. Revista de Turismo y Patrimonio Cultural. 14 N° 1. Enero 2016 ISSN 1695-7121
36 Residents’ Attitudes toward Tourism Development
jobs, better standard of living; psychological empowerment by giving a certain level of pride regarding
community; socio­‑cultural
empowerment by strengthening, rejuvenating and exchanging culture
and traditions and bringing the members of community closer; and political empowerment by active
participation. Managing host community expectations, through an understanding of local residents’
attitudes under changing economic, socio­‑cultural
and demographic conditions, will lead to more
efficient, reasonable and sustainable tourism development. This multifaceted approach can address
socially desirable, economically viable and environmentally sustainable tourism.
Bibliography
Andereck, K.L. and McGehee, N.
2008. The Attitudes of community residents towards tourism. Tourism, Recreation and Sustainability:
Linking Culture and Environment, 2ndedn (eds S.F. McCool and R.N. Moisey), CAB International,
236­‑259.
Andereck, K.L. and Vogt, C.A.
2000. The relationship between resident’s attitudes toward tourism and tourism development options.
Journal of Travel Research, 39, 27–36.
Andereck, K.L., Valentine, K.M., Knopf, R.C. and Vogt, C.A.
2005. Residents’ perceptions of community tourism impacts. Annals of Tourism Research, 32 (4), 1056–1076.
Andriotis, K.
2005. Community groups perceptions and preferences to tourism development: Evidence from Crete.
Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Research, 29 (1), 67­‑90.
Anthony, B.
2007. The dual nature of parks: Attitudes of neighbouring communities to Kruger National Park, South
Africa. Environmental Conservation 34 (3), 236–245.
1993. Ap, J., and Crompton, J. L. Residents’ strategies for responding to tourism impacts. Journal of
Travel Research, 32 (1), 47­‑50.
Bagri, S.C. and Mishra, J.M.
2005. Mountain Tourism in Lata and Tolma villages of Nanda Devi Biosphere Reserve (NDBR): A study
of stakeholder’s perception and forecasting future facilities and amenities. Journal of Tourism, 7
(1), 13­‑40.
Bagri, S.C, Babu, S. and Kukreti, M.
2010. Human resource practices in Hotels: A study from the tourist state of Uttarakhand, India, Journal
of Human Resources in Hospitality and Tourism, 9 (3), 286­‑299.
Bagri, S.C., Babu, S. and Bhatt, V.P.
2013. Innovation and competitiveness in ecotourism: A view from the Koti­‑Kanasar,
Indroli, Patyur
circuit in Uttarakhand Himalaya, India. Journal of Tourism, 14 (1), 109­‑137.
Brida, J.G., Osti, L. and Faccioli, M.
2011. Residents’ perception and attitudes towards tourism impacts: a case study of the small rural
community of Folgaria (Trentino­‑Italy).
Benchmarking: An International Journal, 18 (3), 359­‑385.
Brunt, P. and Courtney, P.
1999. Host perceptions of socio­‑cultural
impacts. Annals of Tourism Research, 26 (2), 493­‑515.
Butler, R.W.
1980. The concept of a tourist area cycle of evolution: implications for management of resources. The
Canadian Geographer/Le Géographe Canadien, 24 (1), 5­‑12.
Catibog­‑Sinha,
C. and Wen, J.
2008. Sustainable tourism planning and management model for protected natural areas: Xishuangbanna
Biosphere Reserve, South China. Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, 13 (2), 145­‑162.
Cavus, S., and Tanrisevdi, A.
2003. Residents’ attitudes toward tourism development: A case study in Kusadasi, Turkey. Tourism
Analysis, 7(3/4), 259­‑269.
Chand, M. and Vivek.
2012. Residents’ perceptions towards sustainable tourism development in Manali region. South Asian
Journal of Tourism and Heritage, 5 (1), 157­‑178.
PASOS. Revista de Turismo y Patrimonio Cultural. 14 N° 1. Enero 2016 ISSN 1695-7121
S.C. Bagri, Devkant Kala 37
Deery, M., Jago, L. and Fredline, L.
2012. Rethinking social impacts of tourism research: A new research agenda. Tourism Management,
33. 64­‑73.
Diedrich, A. and García­‑Buades,
E.
2009. Local perceptions of tourism as indicators of destination decline. Tourism Management, 30 (4),
512­‑521.
Dimitriadis, E., Papadopoulos, D. and Kaltsidou, D.
2013. Attitudes towards tourism development: Residents’ perceptions in the islands of Lemnos and
Hydra. Tourismos: An International Multidisciplinary Journal of Tourism, 8 (1), 133­‑151.
Doxey, G.
1975. A Causation theory of visitor residents irritants: Methodology and research inferences: The impact of
tourism. 6th Annual Conference Proceedings of the Travel Research Association. San Diego, 195­‑198.
