The Tourism Trends In Mauritius Tourism Essay

The touristry Trends In Mauritius Tourism Essay today touristry has become the major focus, mainly for sm whole developing countries which corroborate an effect on local anaesthetic anaesthetic people in terms of socio- ethnic, milieual and stintingal impacts. Residents perceptions ar very central and t here is a submit to understand how these perceptions can contri ande towards touristry increment. The resolve of this study is to entrust a theoretical background for appreciateing local people attitudes on the impacts of touristry instruction in Bel Ombre, Mauritius. Tourism and sustaincapable suppuration atomic effect 18 inter colligate and has been usu altogethery identified with the fast rising demand of tourists performing together with the natural environment. Tourism has the capability to protect as hearty as to destroy a end point. Studying the impacts of touristry is a deprecative element of accepting how touristry cloaks the economy, socio- heathe n and environment shots in Mauritius. A well elaborated belles-lettres shows the character of the main fundamental interaction of tourist and array, uniqueness of soldiery-tourist relationship and their connection with the impacts generated by touristry cultivation. Researchers were more interested towards the interaction surrounded by the tourists and the local people. Though, there ar preceding studies that realise considered the stretch out from tourist perspective. To come finished the purpose of this study a questionnaire was designed and a survey was undertaken among the local residents. Concerning the analysis part, quantitative approach was useful and the take in and objectives were related to the majority of relevant literature.1.2 Problem statementThe main condition for doing this study is because touristry is 1 of the major sectors in many countries, including Mauritius, with the highest product potential. It is the worlds largest employer and one among the major sources of substantial foreign put back earnings (Blank, 1991 Richards, 2003 Mwandosya, 2007). It is done and through with(predicate) this observation that many people believe that the manufacturing is well put as one of the major means through which reading of local communities can be achieved (Scheyvens, 2002 Beeton, 2006). One approach to enhance this breeding through touristry is to involve local communities and disc over that their potential role is tapped and kept up(p) through active connection in the sedulousness (Beeton, 2006). It is imperative to name that battle and involution of these communities is central to the sustainable growth of the intentness not only because touristry has had a close connection with the local communities, particularly as legions and guides (Scheyvens, 2002), only too because the endpoints of tourists be communities and it is in the club that tourism happens (Blank, 1989 p.115).Participation is a process throug h which stakeholders, among them the local communities who argon ofttimes the intended beneficiaries of alliance tourism, tempt and sh ar control over development initiatives and the decisions and resources which affect them (Havel, 1996). Participation, therefore, seeks collaboration or partnerships and the commitment necessary to ensure sustainability of tourism development initiatives (Wolfensohn, 1996). Paradoxically, the answers of meshing are usually a reflection of a certain level of closeness of relevant stakeholders in the decision- qualification process which in turn enables people to make informed commitments to a particular tourism flip (Havel, 1996). According to Akama (1999) as cited in Manyara and Jones (2007, p.629), local communities are notwithstanding involved in tourism development and they are usually without a voice in the development process (Havel, 1996). This situation according to Mbaiwa (2005) is blow to the principles of sustainable tourismdeve lopment which, among other things, emphasize the involvement and elaboration of local communities.1.3 Aims and Objectives of the studyThe find of this study is to assess the residents attitudes and perceptions close to the impacts caused by tourism development in Bel Ombre.The objectives of the study areTo assess the extent of local peoples perceptions and attitudes in the tourism developmentTo assess the domineering and ban impacts of tourism developmentTo assess the extent of local peoples involvement and affaire in tourism development in their local field of studysTo enquire if local people are aware of the impacts of tourism development.1.4 Tourism trends in MauritiusSince the 1990s, Mauritius adopted economic reforms aimed at establishing a market- ground and private-sector-driven economy that marked epoch-making growth in many sectors of the countrys economy. Such reforms for example, serveed to purify the performance of the countrys tourism assiduity and enhanced growth of the sector through improved merchandising and promotional campaigns, improved tourism services, improved