THE ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIO-CULTURAL IMPACTS OF TRAVEL AND TOURISM

By

David PT Harcombe

Lecturer,
School of Business Administration,
Assumption University of Thailand
Email : bbadhc@au.ac.th

Abstract

Travel and tourism's economic benefits are usually considered, on balance, to be beneficial (Cooper et al, 1993; and Harcombe DPT, 1999). However, the situation is much less clear-cut when the environmental and/or socio-cultural effects of a large and continued flow of people visiting a place, or places, are considered.

This analysis, therefore, follows on from the previous article about the economic impacts of travel and tourism (Harcombe DPT, 1999), by first examining tourism's environmental effects. It observes that while there are some positive consequences, the negative environmental impacts of travel and tourism are much more numerous, even when considering the gains provided by the protection of such vital life-sustaining elements as air and water quality, the preservation of wildlife and naturally occurring vegetation, and the conservation of the best features of the 'built' (i.e. human-made) environment.

The study then assesses the socio-cultural consequences for host communities of the routine presence of large numbers of visitors. The reactions of both tourists and residents are considered, as well as the effects of the travel trade and its customers on employment, and the prevailing values, attitudes, customs, and morals etc. to be found in host communities.

Despite the many negative environmental and socio-cultural consequences of tourism that this study identifies, the principal aim of tourism planners and the travel industry is to ensure that high levels of visitor enjoyment are achieved at destinations and attractions because of the financial benefits that arise from this. However, their secondary objective is clearly one of minimizing any environmental and socio-cultural negatives which may accompany economic success. An essential pre-requisite for this is to retain the host community's continued agreement that the tourism-induced changes that may occur to their way of life and the landscape around them are broadly acceptable ones.

INTRODUCTION

As said earlier in the abstract to this article, tourism's economic impacts are usually considered to be beneficial (Cooper C et al, 1993; and Harcombe DPT, 1999). This is due to four main factors, which are:

i) the workings of the multiplier effect,
ii) the receipt by traveller-receiving areas of tourist-provided foreign exchange in exchange for local purchases,
iii) the stimulus to local employment that both these provide, and
iv) the increased taxation revenue that flows to the government because of all this increased economic activity.

However, the benefits are not nearly so pronounced when tourism's environmental and socio-cultural impacts are considered. While some gains in these two categories can usually be identified, a significant number of negative aspects have also been frequently observed (Mathieson A & Wall G, 1982; and Cooper C et al, 1993).

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS

When considering the impacts of tourism and the travel industry, both on the environment and also on societies and their prevailing cultural frameworks, three important factors need to be borne in mind. These are that:

1. tourism's impacts are seldom attributable to specific individual travellers, but instead to the sometimes very large numbers of visitors passing through some tourism destinations. Indeed, these can often massively exceed a destination's resident population - sometimes by up to 100 or more times over a year. A good example of this is Glastonbury in the UK. It has around 700,000 visitors per year, yet its population is only 7,000 (Harcombe DPT, 1997). This inbalance inevitably changes a destination's environment and lifestyle permanently.
2. Despite this problem of excess numbers, much of the environmental damage commonly attributed to tourism may in fact be partly, or even wholly, caused by local residents, modern economic development, and various local commercial and industrial activities etc.
3. In addition, tourism and the environment are often in a symbiotic relationship in that they both depend on each other. As a result, the protection of the environment can often be justified on the commercial and financial returns the environment can earn through tourists' interest in it, their consequent desire to visit it, and their preparedness to spend money while there (Waters SR, 1966; and Mathieson A & Wall G, 1982).

Tourism and the Environment

Travellers and the tourism industry, and the environment which they respectively visit and profit from, can have either a beneficial symbiotic relationship with each other, or be in conflict (Mathieson A & Wall G, 1982). This means that, when they are operating in mutual cooperation rather than in conflict with each other, tourism and the environment, can, and do, receive benefits from each other - and therefore can sustain each other.

This requires the conservation and preservation of natural areas and scenic land, wildlife and forest reserves, historic monuments, and archaeological sites etc. Also needed are the continued operation and routine maintenance of these existing tourism assets, and the extension of environmental consciousness through the provision of relevant public information and education.

This symbiotic relationship has six positive effects. These are:

1. the spread of the conservation movement (Inskeep E, 1991),
2. the creation of national parks,
3. the protection of landscapes,
4. the conserving of city centres - both their ancient features and as places to live in,
5. the spillover effects which often occur - i.e. other good or useful environmental features nearby (but which are not sufficiently important on their own to justify their conservation) are protected by their proximity to an area of visitor interest and its related attractions, and
6. the development of what is variously called nature, 'green' or eco-tourism - i.e. those tourism activities which are designed to operate within, while protecting or avoiding damaging, the existing natural environment of plants, animals, and landscapes etc. This type of tourism also includes non-exploitative contacts with those minority rural groups who live in close harmony with the natural world around them.

Conflicts

But as Mathieson A & Wall G observe (1982), the travel industry and the environment may be in conflict. This can be over the use and/or protection of flora and fauna, water and air quality, and landscapes (i.e. both places of scenic attractiveness, and buildings of architectural quality and/or visually pleasing design) and nature - e.g. parks, the countryside, coast lines, mountains, and other fragile areas etc. An essential feature of such situations is that conflicts over air and water are conflicts over those vital elements which sustain life.

