Year 6, No. 1, June 2013, issn 2335-4194 Academica Turistica Tourism & Innovation Journal Revija za turizem in inovativnost Academica Turistica Tourism & Innovation Journal - Revija za turizem in inovativnost Year 6, No. 1, June 2013, issn 2335-4194 3 Responsible Tourism before'Responsible Tourism'? Some Historical Antecedents of Current Concerns and Conflicts John K. Walton 17 Competitiveness and Responsibility of Tourist Destinations Gorazd Sedmak and Tina Kociper 25 An Empirical Research on the Ecological Orientation of Low Season Visitors to Portorož Helena Nemec Rudež and Petra Zabukovec Baruca 32 Quality of Life of Indianapolis Residents: The Role of Cultural Tourism and a Sense of Community Carina King, Sotiris Hji-Avgoustis, Jinmoo Heo, and Inheok Lee 39 Measuring Performance in the Hospitality Sector: Financial vs. Statistical Data Tanja Planinc, Štefan Bojnec, and Gordana Ivankovič 49 Local Community Perceptions of Tourism Impacts on The Slovenian Coast Ksenija Vodeb in Zorana Medarič 61 The Pressure on the Coastal Area as a Factor of Sustainability of Croatian Tourism Zoran Klarič 71 The Challenges for Responsible Recreation in the Protected Area of Triglav National Park: The Case of Mountain Bikers Miha Kozorog and Saša Poljak Istenič 81 Abstracts in Slovene - Povzetki v slovenščini 85 Instructions for Authors \ s 4% tr. v jAI * s >0 TURISTICA ? C // university of primorska press p. 1K Executive Editor Anton Gosar Editor-in-Chief Gorazd Sedmak Associate Editors Aleksandra Brezovec, Doris Gomezelj Omerzel, and Dejan Križaj Technical Editors Mitja Petelin and Tina Orel Production Editor Alen Ježovnik Editorial Board Tanja Armenski, University of Novi Sad, Serbia Rodolfo Baggio, University di Bocconi, Italy Štefan Bojnec, University of Primorska, Slovenia Dimitrios Buhalis, Bournemouth University, uk Alan Clarke, Pannonian University, Hungary Frederic Dimanche, skema Business School, France Jesse Dixon, San Diego State University, usa Felicite Fairer-Wessels, University of Pretoria, South Africa Sotiris Hji-Avgoustis, Ball State University, usa Jafar Jafari, University of Wisconsin-Stout, usa, University ofAlgarve, Portugal Sandra Jankovič, University ofRijeka, Croatia Anna Karlsdottir, University of Iceland, Iceland Maja Konečnik Ruzzier, University of Ljubljana, Slovenia Mara Manente, Ca Foscari University of Venice, Italy Yoel Mansfeld, University of Haifa, Israel Tanja Mihalič, University of Ljubljana, Slovenia Matjaž Mulej, Univesity of Maribor, Slovenia Milena Peršič, University ofRijeka, Croatia Caroline Ritchie, University of Welsh Institute, uk Vinod Sasidharan, San Diego State University, usa Regina Schluter, National University ofQuilmes, Argentina Sonja Sibila Lebe, Univesity of Maribor, Slovenia Marianna Sigala, University of the Aegean, Greece John K. Walton, Ikerbasque, Instituto Valentin de Foronda, University of the Basque Country, Spain Suosheng Wang, Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis, usa Published by University of Primorska Press on behalf of Faculty of Tourism Studies -Turistica, University of Primorska, Slovenia Editorial Office Academica Turistica Faculty of Tourism Studies - Turistica Obala 11a, si-6320 Portorož, Slovenia Telephone: +386 5 617-70-00 Fax: +386 5 617-70-20 E-mail: academica@turistica.si Web: http://academica.turistica.si Subscriptions The annual subscriptions (2 issues): 30 € (for institutions, vat included), 256 (for individuals, vat included). Single issue is available for 15 €. To subscribe contact academica@turistica.si. Copy Editor Terry Troy Jackson Cover Design Mateja Oblak Cover Photo Dunja Wedam, www.slovenia.info Printed in Slovenia by Grafika 3000, Ljubljana Print Run 200 copies Academica Turistica - Revija za turizem in inovativnost je znanstvena revija, namenjena mednarodni znanstveni in strokovni javnosti; izhaja dvakrat letno v angleščini s povzetki v slovenščini. issN 1855-3303 (printed) issN 2335-4194 (online) Responsible Tourism before 'Responsible Tourism'? Some Historical Antecedents of Current Concerns and Conflicts John K. Walton Ikerbasque, Instituta Valentin de Foronda, University ofthe Basque Country, Spain john_walton@ehu.es This article discusses the historical antecedents of what is now called 'responsible tourism,' taking into account the relationship between this concept and 'sustainable tourism.' It uses a comparative case-study methodology to identify and analyse precursors of 'responsible tourism' from the mid-eighteenth century onwards. Case studies cover the English Lake District, the English coastal resort of Whitby, the Spanish spa resort of Mondariz Balneario, the development of 'social tourism' in Mar del Plata (Argentina), and the Atlantic island of Lanzarote (Canary Islands). Each of the illustrative examples engages with different, but overlapping, aspects of 'responsible tourism,' and the article concludes that (despite the perils inherent in looking for the historical roots of a current concept) the approach taken is viable and conducive to a better understanding of the issues, not least because each case displayed its own distinctive complications and cross-currents. The final, extended case-study, which examines the role of the artist Cesar Manrique in the rise of Lanzarote as a tourist destination between the 1950s and the 1990s, provides a particularly satisfying illustration of how the key elements of 'responsible tourism' might take root and develop under the right cultural and political circumstances, long before the concept had actually been articulated, and offer a genuine opportunity for policymakers to learn from historical example. Keywords: responsible tourism; history; destinations; literary tourism; coastal tourism; spa resorts Introduction 'Responsible tourism' as an articulated body of ideas and recommendations is a product of the twenty-first century, with firmly identifiable immediate roots in the late twentieth century. The concept has, however, a much longer prehistory in the mosaic of practices in destination resorts and national parks, in urban governance, and in aspects of the development of 'social tourism.' Such antecedents, while invariably embodying their own contradictions and never fully anticipating (still less articulating) the extensive agenda set out in August 2002 by the Cape Town Declaration, can be found in the policies and activities of local and national governments, ngos, voluntary organisations, and even private companies (Cape Town Declaration on Responsible Tourism, 2002). There is considerable overlap between what might be considered 'responsible' and 'sustainable' tourism; the former acknowledges its debt to the latter, whose assumptions underpinned the philosophy articulated at Cape Town. The first issue of the Journal of Sustainable Tourism appeared as long ago as 1993, and it now produces eight issues per year, demonstrating the fecundity of the concept for academics, opinion formers and policymakers, although the extent and nature of its impact 'on the ground' may be more debatable. Indeed, 'responsible tourism' can be regarded as a proposal to enable and reinforce sustainable tourism by providing a framework for focusing on specific, concrete outcomes in particular places. The focus on destinations means that 'responsible tourism' has more to do with impacts on localities, and on host societies, than on tourist practices as such, although given the interactive nature of the processes concerned this is more a matter of angle of vision than of separate compartments. There is an extensive body of past practice which might reasonably be identified with or assimilated to the 'responsible tourism' label; these antecedents can be identified in places throughout most of the complex trajectory of tourism in the modern world, from at least the mid-eighteenth century onwards. This should not be surprising, given that tourism as an industry requires the replication of satisfying experiences (including hospitality relationships) in attractive surroundings, so that operating 'sustain-ably' and 'responsibly' should be in the interests of service providers with a long-term commitment to their enterprises. The Cape Town Declaration grew out of the Cape Town Conference on Responsible Tourism in Destinations, and insisted that 'tourism can only be managed for sustainability at the destination level' (Cape Town Declaration on Responsible Tourism, 2002). This article embraces that assertion, while recognising: that all tourism involves travel (with enormous environmental implications, especially carbon footprints for travellers by air, but with direct impacts on life on the ground at destinations); that it necessarily entails negotiation between locals and outsiders (brokered by intermediaries); that destinations are therefore anything but autonomous; that one of the purposes of the Cape Town Declaration was to empower local people who had been marginalised from decision-making processes and shut out by 'leakage' from the fruits of their labours; and that the complex interactions of'glo-calisation' are central to the understanding of contemporary tourism (Salazar, 2010). It explores questions of 'responsible tourism' in the past through brief introductory historical case studies of the management and development of five specific destinations: the English Lake District; the English coastal resort of Whitby; the Spanish mineral springs resort of Mondariz Baln-eario; the development of 'social tourism' in Mar del Plata, Argentina; and the distinctive experience of the island of Lanzarote (Canary Islands), which is developed further as the key post-Second World War example. The case studies, taken together, cover nearly a quarter of a millennium, from the mid-eighteenth to the late twentieth centuries, and take the analysis from the early tourist activities of self-consciously cultured elites to the kind of post-Second World War 'mass tourism' (an unduly simplistic label) which is associated with package tours and jets (Walton, 2009). This does not purport to be a representative sample of experiences: it is geographically skewed and is dominated by Western European and colonial settler societies, reflecting the current imbalance of available historical research. It does, however, give due weight to the importance of domestic tourism within nation-states, which may have different characteristics from the international tourist traffic flows which dominate the literature (Singh, 2009). None of the examples presented below is unprob-lematic, as we might expect when looking