air access to Mauritius, fitting facilities, and other tourism nurtureing radicals. More specifically, growth in the Mauritanian tourism industry can be measured by spirit at the trends in tourism service, tourist arrivals, tourism annual growth, tour of hotels and hotel rooms, contribution of the sector to countrys GDP, and direct jobs created by the industry. To moderate a go picture of the performance of the tourism industry in Mauritius and to be able to gauge the achievements already realized by the industry.While the tourism industry continues to be one of the primal foreign exchange earners in Mauritius, the industry depends primarily on the flow of international tourists to the country. The countrys main source markets are Britain, Germany, the United States, Italy, France, Spain, and some new markets emerging around China and Asiatic countries. The majority of international tourists come to Mauritius for pagan, adventure and beach resort all together making Mauritius a quality destination.It is, however, interesting to note from the statistics infra that, in Mauritius, earnings from international tourism fuck off grown more rapidly than tourist arrivals in nominal terms due to the to heighten Mauritius as a high quality destination. Arguably, the increase tourist numbers game to Mauritius may be a convincing indication of increasing opportunities for local communities to earn r level(p)ue from tourism and these revenue opportunities could eventually contribute measurablely to greater local interest in the development of the industry (Victurine, 2000). parry 1- Tourist arrivals, nights and receipts, 2009 2012YearTourist arrivals (Number)Tourist nights (000)Tourism receipts 1 (Rs million)2009871,3568,63935,6932010934,8279,49539,4562011964,6429,73042,717 320091st Qr.232,9082,25010,265second Qr.180,5961,7917,9841st Semester 413,5044,04118,2493rd Qr.195,3812,2807,436quaternary Qr.262,4712,31810,008second Semester457,8524,59817,44420101st Qr.249,9712,94311,0212nd Qr.189,1791,8558,7881st Semester439,1504,79819,8093rd Qr.207,5062,2758,3584th Qr.288,1712,42211,2892nd Semester495,6774,69719,64720111st Qr.262,6262,96011,9492nd Qr.201,9781,9759,3551st Semester464,6044,93521,3043rd Qr.209,7792,3258,8454th Qr.290,2592,47012,568 32nd Semester500,0384,79521,413 32012 21st Qr.261,9952,95013,768 32nd Qr.205,1582,0109,7801st Semester467,1534,96023,548 blood line www.gov.mu1.5 Outline of StudyChapter 1- IntroductionThis chapter gives an overview of the study and the outline of the dissertation. It includes the introduction, problem statement, aims and objectives of the look.Chapter 2- writings ReviewThe literature review entails the theoretical background the main aim in writing this is to assess existing literature related to the study, what other researchers have done, including empirical evidence to provide a fou ndation to the study. It consists of all the theoretical aspects like the perceptions and attitudes of local people towards tourism development. The impacts of tourism development are also discussed along with how the friendship amour can squinch or increase these tourism impacts.Chapter 3- MethodologyThis comprises of the modeology of how the research was conducted, the questionnaire design, method used to collect the information, sampling techniques used, the data analysis and limitations of the study.Chapter 4- Results and DiscussionsIn this chapter the data collected through the use of questionnaires, testament be analysed by making use of graphical, mean and mensuration deviation. Package for the Social Science (SPSS) software system was used to make these analyses.Chapter 5- Recommendations and ConclusionsThe last chapter identifies the come-at-able solution to come crossship canal for the problems of the poor involvement of locals. The perceptions of residents on th e impacts generated from tourism development, thus leading to the finish of the project.CHAPTER TWOLITERATURE REVIEW2.1 IntroductionThis chapter seeks to address a number of rationalises related to familiarity involvement and fraternity in the tourism industry by examining some key points emerging from various studies, reports and other sources of information. It starts with a discussion somewhat the perceptions and attitudes of host federation towards the impacts of tourism development. Some critics almost Doxey Irridex Model and butler Tourism knowledge domain life cycle will also be discussed. The chapter also identifies factors which influence local communities and attract their connection in the tourism industry. It continues with a discussion about the tourism impacts that bone up due tourism development in a infinitesimal society. The chapter concludes by highlighting key issues raised by the literature that form the tush of this research.2.2 Sustainable Tourism DevelopmentSustainable tourism development (STD) is a long-term approach that cultivates economically viable tourism without harming residents environment or society darn simultaneously ensuring fair distribution of costs and