Tourism's Effects on Water Quality and its Supply

There are several positives. Tourists demand clean water for their drinking and washing needs. This usually leads to improved clean water quality control. In addition, the tendency for visitors to prefer those attractions which contain some kind of water-based feature leads to the conservation of such places, and their non-pollution based use. This especially applies in those cases where these attractions are specifically water-based, such as lakes, waterfalls, the seaside, swimming pools, spas, and water-based theme parks etc.

But the negatives are usually more numerous. As Cooper C et al (1993) note, these include:

1. poor quality drinking water which is a health hazard - often producing diarrhoea, and even cholera, among tourists. Alternatively, the best water may be reserved for tourists, possibly causing only a lower quality to be available for local residents, and so potentially endangering their health instead.
2. There may be changes in hydrological patterns caused by the heavy demands for water by visitors and the travel industry generally. Ground and surface water supplies may be depleted by or for tourist use (e.g. by swimming pools, golf courses, hotel and resort gardens, laundries, and bedroom shower facilities etc) so reducing the quantity of water available to residents.
3. Rubbish and nutrients from hotel gardens and recreational developments, e.g. golf courses, may produce water-born algae growth which kill fish. This occurs because the normal oxygen level in the water is reduced by the algae's often rapidly-expanding presence (Wall G & Wright C, 1977).
4. Poor sea, river, and lake water quality may be the inevitable result of inadequate effluent disposal systems, which follow the rapid development of income earning facilities (e.g. hotels and restaurants etc) without a large enough infrastructure being constructed around them. This was a common problem around European sea-side towns until recently.
5. Sewerage, diesel, and oil fuel spills may pollute the water supply (Wall G & Wright C, 1977).
6. Recreational boating may include outboard motor use, so causing pollution through excess noise, and also some waste fuel emissions (Mathieson A & Wall G, 1982). vii) Finally, acid rain (partly caused by vehicle emissions) may damage forest areas and ancient buildings - as has sometimes occurred in Europe - while at the same time polluting lakes and rivers, and poisoning fish.

The Possibility of Overstatement

But as Cooper C et al (1993) warn, we should be aware that there is a danger of overstating tourism's effects when considering its environmental impacts. For example, sewerage, diesel, and oil fuel spills may occur whether tourists are visiting the place or not - being caused instead by the local community or industry. Industrial waste, rubbish and nutrients from modern agriculture (especially fertilisers) may be much more serious pollutants than any water run-offs from tourism facilities etc. Finally, modern developments in industry and agriculture, and increasing host community population numbers and affluence, may impose much greater strains on the environment than any visitors do (however many of them there may actually be).

Tourism's Effects on Air Quality

The main positive effects are the travel industry's and visitor's pressures for improved fresh air quality, and the controls introduced to achieve this. But again there are several negatives, such as:

1. those situations where transport pollutes the air, whether by aircraft, cars, trains, trucks, buses, boats, or ships etc. However, we should remember that industry and local residents may also be guilty of creating air pollution.
2. Noise pollution can be caused by tourist activities, particularly transportation and night time entertainments. However, local industry, and commercial and residential traffic, are also frequently guilty of this.
3. Global warming and the green house effect have been reliably attributed to hydrocarbon emissions, partly from motor vehicles producing carbon dioxide (CO2) - though there are other major non-transport CO2 sources, especially heavy industry, power stations, offices and houses etc, which should not be overlooked.
4. Finally, ozone (O3) layer depletion is believed to be partly caused by exhaust gases being released by jet aircraft at high altitude - though fluoro-hydrocarbons released at ground level by aerosol sprays and leaking air conditioners are probably much more serious culprits. Ozone layer depletion may also cause skin cancer (mainly in the Southern Hemisphere - but in some northern parts too), and also increasing glare worldwide leading to eye damage - though there are also other significant sources of glare (e.g. computers being used by people over longish periods without the protection of anti-glare screens).

Fauna or Wildlife

Animals, both wild and domesticated, are important objects of tourist interest. As Mathieson A & Wall G (1982) observe, this has led to several positive developments, such as the improvement and development of parks, zoos, and wildlife sanctuaries, the protection of endangered species, the prohibition of hunting, and the management of animal diseases - particularly among domestic, farm, and zoo animals.