for the imagined roots of a current concept, thereby incurring the risk of falling into anachronism. Some historians would regard a search for traces of 'responsible tourism before responsible tourism,' avant la lettre, as philosophically untenable and ipso facto illegitimate. I prefer not to be so pedantic, and I also believe that it is possible, indeed important, to learn from history. This point needs to be made at the outset, because (as in so many aspects of tourism studies) a commitment to the understanding of historical processes has thus far been conspicuous by its absence from the literature that is specifically directed at responsible tourism as a theme (and difficult to find in the understandably policy-orientated world of sustainable tourism); but to act responsibly, in a specific local setting, must always entail the achievement of a respectful apprehension of conflict, tension and community in the past, not least in relation to the history of tourism provision in itself. Each case-study entails the analysis of conflict and compromise between contending interests, which have sometimes involved alternative visions of'responsibility;' and problems arise from the very limited availability of historical studies of tourism labour forces, whether local or migrant, not least in the specific case-study locations (Walton, 2012b). Nevertheless, the opening out of a historical dimension to these questions will shed further comparative light on an important concept. We begin by introducing the key issues and concepts, and the ways in which they might be interrogated in the past. 'Responsible' and 'Sustainable' Tourism: Definitions and Contexts The Cape Town Declaration of 2002 is an ambitious document. It divides the concept of'responsible tourism' into economic, social and environmental spheres, although there is inevitably a good deal of overlap and interaction between these categories. It seeks to promote respect for the local people, environments and economic systems in which tourism takes place, advocating the effective involvement of local people in decision-making and governance, and the development of culturally aware, positive interaction between locals and tourists or, in language it does not use, hosts and guests. It advocates collective engagement in conservation, and it specifically urges the promotion of access and enjoyment for the physically challenged and other excluded groups. In economic terms, it urges that the 'leakage' of the economic benefits of tourism beyond the area should be kept to a minimum and supports the locally-based small, medium-sized and 'micro' businesses that make such a significant contribution to tourism economies across the globe. It is at pains to safeguard cultural and ecological distinc-tiveness and diversity, while protecting local people (especially children) against sexual exploitation, and generally safeguarding the vulnerable against the consequences of the untrammelled machinations of the market. In so doing, it builds on and extends concepts of sustainable tourism, while trying to make them more enforceable, with considerable emphasis on a strong culture of genuine consensus-building, impact assessment and audit. In principle, respon- sible tourism has the potential, however remote, to become sustainable tourism with teeth (Cape Town Declaration on Responsible Tourism, 2002; Lashley & Lee-Ross, 2000). These are virtuous but demanding prescriptions, especially for corporations and hedge funds whose sole concern is to extract maximum 'shareholder value' in the short term in the form of rent derived from the exploitation of an asset. It is good to see ethics, long-term planning, responsive impact assessment and genuine asset management, collaboratively conceived, being given such weight. The focus on the destination is a refreshing reminder that while capital as well as tourists may be mobile, restless and fickle, not all workforces are flexible and migrant. Destinations are places and have inhabitants with families. They also have histories, which form and inform their cultures. Responsible tourism, like sustainable tourism, undermines assumptions about the need for never-ending growth and for the competitive extraction of maximum profits in the short run. It is therefore capable of providing a critical perspective of crucial importance, as it challenges a current deadly disease which has infected economic orthodoxy and policy formulation, in ways that are toxic for the future of humanity on a planet which has finite resources and suffers from a prevailing culture of empowering greed by slashing, burning and moving on. The famous Tourism Area Life Cycle model, whose logic is to reduce destinations to the status of a product (or, now, a brand) with a life cycle, assumes as natural that destinations will pass through all of its evolutionary stages to a point of over-development, saturation and crisis (Butler, 2006). We need to redefine success in tourist destinations in terms of carefully managed, non-disruptive development to an ecologically sound and socially equitable steady state, which can then be responsibly sustained, halting the 'cycle' at the point at which it provides satisfaction without doing damage, although this perspective does not help in dealing with the many destinations which have passed that point and are in need of rehabilitation. Taking this step necessarily entails recognising the necessity for intervention to restrain the damaging tendencies of competitive market forces, and it is difficult to see a successful future for responsible tourism without a committed programme of proactive planning and regulation by clean governments in dialogue with local people and business interests. This is, to say the least, a demanding agenda, especially when dealing with multinational corporations and institutionally corrupt, sometimes klepto-cratic governments. It cuts to the heart of current discontents. Responsible tourism, like its close relative (and, in some senses, progenitor) sustainable tourism, needs to recognise the need for historical understandings of its concerns. It cannot afford to be merely present-minded. Occasional articles on this theme in tourism studies journals carry a historical dimension (Lambert, 2008), but 'history' is more often a key descriptive ingredient in 'heritage tourism' packages than a route to understanding antecedents, process and issues over time. The enduringly influential Tourism Area Life Cycle, whose agenda is highly relevant to sustainable and responsible tourism, ought to have a strong historical component, because it purports to analyse change over time as destinations pass through the imagined stages of the model; but in practice, with a few recent exceptions (for example Gale and Botterill, 2005), an understanding of historical approaches and procedures is conspicuous by its absence, and the stages of the model have tended to be 'read off' without research-based substantiation (Butler, 2006; Walton, 2009). Van der Duim's generally excellent book Tourismscapes, a valuable contribution to tourism studies at the strategic meeting point between anthropology, cultural geography and sociology, is typical of most such work (that of John Urry included) in displaying a 'tin ear' for history. In three pages, he provides a highly schematic tabulated summary of three 'waves' of international environmental concern, beginning in 1900,1970 and the late 1980s. If he had read any serious history, he would have become aware of much earlier conflicts and developments, of changes and contestation in the history of environmental thought, and of complexities and cross-currents rendering any attempt at such reductive simplification risible. It is curious that so many academics (and others) in tourism studies still treat history with an absent-minded contempt that they would never dream of applying to any other discipline (Van der Duim, 2005, pp. 154-157; Walton, 2011; Walton, 2009). 'Social tourism,' intervention by the state or by voluntary organisations for the provision or enablement of access to holiday and tourism facilities to those who would be unable to enjoy them without assistance, is another dimension of responsible tourism, partially but not fully addressed in the Cape Town Declaration. There are significant historical dimensions to this phenomenon, and it also has a more recent guise of trying to channel the tourism activities of the well-off and mobile into empowering host communities and enhancing their quality of life (Minnaert, Maitland, & Miller, 2006; Walton, 2012a, 2012b). History and Historians As the core ideas of responsible tourism focus on furthering and promoting the understanding and cooperative management of the environment, society and culture of tourist destinations, the development of historical understanding is best pursued through case studies, or rather (given constraints of space) illustrative vignettes, which can elucidate aspects of the key issues in specific settings. The strong emergence of the productive sub-discipline of environmental history provides an essential context here, although it rarely engages directly with tourism as such (Mosley, 2010). It seldom uses the terminology of sustainable or responsible tourism, but where it engages with tourism-related issues, the relevance of its approaches becomes evident. Indeed, there are far too many relevant studies to discuss, or even cite, here, and what follows will necessarily be selective. There are few thematic book-length surveys over wide areas and long periods, but (for example) Hassan's study of seaside tourism, health and bathing water quality in nineteenth- and twentieth century Britain provides an excellent early example of the potential contribution of environmental history to understandings of the development of sustainabil-ity and responsibility in tourism. It pays due attention to politics and the role of municipal and national government, to environmental aesthetics and to relationships between public health and applied science, and makes the valuable transferable point that campaigns over (for example) bathing water quality were more likely to be focused on the consumer rights of surfers and swimmers as particular interest-groups, than on principled general concern about the sustainable use of resources (Hassan, 2003, p. 195). Mackenzie's work on hunting, conservation and access to and use of land and natural resources in the British Empire is about tourism (and the problems of sustainabil-ity, including relationships between