Dyer, P., Gursoy, D., Sharma, B. and Carter, J.
2007. Structural modeling of resident perceptions of tourism and associated development on the Sunshine
Coast, Australia. Tourism Management, 28, 409­‑422.
Geneletti, D. and Dawa, D.
2009. Environmental impact assessment of mountain tourism in developing regions: A study in Ladakh,
Indian Himalaya. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 29 (4), 229­‑242.
Gupta, S.K. and Prakash, V.
2014. Assessment of rural destination residents’ attitude toward tourism development in Uttarakhand,
India: A research note. International Journal of Qualitative Research in Services, 1 (3), 192­‑200.
Haralambopoulos, N., and Pizam, A.
1996. Perceived impacts of tourism: The case of Samos. Annals of Tourism Research, 23, 503–526.
Harrill, R.and Potts, T.
2003. Tourism planning in historic districts. Journal of American Planning Association. 69 (3), 233­‑244.
Harrill, Rich
2004. Residents’ attitudes toward tourism development: A literature review with implication for tourism
planning. Journal of Planning Literature, 18 (3), 251−266.
Huh, C. and Vogt, C.A.
2008. Changes in residents’ attitudes toward tourism over time: a cohort analytical approach. Journal
of Travel Research, 46 (4), 446­‑455.
Iroegbu, H., and J. S. Chen
2001. Urban residents’ reaction toward tourism development: Do subgroups exist?.Tourism Analysis,
6 (2), 155­‑161.
Jago, L., Fredline, L. and Deery, M.
2006. Tourism in small communities: risk and benefits. Tourism Review International, 10 (1­‑2),
91­‑101.
Jurowski, C. and Gursoy, D.
2004. Distance effects on residents´ attitudes toward tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 31 (2), 296­‑304.
Karanth, K.K. and Nepal, S.K.
2012. Local residents perception of benefits and losses from protected areas in India and Nepal.
Environmental Management, 49 (2), 372­‑386.
Kayat, K.
2002. Power, social exchanges and tourism in Langkawi: Rethinking resident perceptions. International
Journal of Tourism Research, 4 (3), 171­‑191.
Kiper, T.
2011. The determination of nature walk routes regarding nature tourism in North­‑Western
Turkey:
Şarköy district. Journal of Food, Agriculture and Environment, 9 (3&4), 622­‑632.
Kuniyal, J.C. and Vishvakarma, S.C.R.
2004. Tourism in Kullu valley: An environmental assessment. G.B. Pant Institute of Himalayan
Environment and Development, Dehradun: Bishan Singh and Mahendra Pal Singh.
Kuuder, C. W., Bagson, E. and Oscar, A.I.
2013. Livelihood enhancement through ecotourism; A case of Mognorieco village near Mole National
Park, Damongo, Ghana. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 4 (4), 128­‑137.
Kuvan, Y. and Akan, P.
2005. Residents attitudes toward general and forest­‑related
impacts of tourism: The case of Belek,
Antalya. Tourism Management, 26 (5), 691 – 706.
PASOS. Revista de Turismo y Patrimonio Cultural. 14 N° 1. Enero 2016 ISSN 1695-7121
38 Residents’ Attitudes toward Tourism Development
Lal, B. B.
1955. Excavation at Hastinapur and other excavation in theUpper Ganga and Sutlej basins. Ancient
India, 10–11,5–152.
Lankford, S. V. and Howard, D. R.
1994. Developing tourism impact attitude scale. Annals of Tourism Research, 21 (1), 121 – 139.
Lepp, A.
2007. Residents’ attitudes towards tourism in Bigodi village, Uganda. Tourism Management, 28 (3),
876–885.
Madrigal, R.
1995. Residents’ perceptions and the role of government. Annals of Tourism Research, 22 (1), 86­‑102.
Martin, K.
2008. Tourism as social contest: opposing local evaluations of the tourist encounter. Tourism, Culture
and Communication, 8 (2), 59­‑69.
Marzuki, A.
2009. Impacts of tourism development. Anatolia: An International Journal of Tourism and Hospitality
Research, 20 (2), 450­‑455.
Mason, P. and Cheyne, J.
2000. Residents’ attitudes to proposed tourism development. Annals of Tourism Research, 27 (2), 391 – 411.
McCool, S. and Martin, S.
1994. Community attachment and attitudes toward tourism development. Journal of Travel Research,
32 (3), 29­‑34.
McGehee, N. and Andereck, K.
2004. Factors predicting rural residents’ support of tourism. Journal of Travel Research, 43 (2), 131­‑140.
Milman, A. and Pizam, A.
1988. Social impacts of tourism on central Florida. Annals of Tourism Research, 15, 191­‑204.
Nunkoo, R. and Ramkissoon, H.