However, as Green DH et al (1990) note, there are also numerous negatives.
These include:

1. disturbance (often by tourist minibuses) to wild animals in their hunting and reproductive roles,
2. the disruptive effects of some safari, whale watching, and scuba diving tours - with tourists getting too close to animals and fish. However, some wild creatures (e.g. dolphins) may actually enjoy some of their contacts with humans as long as it is non-injurious and non-exploitative, while other animals - including even predatory ones (e.g. a mother cheetah with her cubs) - may seek refuge near a tourist vehicle if another larger predator, e.g. a lioness, is nearby,
3. the capture and removal of wildlife from their natural habitat - for human entertainment in circuses, zoos, theme parks, water parks, bird shows etc,
4. the extinction of animals through hunting (although this is sometimes claimed to be a species control measure that prevents farmers from eradicating allegedly nuisance-creating wildlife species, e.g. red deer in south-western England), and/or poaching,
5. tourism developments affecting animal habitats, and/or disrupting their natural migration routes,
6. migration by some species away from areas where tourist facilities are (though other rodent species, such as rats, may be attracted to them),
7. the accidental killing of wild animals and reptiles on roads (though this is also frequently done by normal commercial and residential traffic),
8. the urbanisation of wild animals, e.g. both European foxes living off household food which has been discarded by humans as waste, and also those rodents that accumulate around populated areas,
9. killing of wild life to supply stuffed animals either as souvenirs, or as furs and skins for the clothing trade,
10. animals killed in forest fires caused by careless visitors - though many forest fires are probably more likely to be caused by lightning (North America), arsonists (south-eastern Australia), and local farmers stimulating new growth etc (northern parts of Western Australia).

Flora

On the positive side, and according to Inskeep E (1991), tourist interest in a place's flora or naturally occurring vegetation can lead to improved conservation, the cleaning up of previously polluted areas, and the creation of national parks. In addition, rare flora, such as plants and trees, can be bred and/or developed for research purposes. At the same time, otherwise marginal land in certain mountainous areas can be used for tourist purposes - such as ski slopes.

But there can be negative results from human recreation in wild areas, especially if it is excessive. This can:

• reduce species diversity and replacement rates,
• lead to the compaction of soil, creating increased surface run-offs and erosion along pathways, 4WD (i.e. 4-wheel drive) vehicle routes - and even horse trail tracks (Mathieson A & Wall G, 1982). Although these tracks are usually quite narrow, they can occasionally become very large indeed, particularly when caused by 4WD sight-seeing tour buses which sometimes roam freely over East African game parks - despite local regulations restricting them in theory to properly-built roads only,
• damage vegetation through humans walking or skiing on it (skiing can damage the vegetation underneath a ski slope's compacted snow),
• create litter problems in sparsely populated areas where rubbish collection services may barely exist (e.g. litter left by trekkers in the Himalayas),
• cause the destruction of vegetation through the gathering by tourists of firewood for camping or plants as souvenirs (also in the Himalayas), and
• increase the risk of landslides and avalanches (Green DH et al, 1990), especially near mountainside tourist developments (though forestry activities can cause this too).

Environmental Features and Resources

Though these are also affected by general economic developments, visitor activity may cause an increase in fire risks (Mathieson A & Wall G, 1982), and changes in the numbers of, and/or actual, vegetation types - through clearance or planting - to accommodate tourism facilities. Careless tourist use or abuse may also damage geological features, such as caves, coast lines, dunes, reefs, river banks, and lake sides etc.

Unfortunately, delinquent tourist misbehaviour can also occur, including the deliberate looting of ancient historical sites. A 1999 edition of The Economist, a British weekly magazine, reported instances the previous year of foreign tourists using backhoes, metal detectors, and air compressors to loot two adjacent ancient sites in Egypt. Fortunately the looters were discovered in time, and stopped.

Urban Areas and Buildings

There may be many changes due to increased demands for travel and tourism. According to Green DH et al (1990), these may include :

• land being removed from primary (i.e. mainly agricultural) production to provide more room for tourism developments,
• changes in residential, retail and/or industrial land uses (e.g. from private houses to guest houses),
• changes to the urban fabric (e.g. unrestrained road, and car and coach park, construction), and
• the emergence of noticeable contrasts between those urban and residential areas developed for tourists and those developed for the host population. This may include segregating tourist locations away from local residents when the development is in an urban setting, e.g. The Strip in Las Vegas (USA). Alternatively, it may involve locating them on small islands where the only residents are the resort staff and tourists. This applies on several islands in the Maldive Islands group, and also on such islands as Erakor, Mele and Bokissa Islands in Vanuatu (Harcombe DPT, 1991), and Anuha and Uepi Islands in the Solomon Islands group (Harcombe DPT, 1988).

In addition, the built environment has at times played host to new tourism developments whose most noticeable features were the poor quality, or inappropriateness, of their architectural designs, especially at some purpose-built resorts. Similarly, commercial and shopping centre traffic congestion has often been an unwanted by-product of the successful promotion of historic towns, due to increased tourist numbers. Yet, on the other hand, it is easy to blame an apparent deterioration in an ancient town's ambience and general pleasantness on the increased quantity of visitors, when often the local population's new prosperity is an equal cause of much of the area's urban congestion.

Visual Impact

As Mathieson A & Wall G (1982) observe, there may be negative effects on a tourist area's general visual attractiveness, following the:

• construction of new built-up areas (especially if urban sprawl or ribbon development occurs),
• use of new or inappropriate architectural styles (by using different designs from most existing local buildings - and often building much taller ones also),
• appearance of often unsightly advertising hoardings, billboards, poster sites, and the excessive use of neon lights, and
• provision of specialised tourism facilities (e.g. car parks, ski slope chairlifts etc),
• widespread construction of unsightly overhead electricity power lines, and
• production and/or dropping of much more litter than previously.