governments and stakeholders) without actually saying so, pre-dating as it did the emergence of discourses of sustainability and responsibility, and illustrating what can be missed when research is based on mechanical word searches (Mackenzie, 1988). There are also useful monographs based on intensive research on specific places, set in context. They include Lambert's book on the Cairngorms in Scotland, where a contested ski resort development raised a range of questions which were relevant to 'responsible tourism,' including conflicts between rival users of a cherished environment (Lambert, 2001); Garner's study of Arcachon, in south-western France, where the rise of coastal tourism had to negotiate its relationships with an established fishing community and a distinctive, fragile ecosystem; (Garner, 2005) and Chiang's examination of the fraught relationships between sardine fisheries and coastal tourism in Monterey, California, including debates over whether to commemorate the legacy of the sardine fishery as heritage tourism or to obliterate it as part of a rejected past (Chiang, 2008; Palumbi & Sotlea, 2011). Alongside these more ambitious, contextualised historical ventures into what is undoubtedly the study of responsible tourism (and its discontents), even though the relevant vocabularies are not employed, there is a growing array of shorter, more narrowly-focused studies in article form, especially in environmental history journals. A few examples are noted here. Themes include conflicts between tourism and industrial uses, in destination settings which tend to identify tourism with support for rather than challenges to environmental sustainability; industrial employment is set against the less tangible, less measurable opportunities provided by tourism, with its demand for seasonal, part-time, predominantly female labour. Here, questions of 'responsibility' are more focused on the values attached to alternative economic strategies and projected outcomes than on the activities of the tourism sector itself (Bryan, 2011; McFarlane, 2012). However, tourism itself often threatens the environments whose desirability made them into destinations. Australian contributions on the impact of foreshore development on sand dune ecosystems in Queensland, and of coral collection on the Great Barrier Reef over two centuries, have examined problems of environmental degradation, and responses to them. 'Responsibility' has had to be negotiated, here as elsewhere, and requires the informed consent both of tourists and of those who cater for them (Dana-her, 2005; Daley and Griggs, 2008). The perceived needs of certain kinds of tourist experience have also led to the exclusion of aboriginal peoples from national parks in North America and, for example, from hunting grounds in parts of Africa and India, while in Australia Uluru/Ayers Rock has become a contested site and symbol between Native Australian people and White Australians at the 'heart of Australia,' with important tourism-related dimensions to the conflicts and negotiations. Although such exclusions have often been justified on the grounds of conservation of species and habitat, or protection of 'wilderness,' such justifications may provide a cloak of sustainability and responsibility behind which less reputable motives of commercial tourism promotion and social exclusion may lurk (Binneman & Niemi, 2006; Barnes, 2010; Mackenzie, 1988). Historical studies provide many such examples of the ambiguities and cross-currents in the rhetoric, practices and conflicts of tourism, but they tend to be hidden from the view of researchers who are interested in 'sustainable' and 'responsible' tourism as categories, because they usually deploy different keywords and a distinct vocabulary. There is a clear danger of work on these themes being impoverished not only by neglect of the historical literature, but also by researchers confining their reference base to ghettoes of those who share their conventional vocabulary, assumptions and cultures of citation, buying into the damagingly distorting world of impact factors and citation indices (Archambault & Lariviere, 2009). Another half-hidden variation on the themes of sustainable and responsible tourism is the example of the National Trust, the enormous (more than four million members) English voluntary organisation which has ownership 'in perpetuity' of very extensive tracts of attractive and evocative landscape and coastline, and historic houses, which makes it a particularly powerful player in heritage and outdoor tourism, while giving it a 'reputation for power' and considerable political influence. Since its small beginnings in the mid-1890s, it has grown first steadily, then (after the Second World War) spectacularly; its unique commitment to permanent preservation, which was designed to move its properties out of the threatening turmoil of the market place without recourse to direct state intervention, has given it an almost unique commitment to sustainability. However, this in turn requires it to act as a practitioner of responsible tourism: to look to its financial stability, to sustain strong relationships with the members who fund it (which entails delicate negotiation over emotive and divisive issues such as whether fox-hunting should be allowed on Trust properties), to expand its membership numbers and social base, to consider the implications of sourcing and pricing policies for its shops and restaurants, to negotiate carefully with the tenants of its farms and the inhabitants of its local communities (not least about nature conservation and biodiversity issues), and to respect the interests and concerns of its neighbours. Here is a particularly interesting, and important, case-study in the management of responsible tourism, although identified generically with a national organisation rather than an individual destination; but, here as elsewhere, this terminology is not actually used in the existing literature (Walton, 1996; Waterson, 1999; Murphy, 2002; Hall, 2003). Case Studies It is appropriate that the English Lake District, which has been strongly associated with the National Trust since the organisation's origins, should provide the first of the brief case studies of destinations, which will now be offered to illustrate the role of historical research in understanding responsible tourism. It was one of the earliest tourist destinations in the modern world, but it is not well known outside Anglophone cultures, because its distinctive identity since the early nineteenth century has been as a 'literary landscape' associated with the writings of a group of English poets, among whom William Wordsworth has the highest profile. In recent years, it has also attracted significant numbers of Japanese tourists, but here again the core attraction is literary: Beatrix Potter, who became a Lake District farmer and landowner, was the author of anthropomorphic animal stories, which are used to teach introductory English to many Japanese students. The Lake District has become a candidate for unesco World Heritage Site status, under a 'cultural landscape' rubric which was invented for it, and since the late eighteenth century it has been a cockpit of conflict between conservationists and votaries of silent appreciation and contemplation of landscape and ambience, on one hand, and advocates of recreational and sporting development, sometimes associated with a perceived (and positive) democratisation of tourism, on the other (Walton & O'Neill, 2004; Walton & Wood, 2013). The Lake District emerged as a destination for tourists in the mid-eighteenth century, as new positive assessments of upland landscapes placed it on the itineraries of affluent travellers who were following the fashion for the 'discovery of Britain.' Its identity as a 'literary landscape' was reinforced and complemented when Wordsworth became a strong and sustained advocate of preserving the landscape and the existing rural social arrangements, which he romanticised as a 'republic of shepherds and agriculturists,' small farmers and proprietors who were the custodians of the landscape. The most popular vehicle for this agenda was a guide book, which was first published in 1810, became well known through its expanded fifth edition in 1835, and has remained in print. Wordsworth encouraged tourists, but only the kind that were able to make the effort and find the time to explore and contemplate. He understood that at a time of economic and social flux, and of transport innovation (he campaigned to keep the new railways out of the central Lake District), pressures for development would challenge his idealised vision of bucolic landscape and simple hospitality. His aim, as Garrett ex- presses it, was to save the landscape both for and from the people, so there were elements of elitism, exclu-siveness and paternalism in his values. Nevertheless, the power of the Wordsworth agenda to mobilise support was enduring, reasserted in the later nineteenth century by the art critic, polymath, social reformer and alternative political economist John Ruskin and by Canon Hardwicke Rawnsley, one of the founders of the National Trust; the same issues remain prominent in the case for unesco World Heritage Site designation. The Wordsworth agenda has been controversial throughout its existence, but there is no doubt that he and his followers deserve to be understood and assessed, critically, as pioneers of 'responsible tourism' (Wordsworth, 1835; Bate, 1991; Whyte, 2000; Garrett, 2008, p. 182; Walton & Wood, 2013). TheexampleofWhitby, onthecoastofNorth Yorkshire in north-eastern England, is equally complex. Whitby was an old fishing and commercial port, but it was also one of the first modern locations for commercial sea-bathing, beginning in the early eighteenth century. During the second half of the nineteenth century, it developed a split but integrated personality. A conventional Victorian seaside resort was developed on the western cliffs, but the harbour area in the valley of the River Esk became attractive to tourists, often bearing paintbrush or camera, in search of the quaint, the picturesque, a fashionable 'other,' among the jumble of cottages and paraphernalia of the fishing industry, while the trade ofthe harbour generated interest of its own. These were not separate tourism markets, but overlapped, as the health and recreation tourism of the beach and cliffs coexisted with the romantic untidiness and suspect sanitation of the harbour zone. This was a satisfyingly sustainable