goods (DBEDT, 2006a). Decisions are found on economic, environmental, and cultural impacts how wealth is generated and distributed and the relative power and interactions among the stakeholders (Bramwell, 2006 Twining-Ward Butler, 2002). STD balances industrys address of profit with the needs of the environment and stakeholders (Bramwell, 2006). Stakeholder cooperation is necessary for sustainable tourism other than only the well-nigh powerful will benefit (Dyer, Gursoy, Sharma, Carter, 2007). To keep stakeholders snug with tourism development and their community, the environment and culture must be saved (Ahn et al., 2002 Hjalager, 1996). When tourism development enhances, rather than erodes the natural environment, a more sustainable tourism product ca n be offered to support the destinations economy (Batra Kaur, 1996).A disposal that effectively manages tourism creates benefits for all stakeholders (Jamal Getz, 1995). Effective management is avoiding ban impacts through a combination of general protective measures regulations to control development and financial res civilizets (Cohen, 1978 Hjalager, 1996). Improvement of the environment can be achieved by ensuring that development is harmonious with the overall plan for the destination (Batra Kaur, 1996). Necessary tourism infrastructure much(prenominal) as roads, airports, parks, and visitor centers are also the responsibility of government (Jamal Getz, 1995). Maintenance of infrastructure and facilities is expensive and residents, through property taxes, should not be the only group to bear this burden (Wong, 1996). Residents benefit when tourists spend bullion in the local economy and create jobs, as well as from the development of infrastructure that residents also u tilize (Wong, 1996).Residents in mass tourism destinations such as Hawaii depend on tourism for their standard of living (Liu, Sheldon, Var, 1987). Because tourism development usually involves a tradeoff between economic benefits and environmental or cultural costs, residents cope by downplaying the minus impacts based and emphasizing the economic gains to maintain satisfaction with their community (Dyer et al., 2007 Cavus Tanrisevdi, 2003 Faulkner Tideswell, 1997). Residents with the about economic gain are the intimately supportive of the tourism industry (Harrill, 2004).Cavus Tanrisevdi (2003) found that the development process controlled by planners was the primary factor in residents negative attitudes towards tourism. When residents perceive that the costs of tourism outweigh the benefits, getings of resentment and fervor towards tourists can develop and lower community satisfaction (Doxey, 1975 Faulkner Tideswell, 1997 Ko Stewart, 2002). Residents who feel that the y have a voice in tourism planning are more incontrovertible towards tourism (Cavus Tanrisevdi, 2003). According to Choi Sirakaya (2005), sustainable tourism is the development pathway to minimize the negative impacts of tourism. There are many ways to make tourism more sustainable but few tools for evaluating and exam a sustainable tourism manikin (Choi Sirakaya, 2005). Audits and resource valuation value tourisms costs and benefits so that they can be fairly distributed to stakeholders (Warnken et al., 2004 Wen, 1998). Limiting tourism growth (such as carrying capacity or limits of acceptable change) can also make development more sustainable (Cohen, 1978 Butler, 1980 Gssling, Peeters, Ceron, Dubois, Patterson, Richardson, 2005 Christensen Beckmann, 1998 Ahn et al., 2002). In these approaches, government management and stakeholder cooperation are necessary to reach a consensus for how to manage early tourism development. This is why Understanding residents perceptions are critical to fairly distributing the environmental, social, and economic costs and benefits of tourism thus, ultimately increasing sustainable tourism development (Twining-Ward Butler, 2002).2.3 boniface alliance Attitudes and Perceptions about Tourism DevelopmentThis study aims at identifying the relationships between residents socio- cultural, economic and environmental aspect and their attitudes towards tourism by stress on a small community where tourism is in the development stage. By conducting this research, the author hopes to come across the residents attitudes and capture their current perceptions about tourism development in their area. Moreover, this research is being done because most authors agree that initial community attitudes toward tourism are critical to community involvement in the industry (Murphy 1981), the formation of destination image (Echtner Ritchie 1991).Attitudes are defined as a state of mind of the individual toward a value (Allport 1966, p. 24) and as an enduring predisposition towards a particular aspect of ones environment (McDougall Munro 1987, p. 87). Attitude of host community to tourism based development can improve if there is a boost in the tangible and indescribable settlements the host community can receive by being in based development (Choi Sirakaya, 2006). As