Infrastructure

Unplanned tourism development can lead to such tourist over-use that overloading may affect all types of infrastructure. Excessive tourist numbers can overload roads, railways, car parks, telecommunications systems, waste disposal services, and gas, electricity, and water supplies etc (Green DH et al, 1990). In addition, unanticipated requirements for new and/or additional infrastructure can arise, as well as a need to adapt places specifically for tourist use. This sometimes can involve land reclamation and/or modifications. Examples include sea wall construction and maintenance; though residential, agricultural, mining, and industrial developments etc, can also produce similar requirements for certain specialised facilities and their routine repair.

The Restoration of Buildings

A positive effect of increased tourism on the man-made or 'built' environment is the re-use of disused buildings by the tourism industry as amenities (e.g. hotels and restaurants) and attractions (e.g. museums and craft workshops etc). In addition, tourist interest may lead to the preservation and restoration of significant historic buildings and sites as attractions (Cooper C et al, 1993), and also the purchase and restoration of derelict buildings by individual visitors as 2nd homes for their holiday use. Similarly, other under-used buildings at tourism destinations may be converted to retirement homes for elderly people who visited that particular place (frequently a seaside town) in their earlier years, and who now wish to retire there.

Competition

This is not always beneficial especially if displacement effects occur. Competition (following the opening of other newer attractions) may start the decline of existing tourist attractions or areas, thereby causing a displacement effect. These facilities, now that they are surplus, may soon become derelict (Green DH et al, 1990). This is because the demand for their use is no longer sufficient to generate adequate profits for their owners, now that their local area has become less busy. In addition, there may be increased competition for residential land and/or buildings as domestic tourists and retirees move to the resort area to live there, and country people - especially farm workers - leave their previously (usually) lower-paid rural work for the supposedly glamorous tourist industry.

Planning for Environmental Sustainability

In most modern societies (e.g. the UK and much of Europe), governments and/or local authorities have the responsibility of assessing how the environment will be affected, and its sustainability ensured, whenever major commercial or industrial developments (including transportation and tourism projects) are proposed for environmentally sensitive or fragile areas. According to Cooper C et al, (1993), their procedures are usually to:

1. use an environmental impact assessment (or EIA) to assess each project's likely environmental impact,
2. require that their normal pre-determined guidelines for environmentally sensitive areas are followed,
3. only permit those developments which follow these guidelines,
4. reject those applications for developments which appear to breach the official rules, and
5. use appropriate legal procedures to punish those developers whose tourism developments, once they are in progress or have been completed, are found to have actually broken these rules.

However, these laudable rules controlling the planning of all major new developments, including travel and tourism ones, are not without their opponents. Consequently, ensuring that these regulations are observed requires determination on the local authorities' part. It also requires the political will to resist those who might wish to short-circuit the whole process for their own immediate gain, regardless of whatever long-term damage to the local environment and/or community their greed and impatience causes.

Summary

Tourism can have two contrasting relationships. As Mathieson A & Wall G (1982)observe, one of these is a symbiotic one where tourism and the environment are mutually supportive, while the other relationship is one of conflict. Examples of the latter case are where vegetation is damaged and animal life disrupted. Yet, at the same time, an increased visitor presence can lead to the preservation of ancient sites, and the retention of certain elderly disused buildings, as tourism attractions and/or facilities.

Because, therefore, of the varied effects of new tourism developments and mass tourist arrivals, the best environmental response is careful planning by the national and local authorities, once the new visitor trends appear to be firmly established. Indeed, normal planning guidelines should always be faithfully followed, especially whenever there is pressure for these to be bent to satisfy the demands of local political or commercial pressure groups. Otherwise some degree of unwelcome environmental change, or even damage, is an almost inevitable consequence.

SOCIO-CULTURAL IMPACTS

Socio-cultural impacts are the third principal consequence, along with economic and environmental ones, of large scale visitor arrivals at tourism destinations. As De Kadt E (1979) and Cooper C et al (1993) both observe, there are three sources of socio-cultural impacts at such places. These are tourists, hosts, and their (i.e. tourist/host) interactions.

A basic factor in this relationship is that hosts gain economically (or usually intend to) from their contact with visitors, but they or their community may experience some unexpected (and sometimes also undesirable) socio-cultural consequences. At the same time, the visitor is a stranger and therefore may be vulnerable to being cheated by the local people - or even robbed.

Varied Tourist Reactions

Tourists can have a variety of reactions to their travel experience. Some visitors will be very aware that they are away from home, and as a result feel released from their normal inhibitions (Mathieson A & Wall G, 1982) against some forms of anti-social personal behaviour.

Other tourists may experience culture shock. This is the emotional reaction of travellers when they go to places (usually foreign countries, but also those parts of their own country where the customs and lifestyles are very different from their own home area) which are markedly different from what they are used to - especially if there are language differences also. This can lead to tensions, emotional withdrawal, and sometimes actual positive dislike by visitors of some of the places they visit.

At the same time, other visitors - especially those who are very experienced travellers - may feel quite at home in their new surroundings. This is especially so if there are few language, cultural or currency differences; or if these particular tourists have visited the place before, and for long enough to feel at ease there.