2011. Developing a community support model for tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 38 (3), 964–988.
Nunkoo, R., and Gursoy, D.
2012. Residents’ support for tourism: An identity perspective. Annals of Tourism Research, 39 (1), 243­‑268.
Pappas, N.V.
2008. City of Rhodes: Residents’ attitudes toward tourism impacts and development. Anatolia: An
International Journal of Tourism and Hospitality Research, 19 (1), 51­‑70.
Petrzelka, P., Krannich, R.S., Brehm, J., and Trentelman, C.K.
2005. Rural tourism and gendered nuances. Annals of Tourism Research, 32 (4), 1121­‑1137.
Puczkó, L. and Rátz, T.
2000. Tourist and resident perceptions of the physical impacts of tourism at Lake Balaton, Hungary:
Issues for sustainable tourism management. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 8 (6), 458­‑478.
Rao, K.S., Nautiyal, S., Maikhuri, R.K and Saxena, K.G.
2003. Local peoples’ knowledge, aptitude and perceptions of planning and management issues in Nanda
Devi biosphere reserve, India. Environmental Management 31 (2), 168–181.
Rastegar, H.
2010. Tourism development and residents’ attitude: A case study of Yazd, Iran. Tourismos: An International
Multidisciplinary Journal of Tourism, 5 (2), 203­‑211.
2007. Richa. Sustainable nature based tourism: A case study of Kerala, Sikkim and Himachal in Bansal,
S.P. Cutting edge research in tourism emerging issues and challenges (ed), Abhishek Publication.
290 ­‑325.
Seyfi, S., Nikjoo, A.H., Rezaei, O. and Abolfazl Siyamian, A.
2013. Attitudes of local residents toward the development of tourism in a developing society: The case
of Torqabeh, Iran. Tourismos: An International Multidisciplinary Journal of Tourism, 8 (2), 289­‑299.
Sharma, B., Dyer, P., Carter, J. and Gursoy, D.
2008. Exploring residents’ perceptions of the social impacts of tourism on the Sunshine Coast, Australia.
International Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Administration, 9 (3), 288­‑311.
Shibia, M.G.
2010. Determinants of attitudes and perceptions on resource use and management of Marsabit National
Reserve, Kenya. Journal of Human Ecology, 30 (1), 55–62.
PASOS. Revista de Turismo y Patrimonio Cultural. 14 N° 1. Enero 2016 ISSN 1695-7121
S.C. Bagri, Devkant Kala 39
Simão, J. and Môsso, A.
2013. Residents´ perceptions towards tourism development: the case of Sal Island. International Journal
of Development Issues, 12 (2), 140­‑157.
Singh, R.B. and Mishra, D.K.
2004. Green tourism in mountain regions: Reducing vulnerability and promoting people and place
centric development in the Himalayas. Journal of Mountain Science, 1 (1), 57­‑64.
Singh, R. B., Mal, S., and Kala, C. P.
2009. Community responses to mountain tourism: A case in Bhyundar valley, Indian Himalaya. Journal
of Mountain Science, 6 (4), 394­‑404.
Sirakaya, E. Teye, V., and Sönmez, S. F.
2002. Understanding residents’ support for tourism development in the Central Region of Ghana.
Journal of Travel Research, 41, 57­‑67.
Snaith, T., and Haley, A.
1994. Tourism’s impact on host lifestyle realities. Tourism: The State Of The Art. London: John Wiley
and Sons.
Snyman, S.
2014. Assessment of the main factors impacting community members’ attitudes towards tourism and
protected areas in six southern African countries. Koedoe, 56 (2), 1­‑12.
Teye, V., Sönmez, S.F. and Sirakaya, E.
2002. Resident attitudes toward tourism development. Annals of Tourism Research, 29 (3), 668–688.
Tomljenovic, R., and Faulkner, B.
1999. Tourism and older residents in a Sunbelt resort. Annals of Tourism Research, 27 (1), 93­‑114.
Vargas­‑Sánchez,
A., Porras­‑Bueno,
N. and Plaza­‑Mejía,
M.
2011. Explaining residents’ attitudes to tourism: Is a universal model possible?. Annals of tourism
research, 38 (2), 460­‑480.
Wang, Y. and Pfister, R.E.
2008. Resident’s attitudes toward tourism and perceived personal benefits in a rural community. Journal
of Travel Research, 47 (1), 84–93.
Zhang, J., Inbakaran, R.J., and Jackson, M.
2006. Understanding community attitudes towards tourism and host­‑guest
interaction in the urban­‑rural
border region. Tourism Geographies, 8 (2), 182­‑204.
Recibido: 04/03/2015
Reenviado: 29/04/2015
Aceptado: 05/05/2015
Sometido a evaluación por pares anónimos