economy, achieved by accident rather than design, not least because tourism dovetailed with other economic activities not only seasonally, but on a daily basis. Such arrangements were common to many seaports which developed coastal resort functions. However, by the 1930s a new paradigm of public health and planning was emerging, driven by central government; and 'Old Whitby' was threatened with wholesale demolition as an unsightly health hazard, especially to its own inhabitants. Defenders soon ral- lied, combining arguments based on historic preservation and artistic value with an appeal to economic self-interest: if the quaint streets of 'Old Whitby' were to be replaced by neat new houses, standardised and geometrically planned, it would look just like everywhere else in sanitised modern Britain, and the artists, photographers and tourists seeking the 'picturesque' would seek surviving alternatives elsewhere. Public health criteria would be sustained, but the town's economic equilibrium would be threatened. The harbour dwellers would be the beneficiaries of responsible, ameliorating intervention, but not all of them wanted it, although no effective consultation was ever reported; the redevelopment would also threaten the sustainability of a branch of the tourist industry that was firmly embedded in the town's economy. The 'responsible' line to take was not clear, with conflicting versions of what might (in effect) constitute 'responsibility,' and opinions were polarised. The Second World War interrupted the demolition programme, which had been delayed and diluted by the conflict; when it was restarted in the mid-1950s, it was soon halted again by changing policies and circumstances, as the surviving little houses became desirable 'second homes' or holiday lets, their value increased and government improvement grants became available. Meanwhile, the local authority had controversially constructed expensive replacement housing, which tried to replicate the informality and interest of the originals, and many visitors were unable to tell the difference. What, under these shifting circumstances, might constitute a 'responsible' tourism policy, in relation to other aspects of the local economy, society and traditions; and for whom? (Walton, 2005; Borsay & Walton, 2011) The third example, Mondariz Balneario, is a resort business which helped to develop the economy of its surrounding area, rather than a town which had to adjust to a new identity as a destination resort. It was a family-run mineral springs or 'spa' resort which came to dominate the economy of a predominantly rural district in Galicia, near the Portuguese border in western Spain, from its origins in 1873, and was consciously managed with what would now be seen as sustainabil-ity and social responsibility in view, not least because the owners clearly recognised that this was in the interests of their business and brand, which embraced a substantial mineral water bottling trade for international distribution. Mondariz Balneario developed an influential national and international visiting public in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, when (despite its enduring inconvenience of access) it became one ofthe most fashionable summer watering-places of Spain and Portugal. It brought together fashionable, political, literary and scientific figures (including prominent women writers) from Britain and Portugal as well as Madrid and Galicia while acting as a nursery for the early development of Galician nationalism. These developments also highlighted the role of two generations of members of the Peinador family, who ran the balneario from its effective inception in 1873 until it became a limited company in 1932, in creating a distinctive, high-profile identity for the resort while stimulating innovations in transport, advertising and publishing which were aimed at consolidating and extending the external visibility and reach of their establishment. The Peinador brothers, who managed the growth and heyday of the resort, were eager to become as self-sufficient as possible in local produce, campaigned for more effective policing and local services, stimulated local transport improvements, and encouraged the growth of complementary tourism-related businesses run by local people (Del Castillo Campos, 1992; Hooper, 2012). This could be viewed as a model of sustainable and responsible tourism, looking to the benign economic development of a poor area which had suffered a high volume of emigration, generating extensive employment opportunities for local families (including many women), and promoting beneficial external interest in the district. The delights of local scenery were assiduously marketed, while local customs and architecture were celebrated. Nevertheless, there were crosscurrents. The Peinador brothers' efforts to take beneficial ownership of one of the key local mineral springs led to a bitter thirty-year lawsuit against the local authority, which argued that they were, in effect, privatising a public resource by legal sleight of hand. Local political networks, with connections in the national capital, were mobilised on either side. Conflict between the business and the local authority became endemic, as the balneario proprietors complained of fiscal discrimination against their business; in 1925, they were allowed to secede to form their own municipality, the smallest in Spain. The local authority developed its own rival water-bottling plant. Finally, the founding brothers were unable to sustain the family business model through a new generation, and the whole enterprise was torn apart by the Spanish Civil War, to be resurrected under new auspices at the end of the twentieth century. Thus was an apparent exercise in responsible tourism moderated by sustained local conflict, accusations of fraudulent abstraction of resources, and the lack of a sustained succession strategy when the powerful personalities of the founders were removed from the equation (Del Castillo Campos, 1992). As suggested above, 'social tourism' might be regarded as potentially yet another face of 'responsible tourism.' The concept embraces not only the disabled, but also families who would otherwise be excluded from tourist activities by poverty, and especially the children of poor and other working-class families. It has been prominent, under various auspices, in many European countries, especially since the 1930s. In the River Plate region of South America, especially in Argentina, its development was particularly strongly promoted, by government, large employers and trade unions, across the middle decades of the twentieth century, with roots in the authoritarian conservative governmentsofthe1930sbutfullyfloweringafter1946, under the Peron governments. Indeed, Elisa Pastoriza argues convincingly that in Argentina, in particular, 'social tourism' promoted by national and provincial governments, trade unions and charitable foundations became such an accepted and established fact of life that Argentinians became unaware that theirs was a unique case. This entailed organisational and financial support for journeys and accommodation, while children's holiday 'colonies' were established, and established hotels were bought and converted to 'social tourism' uses. The most dramatic and symbolic dimension of these developments was in the coastal resort of Mar del Plata, which had been represented since the early twentieth century as both a national melting-pot and an elite playground, and now found that hitherto socially exclusive areas such as the Playa Bristol and its casino were opened out to the lower-middle and working classes. Mar del Plata became an accessible celebration of national unity and egalitarian pride. This might be regarded as a political version of the use of responsible tourism for democratic nation-building purposes, but the older elites preferred to go elsewhere, and the overall Peronist project always had fierce opponents, drawn from all parts of the political spectrum. Moreover, concern for accessibility and growth did not always spill over into a sense of environmental responsibility, while laws of property development, which were intended to extend the availability of seaside flats, led to speculative construction and the tearing down of attractive older neighbourhoods. Here, too, there were costs to set against the benefits (Pastoriza, 2011). Cesar Manrique and the Case of Lanzarote As we bring the analysis into the age of the jet aircraft, the charter flight and the airborne package holiday, the case of Lanzarote, in the Canary Islands, is of particular interest. This might indeed be regarded as the essential, inspiring historical basis on which ideas about sustainable and responsible tourism can be grounded in space, time and process, and juxtaposed with the problems they face 'on the ground' even when promoted by a charismatic local figure. On this volcanic island near the African coast, from the 1960s until his death in 1992 (and beyond the grave), the artist Cesar Manrique inspired and developed what Van der Duim plausibly represents as a distinctive kind of tourism which coincided with the new pressures of the last third of the twentieth century, and which might retrospectively be labelled as 'sustainable,' and certainly as 'responsible.' Indeed, Van der Duim uses the example of Manrique's 'legacy' to introduce the argument of his stimulating monograph on 'Tourismscapes' (Van der Duim, 2005, pp. 15-16). A more developed interpretation of Manrique's importance is provided by Fernando Sabate's excellent short presentation, which establishes his pioneering role in several aspects of sustainable and responsible tourism. He argues that, 'What Manrique projected (and in large part achieved) constitutes an example of what is now known as sustainable territorial development,' a generation before the Brundtland Report. As Sabate suggests, Manrique was already working artistically with Lanzarote's spectacular volcanic natural features before tourism became paramount to the island's economy. He was looking to the future, beginning work on his Los Jameos artistic project in 1966, while the volcanic site at Timanfaya was already open to the public in 1970, before its designation as a national park, at a time when the annual number of foreign visitor arrivals was only just over 20,000. Manrique aimed to offer visitors more than just 'sun and beach,' wanting them to value the island's natural and cultural assets while rehabilitating and enhancing 'degraded