The Purpose of the Visit

The degree of impact may be affected by the traveller's reason for visiting. For example, a business visitor will have a very different contact and/or effect on the place he or she visits (e.g. to a factory or city centre office in Hong Kong) than a leisure tourist will have during a charter package holiday (e.g. to a coastal resort in Thailand or Indonesia etc).

These differences in levels of impact occur because most of the time the business person spends on his or her trip is likely to be restricted to the commercial sector. In contrast, many package tourists may spend much of their holiday within their 'environmental bubble' (Hassan R, 1995) - i.e. the protective environment that the hotel or resort provides. This offers them both a protection from the alien culture at the destination, and also a temporary home there for these visitors to hide in if need be. However, other more experienced travellers may do quite the opposite, instead using their hotel as not much more than a place to sleep in.

The Nature of Mass Tourist Relationships

There are three main features to tourists' behaviour during their contacts with host communities (especially when they are in large numbers). Their contacts are predominantly brief and spontaneous, asymmetrical (i.e. unequal and regarded differently by both host and visitors, according to Inskeep E, 1991), and often occur during a short but high-density tourist season.

The majority of these host/visitor contacts are commercial, and have nil, or very little, prior planning. In addition, they are typified by the asymmetrical material or economic differences that frequently exist between visitors and hosts. Tourists are often perceived to be both wealthy and coming from different backgrounds to their hosts. Consequently, the hosts may be tempted to over-charge.

Demonstration Effects

These are the effects of those situations where someone sees another person doing a particular thing, and - as a result - wants to do or have the same things themselves (Mathieson A & Wall G, 1982). The host/tourist encounter (where this demonstration effect may occur) is likely to have the following features:

In addition, the tourists' paraphanalia, such as his or her cameras, holiday clothes, credit cards and foreign money etc, may also create a demonstration effect. This occurs when the local host population (especially its younger members, including those of the local elite) want to emulate (i.e. also experience and imitate) the tourists' affluence. As Mathieson A & Wall G (1982) observe, young members of host cultures are particularly susceptible to such demonstration effects.

This may involve copying the visitors' consumption patterns - leading to increased demands for imported goods. Alternatively, it may involve imitating the tourists' behaviour, sometimes to the distress of the local older generation.

This copying behaviour by younger members of the local population may include making public displays of affection, wearing skimpy or very casual clothes, and/or adopting the visitors' interests and/or social and political opinions etc. Certain of the more conservative members of the local population may feel a considerable degree of distress at this behaviour, and consequently experience a reverse form of culture shock.

However, these demonstration effects can also be caused or reinforced by the media, especially TV, radio, and glossy magazines, as well as popular music, advertising, and movies etc. As a result, therefore, the adoption of foreign fashions and behaviours may only be partly attributable to travel and tourism.

A possible remedy against demonstration effects is the tourist resort. Sometimes also referred to as 'tourist bubbles' or 'tourist ghettoes', these are places where tourists reside in custom-built protective areas or resorts, which are isolated from the mass of the host community (Mathieson A & Wall G, 1982). Because of this isolation (according to this theory), the visitors' customs and behaviours are likely to have very little impact on the local population.

But not all tourists like such places. They may feel trapped inside them and artificially separated from the local community, whose way of life is one of the destination's features that has attracted them - and therefore generated their visit.

Culture Brokers

Because of the special environment at resorts, these places are usually composed of:

tourists + culture brokers

Culture brokers are those people whose daily work provides a protective barrier between the tourist and the local community. They explain the local host society or community to the tourists, and try to assist the visitors to understand its customs and ways.

People working as waiters, stewards, receptionists, guides, couriers, and as members of aircraft cabin crews etc, usually fill a culture broker role. They are normally multi-lingual (Evans N, 1976), and able to understand most tourists' needs, including calculating foreign currencies etc.

Culture brokers are sometimes called 'marginal men or women' because they are always at the edge, or margin, of the tourist/host encounter. Because of this process of satisfying their tourist customers' needs, many of these so-called marginal men and women come to adopt the tourists' world view and lifestyles. As a result, they may also become marginalised (ie separated or distanced) from their own culture.

Impacts on Employment and Jobs

The travel and tourism industry offers many work opportunities. These create social change through new wealth, new expectations, and new working habits. Often these new opportunities involve inward domestic migration to work at the new tourism centres (sometimes also including migration across national borders), and outward migration from other (often agricultural, or old depressed industrial) areas to the new tourist localities.

Significantly, these new work opportunities are often most suited to women and young people in general. Consequently, tourism work can give both these groups a greater degree of economic independence than they had previously (Mathieson A & Wall G, 1982). This often sets them free of earlier social systems, especially those where women are, or were in the past, dependent on patriarchal societies (i.e. those dominated by elderly men).

However, despite these new jobs that tourism may bring, there may also be some negative impacts that the new tourist industry workers may experience. Their new work may only be available during periods of peak travel demand (i.e. the few months of the tourist high season). In addition, long and inconvenient working hours may be required of them (including nights and weekend shifts etc), and wage and salary levels may be lower than in other comparable white collar jobs. In short, many of these new jobs may be characterised by low pay, seasonal employment availability, and unsocial working hours.