Attitudes are based under this understanding, this is why some researchers came to a conclusion that residents attitudes toward tourism are not simply the reflections of residents perceptions of tourism impacts, but the results of interaction between residents perceptions and the factors alter their attitudes (Lankford et al.1994). Some preceding researches have proved that some most burning(prenominal) impacts of tourism are identified along with its variables, however the theory is develop Currently there is limited understanding of why residents respond to the impacts of tourism as they do, and under what conditions residents react to those impact s (Ap 1992, p. 666). Husband (1989) also addressed this issue by saying There is, so far, no theoretical justification of why some people are, or are not, favorably habituated up to tourism.Various issues can persuade perceptions of the host community about positive outcomes of tourism development. Support will depend on the degree of benefits perceived. The participation of community will be discussed later on in the literature review. The acceptance of local values can also be an important factor that leads to the achievement of a tourism based development (Alexander, 2000). in time over a certain period of time many findings find that host community perceptions in the direction from tourism may have more positive attitudes. People who depend on tourism industry or having a fall apart economic benefit may mayhap have a high degree of positivity than other inhabitants who do not benefit from a tourism development (lankford and howard, 1994 Jurowski, Uysal, and willimas, 1997 Sirakaya , Teye and Sonmez,2002 ).Lindberg and Johnson (1997) mentioned that people having higher economic impacts from tourism may have more positive attitudes. however Travis (1984) has stated that its not only an economic characteristic such as the opportunity for jobs creation or capital generation that needs to be considered by the host community. The socio-cultural and environmental aspects are also very important. For Choi and Sirakaya (2005), the most community should also have a better environment in term of infrastructures and improved amenities such as leisure and unskilled activities. They describe tourism as consisting of various supports and any development in the tourism field should ensure the protection of the culture of host community, on base the protection of the environment.In order to clarify the relationship between the impacts of tourism and residents attitudes toward tourism, several models have been developed. One of the most influential models is Doxey s Irridex model (1975) which suggests that residents attitudes toward tourism may pass through a series of stages from euphoria, through stoicism and irritation. to antagonism, as perceived costs exceed the expected benefits. This model is support by Long et al.s (1990) research results, which indicate residents attitudes, are initially complimentary but become negative after reaching a threshold.To have a better comprehension about the relationship between the impacts of tourism and residents attitudes toward tourism, several models like Butler Tourism Life cycle Area and Doxey Irridex model have been developed. One of the most dominant models is Doxeys Irridex model (1975) which suggests that residents attitudes toward tourism may pass through a series of stages from euphoria, through impassiveness and irritation. to antagonism, as perceived costs exceed the expected benefits. This model was back up by Long et al.s (1990) research results, which indicated that residents attitu des are initially favorable but become negative after reaching a threshold. The Irridex model indicates that residents attitudes toward tourism will change overtime. It suggests that residents attitudes and reactions toward tourism contain a sense of homogeneousness (Mason et al. 2000). Conversely, this concept was challenged by some research findings that reported heterogeneous community responses and diverse residents attitudes simultaneously existing in a community (Brougham et al. 1981,Rothman 1978).2.4 Critics about Doxey Irridex Model and Butler Tourism Area Life cycleButler (1980) took a more complicated approach. He argued that tourist areas go through a recognizable cycle of evolution he used an S-shaped worm to illustrate their different stages of popularity. Butler stated that there are cardinal stages through which tourist areas pass. These include the exploration stage, involvement stage, development stage, integrating stage, stagnation stage, and decline stage. His study also reveals that evolution is brought about by a variety of factors, including changes in preferences and needs of visitors, the gradual deterioration and possible replacement of physical plant and facilities, and the change of the original natural and cultural attractions, which is responsible for the initial popularity of the area. Furthermore this model is back up by Murphys (1983) research results, which reveal the