spaces' like the old quarry site on which he created the Jardin de Cactus. He sought to educate by example and demonstration, and constructed itineraries across the island, linking the sites of interaction between nature and culture that constituted his large-scale artistic works, and sharing tourism revenue generation across the interior. He insisted that tourism must pay to sustain the landscapes it enjoyed, controversially introducing access charges at Timanfaya, and using them to generate social funds to counteract the adverse impact of unplanned tourism; he also talked with, and listened to, peasants and fishermen. He was able to achieve all this during the 1960s and 1970s by enlisting the active and enthusiastic support of the island's government and public administration, bridging the Spanish transition from the Franco dictatorship to a fledgling democracy. This adds up to a remarkably full inventory of what were later to be labelled as the salient characteristics of responsible tourism (Sabate Bel, 2012; Gomez Aguilera, 2001). With due allowance for context and change over time, there are significant parallels with William Wordsworth's role in promoting his prototype of 'responsible tourism' in the English Lake District (Walton and O'Neill, 2004). Manrique, who has been described as 'painter, sculptor, architect, ecologist, conservator of monuments and buildings, urban development planner, (and) designer of landscapes and gardens,' was a native of Arrecife, the capital of Lanzarote, and from childhood was deeply attached to the dramatic volcanic coastal landscape of La Caleta de Famara. He returned to the island after enjoying an extended bursary in New York in the mid-1960s, where excitement at encounters with Pop Art, Op Art and Andy Warhol gave way to revulsion at the artificiality of the big-city rat race (Fundacion Cesar Manrique, 2012; 'La Mitad Invisible,' 2010; Antena, 1954-1965, 27 April 1965). His return to Lanzarote as his home base was permanent and committed, and he began to construct his house and gallery, El Taro de Tahiche, around a lava flow and using volcanic bubbles, completing it in 1968. Further artistic ventures, working with the island's spectacular natural features, followed in a sustained burst of creativity. Manrique identified tourism as a necessary route out of poverty for his fellow-islanders, but it was to be a distinctive form of tourism, one which went with the flow of nature and culture, and respected Lan-zarote's unique natural environment without damaging or degrading it (Gomez Aguilera, 2001). The power of Manrique's vision made a highly visible impact from the mid-1960s onwards, when Lan-zarote's tourism industry was just beginning to make headway, a decade or more behind existing developments on the Balearic Islands (especially) and Spain's Mediterranean coast (Pack, 2006; Buswell, 2011). Lan-zarote had a long history of involvement in international commerce and the global economy: American crops such as potatoes and tobacco arrived in the eighteenth century, but successive booms in barilla harvesting and processing (providing soda ash for the nascent international chemical industry) and the preparation and export of the red dye cochineal (from insects infesting prickly pear plants) were both overtaken by chemical innovations that bypassed these raw materials. Emigration, especially to Latin America, also opened out distant horizons (Gonzalez Morales, 2010). Tourism, however, was a late arrival on the scene: the first pamphlets for a tourist market on Lan-zarote's natural attractions did not appear until 1936, just in time for the Spanish Civil War to place everything 'on hold' (Acosta Rodriguez, 2007; Gonzalez Morales & Hernandez Luis, 2007; Martin Hormiga, 1995). Development picked up very slowly during the 1950s. Manrique painted murals for Arrecife's national Parador de Turismo, which originally opened around 1950 and was expanded between 1954 and 1957 in response to gently rising demand (Cesar Manrique, 2012; Antena, 1954-1965,16 February 1954; Acosta Rodriguez, 2007, p. 580). Nevertheless, in 1956 the arrival of 36 Swiss tourists by the Iberia mail flight (on two separate planes) was still a prominent news item on the island (Antena, 1954-1965,13 November 1956). In 1958, work began on an 11-kilometre coastal highway to open out eight beaches on the way to Playa Blanca, passing through (and giving access to) the area of the Tias municipality that became Puerto del Carmen, the epicentre of 'mass tourism' on Lanzarote in the late twentieth century (Antena, 1954-1965, 15 July 1958). By 1964, seven or eight charter flights a week were arriving from Tenerife, but direct long-distance flights were a thing of the future, and even in 1965, when the airport finally acquired an asphalt runway, the prospect of Fred Olsen Line sending regular groups of cruise passengers had a higher profile than airborne arrivals (Antena, 1954-1965, 14 April 1964, 27 April 1965). By 1969, when substantial improvements were being made to the airport, Arrecife had three sizeable hotels as well as the Parador, and its new urban plan allowed for a scattering of isolated ten-story buildings among the prevailing low-rise. However, this was still very small-scale, and Manrique's known antipathy to this kind of development was sufficiently widely known to constitute a barrier to the proliferation of large hotels and apartment blocks (Lanzarote: la Isla de los Volcanes, 1969). Crucial to Manrique's influence was his friendship (from childhood) with Jose Ramirez Cerda, who was President of the Cabildo, the governing body of Lan-zarote, between 1960 and 1974, an unusually long period which was also formative in the development of tourism on the island. The political dimensions of this association illustrate Manrique's willingness to work with the Franco regime for the good of his island (Martin Hormiga & Perdomo, 1995; Fundacion Cesar Manrique, 2012). This alliance was central to the implantation of Manrique's ideas, during a period of transition which saw tourist arrivals increase from just over 25,000 in 1970 to nearly 175,000 in 1981, with a growing international presence as the growth in Spanish visitors (around 40 per cent in 1970, but 22 per cent in 1981, although numbers increased nearly four- fold) was swamped by Germans (nearly 40 per cent in 1981) and other nationalities (in 1981, the British were just behind the Spanish, and Norwegians accounted for nearly 10 per cent of the total) (Acosta Rodriguez, 2007, p. 567). However, the transition to democracy in Spain from the late 1970s onwards, which coincided on Lanzarote with accelerating pressure for large-scale tourism development for international markets, led to a dilution of Manrique's influence. According to a guide-book issued in 1969, at the dawn of the new age of airborne 'mass tourism' in this setting, Lanzarote offered 'Unimaginable contrasts of colour and landscape and, above all, the identification of people ('el hombre') with their geography. Here, strangeness and idiosyncrasy are at the core; in agriculture man dominates the land without doing violence to it [...] the architecture is rooted in simplicity, and even the silence of the island has its colour.' (Lanzarote: la Isla de los Volcanes, 1969) This is more than the usual purple prose of the guide-book industry, and it demonstrates a recognisably Manrique-influenced discourse aimed at a discerning niche market (with both initiative and spending power). However, Manrique and his allies were unable to withstand the growing pressures for speculative coastal development, which became accentuated during the 1980s, when the volume of popular demand from northern Europe for family package holidays in sunny coastal locations really began to increase (Demetriadi, 1997). By 1991, Lanzarote was attracting over a million tourist arrivals per annum, and in the early twenty-first century the total was approaching two million (Acosta Rodriguez, 2007, p. 567). Manrique was already expressing disquiet about the tendency towards 'mass tourism' in 1978, and in 1986 he travelled to Madrid to present a manifesto against the 'urban chaos and architectural barbarities' of new developments for less discriminating new markets. He produced a cri de coeur of protest against the new unplanned developments, addressing himself to the island person-ified:'[...] those who have fought to rescue you from your enforced isolation and the poverty which you always suffered, begin to tremble with fear when we see how you are destroyed and submitted to massifi-cation. We realise just how futile our accusations and cries for help are to the ears of speculators in their hysterical avarice and the authorities' lack of decision that sometimes tolerates and even stimulates the irreversible destruction of an island [...]' (Van der Duim, 2005, pp. 15-16; Gomez Aguilera, 2001, pp. 118-19) In 1992, Manrique was killed in a traffic accident, and although Lanzarote was designated as a unesco biosphere reserve in the following year, the spread of unplanned lowest-common-denominator (though not high-rise) development along the east coast traded increased tourism income against chaotic urbanisation (Fundacion Cesar Manrique, 2012). In 2010, after the long development boom had broken and a strong of planning violations and illegal hotel developments came to light, unesco was reported to be considering the withdrawal of Lanzarote's status as a biosphere reserve (Brooks, 2010). By 2012, the feature on Manrique on the promotional website Lan-zarote Island was presenting him as purely and simply an artist, with no mention of his environmental and sustainable/ responsible tourism campaigns. This might be regarded as a neat way of appropriating those elements of his life and work that were digestible for current tourism policies, while marginalising the inconvenient truths he spoke to the powerful, in ways that are reminiscent of the treatment of the art critic and radical political economist John Ruskin in the English Lake District (Cesar Manrique, 2012; Hanley & Walton, 2010, ch. 7). This reminds us that Manrique was not unique. As Van der Duim points out, and as the actor-network theory he uses assumes, influential figures who were integrated into international networks, capable of articulating and making use of connections between the local and the global, and able to mobilise powerful figures in government, were capable of making a difference to patterns of tourism development in other settings. The case of the poet Robert