Impacts on Local Politics and Languages

When a place becomes a new tourism destination, control of local activities is often in the hands of local elites and power-brokers. These are those people who are influential and/or who tend to dominate locally, sometimes including certain local government officials.

But expansion often leads to a loss of local control, especially when new elites emerge based on tourism and the newly-established international contacts that tourism often requires (Moore K, 1970). At the same time, some residents may be forced from their homes (not always with adequate compensation) to enable new government-supported tourism ventures to proceed.

In addition, minor languages such as Isaan (the language of north-eastern Thailand) and Romansh (spoken in south-eastern Switzerland) may no longer appear useful to tourism staff compared to mass international languages like English and French (White PE, 1974). So their usage declines.

Impacts on Morals and Good Behaviour

The tourists' presence may lead to noticeable changes, in tourist-receiving countries, in generally accepted attitudes towards what is considered to be normally appropriate behaviour, and also in the prevailing moral code.

1. These changes in morals, and the resulting problems for host communities, can include:
   1. changes in moral values and attitudes (Archer BH, 1978), even among law-abiding citizens (e.g. towards extra-marital sex etc),
   2. sex tourism may become a common feature (e.g. Thailand, the Philippines, the Seychelles, Sri Lanka, Brazil etc), and
   3. prostitution (although present in many countries including France, the USA, Holland, India, and much of Latin America etc) may be encouraged by tourist complicity to appear where it has not been common before (e.g. in the Czech Republic and Russia), along with the seedy environment which is often associated with it - e.g. with:
   • pimps living off prostitutes, and
   • protection rackets operating.

   Pimps are people who live off the earnings of prostitutes in return for protecting them from violence (e.g. from customers, or other pimps). Protection rackets are operated by criminals who force businesses to pay them money to avoid being attacked (usually by the same criminals!).

2. Sexually transmitted diseases, such as HIV, AIDS, and other serious (but non-life threatening) forms of venereal disease, may become prevalent. Syphilis and gonorrhea etc may re-appear - either being:
   • spread by local people to tourists, or
   • received by them from visitors.

3. Gambling may become prevalent. This may be objected to morally, but it is a large source of income for some tourist resorts (Mathieson A & Wall G, 1982), e.g. Las Vegas and Atlantic City (both in the USA), Macau, and Monaco (a small nation adjacent to Nice in southern France). At the same time, criminal gangs may begin operating there, attracted by the apparently easy money which is routinely associated with gambling.

4. Drugs may become a problem, with
   • some tourists being tempted by local suppliers to try them, and
   • some local people (usually youth) becoming suppliers and/or producers of these narcotics.

   An additional problem can be that the attitudes towards certain drugs can vary very considerably between different countries, ranging from what might be considered to be over-indulgence in some tourist-generating nations (e.g. Holland) to ones of excessive severity in some visitor-receiving countries (e.g. Malaysia). Alternatively, the tourist destination may be widely known as being indulgent towards drugs as Bali, Nepal, and Afghanistan were in the 1970s.

5. Alcoholism may reach bothersome levels, either among tourists (Pizam A, 1978) or among the local inhabitants whose increased drinking is the result of traveller-induced demonstration effects. At the same time, local people may also be heavy drinkers (e.g. in Australia, Russia, France, and Poland etc), this time having a potentially negative demonstration effect on any visitors to their country.

6. Crime, begging, and noisy and aggressive behaviour may all seem to increase, following the arrival of significant numbers of visitors. Local criminals may prey on tourists, some of whom may also engage in petty crime. At the same time, some residents may beg from tourists (e.g. in Africa and India etc), while a few visitors may become beggars too (e.g. at Delhi etc).

In addition, black market currency dealings may be encouraged (Lehmann AC, 1980) by many tourists' understandable preference for cheaply (even if illegally acquired) foreign money, especially in those developing countries with over-valued, officially-fixed, currency exchange rates. However, free market economists might say that this is the correct and natural working of the financial market place in those situations where a government artificially controls its currency's value.

Finally, noisy and aggressive behaviour can sometimes be as much a feature of domestic visitors' conduct as it can be of certain foreign tourists' lifestyles. This has in the recent past included the activities of some soccer fans. Although their activities at local football matches may not always have been ideal, their worst behaviour has often been reserved for 'away' destinations, rather than 'home' matches.

Observations on Tourism-related Moral Issues

Although tourism has sometimes be blamed for a general loosening of morals (Mathieson A & Wall G, 1982), the media (e.g. TV, movies, newspapers, magazines etc) and the fashion, advertising, and popular music industries may often, in fact, be much more powerful influences on this widespread modern phenomenon than any of tourism's demonstration effects. This particularly applies to the many influences on young people's conduct.

Indeed, all these impacts (with the exception usually of non-commercial adult extra-marital sex) are frequently the subject of legal control and/or restriction. The first response of the local authorities should, therefore, be to see if the law can be made more effective and acceptable, rather than blaming all tourists - most of whom are law-abiding.