distinct attitude differences among residents, public officials, and transaction owners in terzetto English tourist centers. Although Butlers model addresses the difficulty of residents attitudes toward tourism, researchers still lacked theories explaining relationships between residents attitudes and tourism impacts until Ap (1992) applied social exchange theory to tourism.2.5 Social Exchange possibilityAccording to the theory, exchange will start, only when there are maverick inaction forms. Ap (1992) suggests that residents valuate tourism in terms of social exchange, that is, evaluate it in terms of expected benefits or costs obtained in effect for the services they supply He also argued that when exchange of resources is high for the host actor in either the balanced or unbalanced exchange relation, tourism impacts are viewed positively, while tourism impacts are viewed negatively if exchange of resources is low. Social exchange theory has been examined as a theoretical framework by researchers to describe residents attitudes toward tourism impacts (Perdue et al. 1990, McGehee Andereck 2004).However mason and Cheyen (2000) stated that that the way of Butler assumes a degree of homogeneity of community reaction. Butler (2006) supported his model by suggesting that a consistent evolution of tourist area can be conceptualized. Different phases at a particular destination may not be understood without mistakes. The demonstration hence should be frighted only to some extent as the phase itself differs from one tourist area to an otherb(Tosun,2002).The Doxey irridex model gives a clear view of how host community attitude changes over a period of time. It mentions host community perceptions, reactions and attitudes in the direction of tourism (Manson et al.2000). This can be a conflict principle because some research came to a conclusion that various host community attitudes and perceptions may exist in the community, (Brougham et al.1981, Rothman 1978). Akis, Peristanis Warner (1996) disapprove the Irridex Model and The Tourism Life Cycle and view it as too simple, because both models give a few hint of changing host community perceptions and attitudes over time. Other researchers like Lankford and Howard (1994, P.135) opposed against the model of Doxey(1975) because positive and negative factors that affect the perceptions and attitudes of host community are not given much consideration.As the tourism industry keeps on changing, this may be a reason why we must give this industry continuous support for it s related development. Andereck vogt( 2000) stated that it is considered that optimistic attitudes towards tourism may entail the encouragement for merely tourism development. If there is any delay in tourism project development this can be due to frustration towards tourists. Mill and Morisson (1984) even mention that, an acceptance of tourism cannot be built unless the benefits of tourism are made relevant to the community. Attitudes and perceptions of host community at a destination is of utmost importance in the touchment of tourism development on board the development of the industry at large also, (Hayword,1975), (Heenan, 1978), and Hiller (1976).There is a handsome belief perception and attitudes of host community in the direction of tourism outcomes are apt to become essential planning and policy concern for flourishing development and expansion of existing and potential tourism programs, (Ap,1992). Host community attitudes and perception is very important as it will inf luence their behavior towards tourism, (Andriotis and Vaughan, 2003).2.6 Host community involvement and participationCommunity participation has become a common element in many development initiatives, such as community-based programmes, which assume participatory methods and has been promoted by development organizations, notably the World Bank, to address the in expertness of super centralized development approaches particularly in the developing world (Baral and Heinen, 2007).Today, many development initiatives solicit the participation of all concerned stakeholders, at the relevant level, not only for the sake of efficiency and equity of the programmes, leverage of donors and demands of local communities, but also for sustainability of these initiatives (Ribot, 2004). Consequently, the real outcome for soliciting such community participation is to create and produce an enabling environment needed by these stakeholders, especially local communities who have been vulnerable to ne gative impacts of tourism attributed partly to the fact that many tourism resources occur in their areas, to have a real stake in development activities (Havel, 1996 Songorwa, 1999). This requires involving local communities in decision-making and strengthening their ability to act for themselves. One approach to achieve this is through investments in human capital, such as education and health, investments in social capital such as local-level institutions and participatory processes, and support for community