Graves, who may have used his contacts with General Franco's tourism minister Manuel Fraga to help to preserve Mallorca's rugged north-western coast (and his home at Deia) from large-scale and intrusive tourism development, is far from being an exact parallel; but it might fit Van der Duim's model rather well (Van der Duim, 2008; Waldren, 1996). On a broader canvas, if we relate the debates over the development of the national park network in the United States to a historical agenda for responsible tourism, the evangelical role of John Muir, his engagement with government and opinion formers, and the debates over the role of tourism in national parks might usefully be seen as anticipating the issues raised by Manrique's interventions; but one of the delights of history is that it never repeats itself precisely across time, space and cultures (Worster, 2008; Huntley, 2011). Nor was Manrique unsuccessful, though he lamented his failure to live up to his own exacting expectations. He may have 'lost' the eastern coastal strip on both sides of Arrecife and its airport, between Costa Teguise and Playa Blanca, from the 1980s onwards; but the rest of the island bears few scars. As in the case of Mallorca's north-west, this outcome was considerably assisted by basic geographical conditions: neither the terrain nor the prevalent strong winds in the north and west were conducive to the conventional 'sun and beach' tourism that would have stimulated unplanned development on an intrusive scale. Nevertheless, Man-rique's moral authority and reputation for power must have played their part, just as William Wordsworth and John Ruskin, and the followers of their traditions in England's National Trust, set intangible barriers to certain kinds of intrusive development, challenging their legitimacy in the Lake District (Walton and Wood, 2013). Moreover, a large number of 'sun and beach' tourists take excursions to the sites associated with Manrique's syntheses of nature, art and culture, encountering spaces and stimuli which would otherwise have remained beyond their experience. The impact of this is no less valuable for not being readily measurable, and tick-box questionnaires with predefined alternative responses would not achieve that McKinseyan goal. Pulling the Threads Together: Implications and Conclusions The core argument of this paper is that responsible tourism has a history, or indeed several histories, and that this is not of mere antiquarian interest. It has practical value, and practitioners can learn from it. The case studies developed in preceding paragraphs demonstrate the complexities entailed in learn- ing from the past, and we should not be surprised that each of them brings out different aspects of a proto-responsible tourism agenda. We cannot expect tidiness or uniformity, but we can hope to be stimulated by transferable themes. As the literature on sustainable tourism expands, there is a danger that it will tend to focus on narrow current case studies, which may bring economic benefits for firms seeking to use the concept for the maximisation of profit. The same may come to apply to responsible tourism, as these ideas become desirable labels to justify projects and practices by mechanically following check-lists and reducing the whole to less than the sum of the parts. A review of the literature from this perspective is beyond the scope of the present paper. For the academic discussion of responsible tourism to promote real sustainability and responsibility, and to avoid a cumulative 'greenwash' effect, it will be necessary to keep a close eye on the founding principles, and to look at the developing themes and arguments holistically in local contexts. Responsible tourism needs to be more than just another way of laying claim to virtue in the pursuit of financial gain. If its goals are pursued in a principled and convincing way, it will come into systematic conflict with the profit-maximising, top-down and centre-outward, imposed line management orthodoxies of most big business, in an environment where it is impossible to hold management to undertakings that may damage profit levels (Thompson, 2003). It needs to be able to deliver on its ideals, as set out so eloquently at Cape Town; and this will entail the subverting of the established assumptions of the market place. It also needs to be audited qualitatively, in dialogue with all the stakeholders, and without resort to the reductive use of check-list 'consultations' whose questionnaires set their own agenda of inclusion and exclusion. Without such a revolution in attitudes and behaviour, as Cesar Manrique found, all the audited good intentions in the world will be undermined by the destructive corporate forces of insensate greed. This is a central challenge for our times. References Acosta Rodriguez, J. E. (2007). Los impactos territoriales del turismo en la Isla de Lanzarote (Unpublished doctoral thesis). Universidad de Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, Las Palmas, Spain. Antena. (1954-1965). Archivo Documental de Lanzarote. Retrieved from http://www.webdelanzarote.com/archivo/ Archambault, E., & Lariviere, V. (2009). History of the Journal Impact Factor: Contingencies and consequences. Sci-entometrics, 79, 639-653. Barnes, J. (2010). Tourism's struggle for the intellectual and material possession of'The Centre' of Australia at Uluru, 1929-2011. Journal of Tourism History, 3,147-176. Bate, J. (1991). Romantic ecology. London, England: Rout-ledge. Binneman, T., & Niemi, M. (2006). 'Let the line be drawn now:' Wilderness, conservation and the exclusion of aboriginal people from Banff National Park in Canada. Environmental History, 11, pp. 724-750. Borsay, P., & Walton, J. K. (Eds.) (2011). Resorts andports: European seaside towns since 1700. Bristol, England: Channel View Publications. Brooks, A. (2010, 7 July). Building craze threatens to end Lanzarote's biosphere status. Independent. Retrieved from http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/ nature/building-craze-threatens-to-end-lanzarotes -biosphere-status-2020064.html Bryan, W. D. (2011). Poverty, industry and environmental quality: Weighing paths to economic development at the dawn of the environmental era. Environmental History, 16, 482-522. Butler, R. W. (Ed.) (2006). The tourist area life cycle: Vol. 1. Applications and Modifications. Bristol, England: Channel View Publications. Buswell, R. J. (2011). Mallorca and tourism. Bristol, England: Channel View Publications. Cape Town Declaration on Responsible Tourism. (2002). Retrieved from http://www.responsibletourismpartnership .org/CapeTown.html Cesar Manrique. (2012). Retrieved from http://www .lanzaroteisland.com/es/cesar_manrique Chiang, C. Y. (2008). Shaping the shoreline: Fisheries and tourism on the Monterey Coast. Seattle, wa: University of Washington Press. Daley, B., & Griggs, P. (2008). 'Loved to death:' Coral collecting in the Great Barrier Reef, Australia, 1770-1970. Environment and History, 14, 89-119. Danaher, M. (2005). Reconciling foreshore development and dune erosion on three Queensland beaches: A historical perspective. Environment and History, 11, 447-74. Del Castillo Campos, M. (1992). Historia del Balneario de Mondarizhasta 1936 (Unpublished doctoral thesis). Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Madrid, Spain. Demetriadi, J. (1997). The golden years, 1951-74. In A. Willi- ams and G. Shaw (Eds.), The rise andfall ofBritish coastal resorts (pp. 49-74). London, England: Cassell. Fundacion Cesar Manrique. (2012). Biography of Cesar Manrique. Retrieved from http://www.cesarmanrique.com/ biografia_e.htm Gale, T., & Botterill, D. (2005). A realist agenda for tourism studies. Tourist Studies, 5,151-174. Garner, A. (2005). A shifting shore: Locals, outsiders and the transformation of a French fishing town. Ithaca, ny: Cornell University Press. Garrett, J. R. (2008). Wordsworth and the writing of the nation. Aldershot, England: Ashgate. Gaviria, M. (1974). Espana a go-go. Madrid, Spain: Ediciones Turner. Gomez Aguilera, F. (2001). Cesar Manrique in his own words. Teguise, Spain: Fundacion Cesar Manrique. Gonzales Morales, A. (2010). Sintesis historico geografica de la Isla de Lanzarote. Las Palmas, Spain: Anroart. Gonzalez Morales, A., & Hernandez Luis, J. A. (2007). El de-sarrollo del turismo en Lanzarote. Santa Cruz de Tenerife, Spain: Ediciones Idea. Hall, M. (2003). The politics of collecting: The early aspirations of the National Trust, 1883-1913. Transactions of the Royal Historical Society, ns 6, 345-357. Hanley, K., & Walton, J. K. (2010). Constructing cultural tourism: John Ruskin and the tourist gaze. Bristol, England: Channel View Publications. Hassan, J. (2003). The seaside, health and environment in England and Wales since 1800. Aldershot, England: Ash-gate. Hooper, K. (2012). Spas, steamships and sardines: Edwardian package tourism and the marketing of Galician regionalism. Journal of Tourism History, 4(2), 205-224. Huntley, J. A. (2011). The making of Yosemite: James Mason Hutchings and the origin of America's most popular national park. Lawrence, ks: University Press of Kansas. Lambert, R. A. (2001). Contested mountains: Nature, development and environment in the Cairngorms Region of Scotland, 1880-1980. Cambridge, England: White Horse Press. Lambert, R. A. (2008) 'Therapy of the green leaf:' Public responses to the provision of forest and woodland recreation in twentieth-century Britain. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 16, 408-427. La Mitad Invisible - Lanzarote: Cesar Manrique. (2010, 27 December). Retrieved from http://www.rtve.es/ alacarta/videos/la-mitad-invisible/mitad-invisible -lanzarote-cesar-manrique/974873/ Lanzarote: la Isla de los Volcanes. (1969). Retrieved from http://www.webdelanzarote.com/archivo/Lanzarote _1969.pdf Lashley, C., & Lee-Ross, D. (2000). Entrepreneurship and small business management in the hospitality industry. Oxford, England: Butterworth-Heinemann. McFarlane, W. S. (2012). Defining a nuisance: Pollution, science and environmental politics on Maine's Androscog-gin River. Environmental History, 17, 307-335. Mackenzie, J. M. (1988). The empire ofnature: Hunting, conservation and British imperialism. Manchester, England: Manchester University Press. Martin Hormiga, A. F. (1995). Lanzarote antes de Cesar. Santa Cruz de Tenerife, Spain: Ediciones Destino. Martin Hormiga, A. F., & Perdomo, M. A. (1995). Jose Ramirez y Cesar Manrique: el cabildo y Lanzarote; una isla como tema. Arrecife, Spain: Servicio de Publicaciones del Cabildo de Lanzarote. Minnaert, L., Maitland, R., & Miller, G. (2006). Social tourism and its ethical foundations. Tourism, Culture and Communication, 7(12), 7-17. Mosley, S. (2010). The environment in world history. London, England: Routledge. Murphy, G. (2002). Founders of the National Trust. London, England: National Trust. Pack, S. D. (2006). Tourism and dictatorship: Europe's peaceful invasion of Franco's Spain. Basingstoke, England: Pal-grave Macmillan. Palumbi, S., & Sotlea, S. (2011). The death and life ofMonterey Bay. Washington, dc: Island Press. Pastoriza, E. (2011). La conquista de las vacaciones. Buenos Aires, Argentina: edhasa. Sabate Bel, F. (2012). Cesar Manrique y el territorio. http:// www.revistacanarii.com/canarii/7/cesar-manrique-y-el-territorio Salazar, N. B. (2010). Envisioning Eden: Mobilizing imaginar-ies in tourism and beyond. Oxford, England: Berghahn. Singh, S. (Ed.) (2009). Domestic tourism in Asia: Diversity and divergence. London, England: Earthscan. Thompson, P. (2003). Disconnected capitalism: Or why employers can't keep their side of the bargain. Work, Employment and Society, 17, 359-378. Van der Duim, V. R. (2005). Tourismscapes: An actor-network perspective on sustainable tourism development. Wageningen, The Netherlands: Wageningen Academic Publishers. Van der Duim, V. R. (2008). Tourism and innovation: An actor-network approach. In G. Richards & J. Wilson (Eds.), From cultural tourism to creative tourism: Part 2. Changing structures ofcollaboration (pp. 11-25). Arn-hem, The Netherlands: Atlas. Waldren, J. (1996). Insiders and outsiders. Oxford, England: Berghahn. Walton, J. K. (1996). The National Trust centenary: Official and unofficial histories. Local Historian, 26, 80-88. Walton, J. K. (2005). Fishing communities and redevelopment: The case of Whitby, 1930-1970. In D. J. Starkey & M. Hahn-Pedersen (Eds.), Bridging the North Sea: Conflict and cooperation (pp. 135-162). Esbjerg, Denmark: Fiskeri- Og Sofartsmuseet. Walton, J. K. (2009). Prospects in tourism history: Evolution, state of play and future developments. Tourism Management, 30, 783-793. Walton, J. K. (2011). Seaside tourism and environmental history. In G. Massard-Guilbaud & S. Mosley (Eds.), Common ground, converging gazes: Integrating the social and environmental in history (pp. 66-85). Newcastle, England: Cambridge Scholars Press. Walton, J. K. (2012a, February). Understanding social tourism over time and across cultures: An international historical perspective. Presented at NET-STaR seminar on Social Tourism and Destination Regeneration, Bradford, England. Walton, J. K. (2012b) 'The tourism labour conundrum' extended: Historical perspectives on hospitality workers. Hospitality and Society, 2(1), 49-75. Walton, J. K. (2013) 'Social tourism' in Britain: History and prospects. Journal of Policy Research in Tourism, Leisure and Events, 5(1), 46-61. Walton, J. K., & O'Neill, C. (2004). Tourism and the Lake District: Social and cultural histories. In D. W. G. Hind & J. P. Mitchell (Eds.), Sustainable Tourism in the English Lake District (pp. 19-47). Sunderland, England: Business Education Publishers, Walton, J. K., & Wood, J. (Eds.) (2013). The making of a cultural landscape: The English Lake District as tourist destination, 1750-2010. Farnham, England: Ashgate. Waterson, M. (1999). The National Trust: The first hundred years. London, England: National Trust. Wordsworth, W. (1835). A guide to the scenery of the lakes in the North of England. Kendal, England: Hudson and Nicholson. Worster, D. (2008). Apassionfornature: ThelifeofJohnMuir. New York, ny: Oxford University Press. Whyte, I. (2000). William Wordsworth's Guide to the Lakes and the geographical tradition. Area, 32,101-106. Competitiveness and Responsibility of Tourist Destinations Gorazd Sedmak University of Primorska, Faculty of Tourism Studies - Turistica, Slovenia gorazd.sedmak@turistica.si Tina Kociper University of Primorska, Faculty of Tourism Studies - Turistica, Slovenia tina. kociper@turistica.si This paper deals with the competitiveness of tourism destinations in connection with destination management organizations (dmo) and corporate responsibility. The primary aim of the research was to assess the overall competitiveness of the north Adriatic seaside resort of Portorož and to identify the elements whose performance the destination should improve in the future in order to enhance its competitive position. The secondary aim was to evaluate whether Portorož is oriented towards responsible tourism. Specifically, in many respects responsible tourism makes destinations more competitive. The results of the study show that the destination has some unexploited potentials to become more competitive and responsible. Keywords: competitiveness; tourism responsibility; seaside destination; Portorož Introduction Any tourism company's primarily goal is economic success, which is also a crucial principle of destination management organizations. Economic success can, of course, be achieved in many different ways. Furthermore, the approaches for ensuring long-term success might differ considerably from those targeting short-term success. The responsibility is essentially connected to the issue of sustainability, including its economic component, since no business ignoring the needs of stakeholders (suppliers, local community, etc.) can survive and be successful over the long term (Sedmak, Majdič, & Sedmak, 2011). 'In an ever more saturated market, the fundamental task of destination management is to understand how a tourism destination's competitiveness can be enhanced and sustained. There is thus a strong need to identify and explore competitive (dis)advantages and to analyze the actual competitive position' (Omerzel Gomezelj & Mihalič 2008). Or, as Ritchie and Crouch (2003) put it, a tourism destination is truly competitive when it is able 'to increase tourism expenditure, to increasingly attract visitors while providing them with satisfying, memorable experiences, and to do so in a profitable way, while enhancing the well-being of destination residents and preserving the natural capital of the destination for future generations.' In fact, in many respects, except perhaps for enclave destinations, it can be argued that what is good for tourists is also good for local people. Neither of them likes the devastation of natural or cultural heritage, traffic congestion, pollution or poverty in the destination. Since the 1970s, awareness of the mutual dependence between business, environment and society has become increasingly present among managers and tourists (Smith & Nystad, 2006). Van de Ven and Graafland (2006) state that corporate responsibility integrates two main missions: long term care for social welfare and a fair relationship with all stakeholders, but also for value creation, which includes the creation of employment, and the ecological and social aspects of an enterprise's operation. This statement can be easily adopted on the destination level. In the future, destinations that will support the requirements of emerging sophisticated clientele and that will follow the trends of flexible specialization can develop competitive advantages and also support local suppliers and the region as a whole as it evolves. Strategic marketing and management can maintain the competitiveness of the destination on the long term only via the optimization of tourism impacts for all stakeholders, tourists, local community and tourism suppliers (Buhalis, 2000). Dodds and Kuehnel (2010) identified four areas that tour operators recognize should be addressed in this respect: care for scarce resources in the destination (like drinking water), minimization of waste generated by tourists, cultural and natural heritage protection, and the encouragement of the local production of goods and services, which bring some economic benefit to the destination. According to the Cape Town Declaration on Responsible Tourism in Destinations (2002): 'Responsible tourism is about making better places for people to live, and better places for people to visit.' Buhalis (2000) is of the opinion that tourism marketing should not only be regarded as a tool for attracting more visitors but should operate as a mechanism to facilitate regional development and ensure suitable gains to all stakeholders involved in the tourism system. Destination Competitiveness According to Dwyer and Kim (2003), a competitive advantage could be attained if the overall appeal of a tourism destination is higher than that of an alternative destination open to potential visitors. In this paper, competitiveness is dealt with on the destination level. Previous studies on destination competitiveness were mostly based on Porter's (1990) and Ritchie and Crouch's (Crouch & Ritchie 1999; Ritchie & Crouch, 2000) models. According to the latter, destination competitiveness depends on four aspects: qualifying determinants, destination management, core resources and attractions, and supporting factors and resources. However, this model is not without deficiencies as some important indices, such as eco-environment quality, are neglected (Zhang, Gu, Gu, & Zhang, 2011). In contrast, 'resource-based view' advocates claim destination competitiveness depends predominantly on its own tangible and intangible resources, as well as combinations of resources and their management (Abfalter & Pechlaner, 2002; Dwyer & Kim, 2003). Dwyer, Kneževic Cvelbar, Edwards and Mihalič (2012) suggest that destination competitiveness in the final stage depends on tourists' perception. Specifically, the so-called core resources and other destination characteristics and features are those that provide the opportunity for tourists to experience the destination. In the stage of deciding where to spend their holidays, they compare these elements, consciously or not. Cracolici and Nijkamp (2008) agree that tourist destinations' competitiveness derives predominantly from the attractiveness characteristics of a certain area. However, the bundles of these characteristics should be (due to the heterogeneity and dynamicity of the market) highly flexible and able to constantly reconfigure. Omerzel Gomezelj and Milhalič (2008) investigated the application of different models of destination competitiveness in Slovenia as a destination and conclude that; 'it is more competitive in its natural, cultural and created resources, but less competitive in the management of tourism and demand conditions, with both uncompetitive elements reducing the Slovenian tourism industry's