Doxey's Irridex (i.e. irritation index)

Doxey GV (1975 & 1976), based on his research on the Caribbean island of Barbados and in the Niagara Falls area of Canada, has plotted the changing reactions over time of both residents and local business communities alike, to the presence of tourists. According to him, there are usually five stages in these changing attitudes. These vary in duration from destination to destination, depending on how long they have been receiving visitors. He described these five stages in his irridex, or irritation index, as follows:

1. Euphoria	Visitors are welcome; there are opportunities for local people, and new money flows in - but there is little planning.
2. Apathy	Visitors are taken for granted; they become targets for profit-making, and contact becomes more formal.
3. Annoyance	Saturation is approached, with too many people visiting the destination for it to remain enjoyable - especially in the peak season. This causes the local residents to begin to have doubts about tourism. Planners try to resolve this problem by increasing infrastructure rather than by limiting growth.
4. Antagonism	Open irritation appears (including sometimes strong levels of dislike), yet planning is remedial. Promotion is increased to offset the deteriorating reputation of the destination. Tourists are now being (and are probably feeling) cheated, yet are also being blamed for increased crime and taxes, and for all sorts of every day problems.
5. Acceptance	The place has changed permanently. Change is now accepted by residents. They have forgotten what the area was like before the first tourists arrived.

(Source: Doxey GV, 1975)

Socio-cultural Benefits of Travel and Tourism

Despite these problems, there are some benefits. These are:

A) social, i.e. the -

• increased knowledge of the host culture by visitors; and awareness of its history, festivals, music, arts, cuisine or cooking styles, religion and language etc. This can lead to renewed cultural pride among the host community,
• improved reputation and visibility of the host community to outsiders, and
• increased social contacts, produced by the arrival of outsiders, which can inject new ideas and values into the host community (Evans N, 1976),

B) to the host culture -

• which survives because of tourists' interest in seeing traditional entertainments, arts, crafts (Graburn NH, 1976), and music performances, and

C) the enriching role of visitors, which

• frequently leads to the provision of facilities, amenities and services which would not otherwise be available to the host community (e.g. transport facilities),
• may encourage the teaching of the local language to foreigners (and their learning of it),
• often boosts heritage protection, especially of ancient buildings, leading to increased appreciation of their architectural value - and improvements in their interpretation and management etc, and
• can encourage cultural interchange and international understanding.

Socio-cultural Costs of Travel and Tourism

1. a host culture's alteration and/or debasement, or a loss of cultural pride and identity, as it tries to make itself more acceptable to its visitors (Sandelowsky BH, 1976),
2. an unacceptable rate and scale of cultural conflict and change, particularly over the altering roles and positions in society of women and young people,
3. the adoption by local youth of new and foreign behaviours, dress, language, and music fashions etc - which may be disturbing to some of the host community's older generation,
4. the putting at risk, at times, of long-held social beliefs and values,
5. the loss of the original level of social stability,
6. the commercialisation of the local culture to entertain visitors, instead of displaying it authentically because the tourists may consider this to be dull,
7. a decline in traditional arts and crafts as folk art becomes 'airport' (May RJ, 1977) or 'junk art' (i.e. those low quality mass-produced versions of traditional arts and crafts which are often for sale at airports or hotel shops). Some of this art may be so non-authentic that it has actually been manufactured overseas, rather than being made by local craftsmen according to genuine traditional styles and designs. Yet, according to Mathieson A & Wall G (1982), it may often match the tourists' idea of what would be an acceptable and memorable purchase (regardless of whether it is historically or culturally correct),
8. tourists who are rich (or appear to be so) visiting poor areas, and so creating envy and resentment, and
9. a frequent lack among visitors of sufficient cross-cultural knowledge and understanding of their host country or community's culture, including its values, lifestyle, social rules, festivals, and language etc. Consequently, tourists may say or do things which cause unintended offence to local people - though it is quite possible for some aspects of the local culture to, in turn, be displeasing to some visitors also (e.g. bull-fighting in Spain).

Summary

Many places have found that any detrimental aspects of social and cultural change that they have experienced has coincidentally accompanied the growth of their tourist trade (Mathieson A & Wall G, 1982). But whether every negative change, or even the majority of them, are attributable to the recent arrival of tourism and large numbers of visitors, rather than the effects of TV, the radio, mass circulation magazines, and/or the advertising, fashion and popular music industries, is much less clear. Indeed, it may be that many of the factors which cause or influence change at tourism destinations may originate as much from these aspects of the eclectic modern world as from tourism.

Some cultural benefits have been gained through tourists' frequent interest in traditional arts, crafts, and festivals. But while this specialist type of attention may have made most host communities more aware of their history and culture, the very nature of tourism, with its insistence on its own needs and timetables rather than on those of the local community, may lead to long-term changes in the local culture to meet the many varying demands of mass tourism. Yet despite these negative factors, it should always be remembered that cultures evolve as they adapt to, and interact with, the outside world.

CONCLUSION

As the previous article (Harcombe DPT, 1999) showed, the economic impacts of travel and tourism are often too enticing for host communities to be able to reject tourism outright. Indeed, these economic benefits often crowd out of the average citizen's mind the disadvantages that may accompany a rapidly changing life-style in hitherto stable societies. Similarly overlooked, until it is sometimes too late, is the frequent decline in the quality of townscapes and wild areas - due to the construction and/or operation of new, but often inadequately planned, tourism projects.