based development efforts planned and implemented from bottom up (Havel, 1996, p.145). However, given the fact that the central point underlying peoples participation may be the degree of power distribution, these efforts are less likely to succeed unless antiphonal institutions and the legal and policy framework that facilitate and support local participation are in place (Havel, 1996 Tosun, 2004 Wang and Wall, 2005).It is probably important to insist from here that a key c onsideration in tourism development is sustainability, which cannot be achieved without community support (Vincent and Thompson, 2002). While sustainability is the core objective of community participation (Vincent and Thompson, 2002 Johannesen and Skonhoft, 2005), proponents of community tourism further argue that community participation seeks to improve the welfare of the local community and, perhaps most importantly, win their support in conservation of tourism resources (Songorwa, 1999). This means community participation is necessary and imperative for tourism development because most tourist attractions lie indoors local communities or in their vicinities and in most cases co-exist side by side with the communities, for instance, in wildlife areas.Community participation via decision-making is an essential determinant to ensure that the benefits that local communities get from tourism are guaranteed, and their lifestyles and values are respected. It is, however, important to note that community participation in decision making is not only desirable but also necessary so as to maximize the socio-economic benefits of tourism for the community. It is perhaps one of the most important elements of tourism management to enable communities who often serve as tourist destinations and for that social occasion suffer from the negative impacts of tourism, to get involved and eventually infix in planning decisions regarding tourism development. This is important in order to create better handling of the negative impacts of tourism development (Li, 2004 Tosun, 2000). It is equally important to note, therefore, that integrating of local communities into the decision-making process is not a final goal itself but only one of the many ways through which community participation can be achieved (Li, 2005, p.133).Another way to involve and attract community participation and ultimately their support in tourism development is through local job creation (Zhao and Ritchie, 2007). Since tourism offers better labour-intensive and small scale opportunities (Chok and Macbeth, 2007 Scheyvens, 2007) and since it happens in the community, arguably, it is thought to be one of the best fit(p) potential sources of employment opportunities for local communities, inclusive of women and the informal sector (Blank, 1989 Li, 2005 Johannesen and Skonhoft, 2005 Scheyvens, 2007). Community participation via employment opportunities, as workers or as small business operators, can be a catalyst to the development of tourism products and services, arts, crafts and cultural values, especially through taking advantage of abundant natural and cultural assets available in communities in developing countries (Scheyvens, 2007). Tosun (2000) stated that community participation through working in the tourism industry has been recognized to help local communities not only to support development of the industry but also to receive more than economic benefits.However, it is import ant to understand that in some cases community participation is seen as a way of acquire people to carry out activities or share their costs while the benefits are not clear to those expected to participate (Havel, 1996). This implies that a key factor to the success of any community-based tourism project is the incentive to benefit sharing which is usually attractive enough to make people highly motivated to participate. As Havel (1996) asserted people will not participate unless they believe it is their interest to do soInvolvement and participation of the community in decision-making is advocated so that communities can have some control over tourism resources, initiatives and decisions that affect their livelihood (Wang, and Wall, 2005). On the other hand, the idea of involvement and participation of local communities in the tourism benefits is easily reflected in increasing incomes, employment, and education of local communities about tourism and entrepreneurship (Timothy, 199 9). One way to accomplish this is to increase public cognisance of tourism through education campaigns and train local communities for employment in the industry. While increased public awareness creates a more hospitable environment for tourists and improves the image of the destination, providing entrepreneurial didactics empowers local communities and ultimately increases their capacity to receive significant benefits from tourism (Timothy, 1999). This enables tourism-oriented businesses and locals such as taxi drivers, guesthouse managers, restaurant owners, and street vendors, th