Even so, the increasing overall prosperity that tourism brings is generally considered to be beneficial. Equally valuable, in terms of lifestyle opportunities, are the new employment openings that the travel trade usually provides. This is despite the many negative consequences of tourism and its activities, especially those adverse socio-cultural and environmental impacts that have been identified in in this article.

Instead the challenge for both the public and the private sectors is to limit the travel industry's more negative effects, usually by controlling the style and location of tourism developments - and managing the intensity of visitor flows - through effective and efficient planning. As long as this occurs, it should be possible to retain the agreement of host communities that the economic benefits to them of travel and tourism genuinely do outweigh any environmental and socio-cultural costs that they may, from time to time, experience.

REFERENCES

Archer BH; Domestic tourism as a development factor, Annals of Tourism Research, vol. 5, pp 126-41, 1978.

Butler R & Hinch T; Tourism & indigenous peoples, International Thomson Business Press, London, UK, 1996.

Burns PM & Holden A; Tourism: a new perspective, Prentice Hall International (UK), Hemel Hempstead, UK, 1995.

Cooper C, Fletcher J, Gilbert D, & Wanhill S; Tourism: principles & practice, Longman, Harlow, UK, 1993.

De Kadt E; Tourism: passport to development?, Oxford University Press, New York, USA, 1979.

Doxey GV; A causation theory of visitor-resident irritants: methodology and research inferences, Proceedings of the Travel Research Association, 6th Annual Conference, San Diego, California, USA, pp 195-8, 1975.

Doxey GV; When enough's enough: the natives are restless in Old Niagara, Heritage Canada, vol. 2, no2, pp 26-7, 1976.

Evans N; Tourism and cross-cultural communication, Annals of Tourism Research, vol. 3, pp 189-98, 1976.

Graburn NH (ed); Ethnic and tourist arts: cultural expressions from the Fourth World, University of California Press, Berkeley, USA, 1976.

Green DH, Hunter CJ, & Moore B; Applications of the Delphi technique in tourism, Annals of Tourism Research, vol. 17 pp 270-9, 1990.

Harcombe DPT; Solomon Islands: a travel survival kit, Lonely Planet Publications, Melbourne, Australia, 1988.

Harcombe DPT; Vanuatu: a travel survival kit, Lonely Planet Publica-tions, Melbourne, Australia, 1991.

Harcombe DPT; The marketing of legends, with particular reference to the King Arthur legend, unpublished MSc thesis, Bournemouth University, UK, 1997.

Harcombe DPT; The economic impacts of tourism, ABAC Journal, Assumption University, Bangkok, Thailand, vol. 19, no 2, 1999.

Hassan R; International tourism and intercultural communication, Southeast Asian Journal of Social Sciences, vol. 3, no 2, pp 25-27, 1975.

Inskeep E; Tourism planning: an integrated and sustainable development approach, Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York, USA, 1991.

Lehmann AC; Tourists, black markets and regional development in West Africa, Annals of Tourism Research, vol. 7, pp 102-19, 1980.

Mathieson A & Wall G; Tourism: economic, physical and social impacts, Longman, Harlow, UK, 1982.

May RJ; Tourism and the artefact in Papua New Guinea, pp 125-33 in Finney BR & Watson A, A new kind of sugar: tourism in the Pacific, Center for South Pacific Studies, University of California, Santa Cruz, USA, 1977.

Middleton VTC & Hawkins R; Sustainable tourism, Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford, UK, 1998.

Moore K; Modernization in a Canary Island village: an indicator of social change in Spain, Journal of the Steward Anthropological Society, vol. 2, pp 19-34, 1970.

Oppermann M & Chon K-S; Tourism in developing countries, International Thomson Business Press, London, UK, 1997.

Pizam A; Tourism's impacts: the social costs to the destination as perceived by its residents, Journal of Travel Research, vol. 16, no 4, pp8-12, 1978.

Sandelowsky BH; Functional and tourist art along the Okavango River, pp 350-365 in Graburn NH (ed), Ethnic tourist arts: cultural expressions from the Fourth World, University of California Press, Berkeley, USA, 1976.

Sharpley R & J; Rural tourism, International Thomson Business Press, London, UK, 1997.

Smith VL & Eadington WR; Tourism alternatives, John Wiley & Sons, Chichester, UK, 1994.

The Economist, London, UK; Many mummies, 31 July 1999, pp 71-2.

Wahab SE & Pigram JJ; Tourism, development & growth: the challenge of sustainability, Routledge, London, UK, 1997.

Wall G & Wright C; The environmental impact of outdoor recreation, Publication Series no 11, Dept of Geography, Waterloo University, Ontario, Canada, 1977.

Waters SR; The American tourist, Annals of the American Academy of Political & Social Sciences, vol. 368 pp 109-18, 1966.

Weiler B & Hall CM (eds); Special interest tourism, Bellhaven Press, London, UK, 1992.

White PE; The social impact on host communities: a study of language change in Switzerland, Research paper no 9, School of Geography, Oxford University, UK, 1974.