ability to add value.' Results also show for which areas actions need to be taken in order to enhance Slovenia's tourism competitiveness. There were two analyses of competitiveness in Slovenian tourism conducted in the previous 20 years. Sirše and Mihalič (1999) investigated competitiveness of Slovenia using the De Keyser-Vanhove model and the Integrated model. The results of the study show that Slovenian tourism was stronger in its non-produced attractiveness than in its built infra- and superstructure, and management's capability to add value. For the second analysis (Omerzel Gomezelj & Mihalič, 2008), the authors used the same models and argued that, in comparison to its competitors, Slovenia is more competitive in its inherited and partly created resources (spas, natural endowments, cultural heritage). The authors suggested improvement of managerial efforts and marketing activities in order to improve the country's competitiveness. Based on the abovementioned literature, the following 22 destination competitiveness elements were included in this research; gambling facilities, wellness centers, accommodation quality, health tourism facilities, beaches, safety, accessibility and adjacency, local transport (bus, taxi), neatness, sport and recreation facilities, suitability for family holidays, restaurants, hospitality (local people, tourism workers), relaxed atmosphere, shopping possibilities, night life and entertainment, cultural events, pleasant spirit of the place, natural attractions, authentic local gastronomy offer, prices, cultural heritage. Portorož as a Tourism Destination Portorož is a typical northern-Mediterranean seaside destination in Istria, lying on the southern part of the Piran peninsula. With its adjacent tourism hamlets, it has approximately 6000 hotel beds (Statistical Office of the Republic of Slovenia, 2011). With 415,000 arrivals per year, the municipality of Piran, as the most important Slovene destination, accounts for one fifth of the total Slovene tourism income (Statistical Office of the Republic of Slovenia, 2011). A rough national structure of tourists is: 40% domestic guests, 20% Italians and 15% of both Germans and Austrians; the rest is distributed among other, mostly European, nationalities (Sedmak & Mihalič, 2008). Portorož is presently situated between the second-generation destinations, offering 3S mass tourism following a Fordist production model based on a lack of differentiation, and the third-generation for which high quality accommodation, conference venues, etc. are typical. While tourists visiting second-generation destinations generally do not care much about sus-tainability, new tourists have modified their values and lifestyles and demand that the tourism industry be responsible in the conduct of its business (Claver-Cortes, Molina-Azorin, & Pereira-Moliner, 2007). As in the majority of Mediterranean destinations, a strong seasonal oscillation in tourist arrivals is a problem. In order to retain appeal throughout the year, in the mid-1990s hotels started investments with a focus on wellness, gambling and congress facilities. To a certain point, these investments turned out to be the right decision; however, the development on the destination level was not coordinated, and a part of integral tourism product remained focused on the 'old type' of services. Moreover, the overall connection between the tourism industry, i.e. the Portorož itp (integral tourism product) and its hinterland in terms of typical products and heritage presentations is extremely poor. Thus, the present market position of the destination suffers considerably from a lack of distinctive-ness and consistency (Sedmak & Mihalič, 2008). For further actions, a thorough analysis of present competitiveness of the destination in terms of its strengths and weaknesses is needed. The aim of this paper is threefold. Firstly, we wanted to identify which destinations are perceived by the low season visitors as being competitive with Portorož. The low season was chosen as there is much more potential for improvements to increase capacity occupancy than in the high season when capacities are full. Next, we measured destination's competitive position; in general and regarding its individual features and attractions; finally, the connection between tourism destination competitiveness and its responsibility is discussed. Research Survey Instrument For this study, subjective consumer measures were decided to be appropriate for competitiveness assessment, as suggested by Enright and Newton (2004), who claim that 'specific tourism destinations are not competitive or uncompetitive in the abstract, but versus competing destinations.' In fact, in many previous studies, respondents were asked to rate a destination under study against one or a set of locations chosen by researchers as being competitive to it (Omerzel Gomezelj & Mihalič, 2008). Cracolici and Nijkamp (2008) say that the destinations aiming to be competitive: 'have to face the challenge of managing and organizing their scarce resources efficiently in order to supply a holiday experience that must outperform alternative destination experiences on the tourist market.' In our research, we assumed that by leaving to tourists the free choice of the alternative (or 'second choice') destination the problem of potential unfamil-iarity with it, which was found to be often problematic (Dwyer et al., 2012), was considerably diminished. Therefore, we decided to measure Portorožs competitiveness through comparison of the destination's performance in the eyes of tourists in relation to their closest alternative destination. Therefore, we developed two research questions: rq1a What is the overall competitiveness of Portorož? rq12 According to which elements should the destination improve its performance in order to strengthen its competitive position? rq2 Is Portorož oriented to responsible tourism? The empirical work was carried out from November 2011 through January 2012. Information from 451 tourists/interviewees were gathered using a structured questionnaire form (in the Slovene, Italian, English and German languages). As 15 forms were not completed correctly, only 436 were used for analysis. Information gathering was performed by three trained students under the supervision of the researchers. The sample blueprint was formed using proportional stratification based on shares of tourists by the type of accommodation in previous years. However, due to the relative scarcity of tourists in the low season we were forced to 'catch' some extra interviewees in the hotels during the events, conferences, etc. Interviews took place in hotel lobbies and at a tourist information center. In terms of nationality, the final structure of the sample is comparable to the usual structure of tourists in the low season. The survey instrument was a questionnaire in which the first part included the socio-demographic characteristics of respondents and their motives for their visits. The second part measured destination competitiveness; in tourists were asked which destination they would have visited on this particular holiday if they had not visited Portorož. Then they were asked to compare Portorož's performance in relation to their closest alternative destination. These were subjectively perceived destinations with which Portorož directly competes. In the central part of the questionnaire, the perceived competitiveness of the destination was measured by 22 elements via a five-point scale. Mazanec, Wober and Zins (2007) present several theories and approaches to destination competitiveness assessment, as well as sets of indicators used in previous research. Buhalis (2000) suggests six as a framework for the analysis of tourism destinations (attractions, accessibility, amenities, available packages, activities, ancillary services). However, all of these general indicators seem to overlook some essential specific items, such as security, suitability for family holidays, authenticity of food, lively spirit of the destination, etc., which were found to play a crucial role in tourist decision-making process in some previous studies (Cracolici & Nijkamp, 2008; Enright & Newton, 2004; Nemec Rudež, Sedmak, & Bojnec, 2011; Sedmak, 2006). The authors therefore believed the set of competitiveness elements/parameters should be determined according to the type of destination and the segments of tourists visiting it. In our case, the set of variables was supported by the research carried out by Prašnikar, Brenčič-Makovec, and Cvelbar Kneževic (2006) in Portorož, Grado, Opatija and Nova Gorica, where variables considered to be important for this specific area were included in the indicators set. The majority of these variables could easily also be considered indicators of tourism sustainability/responsibili-ty: cultural and natural heritage resources, safety, neatness, pleasant spirit of the place, local transportation, sport and recreation facilities, authentic local gastronomy offer, cultural events and accessibility of the place, tidy beaches, etc. Thus, interviewees were asked to rate on the five point scale (from -2 'much worse than the competitive destination' to +2 'much better than the competitive destination') the performance of Portorož comparing to the 'second choice destination' for each of the 22 competitiveness elements shown in Table 1. For those elements that could not be compared between the destinations of which they did not have knowledge, they were asked to choose the answer 'I don't know.' These cases were excluded from the analysis. Results The sample comprised 53% women and 47% men. The average age was 46 years. One half of the interviewees were Slovenes (50%), followed by Italians (26%), Aus-trians (10%), Germans (4%) and Russians (1%). Other nationalities were present at levels of less than one percent. The majority had finished secondary education (49%) or had a bachelor degree (41%). In 73% of cases, they were lodged in hotels and in 27% in other accommodation facilities. The main motives of the visit were: 'relaxation' (54%), 'fun' (23%), 'business or education' (11%), 'wellness' (7%), 'vfr' (visiting friends and relatives) (4%) and 'medical care' (2%). For the question 'Where would you go if you would not come to Portorož?' more than one answer was allowed. The majority, 42% of interviewees, answered they would choose a resort in the Croatian part of Istria (Umag - 49, Poreč - 31, Opatija - 29, Pula -20); 37% would visit some other Slovenian town/resort (Bohinj - 32, Bled - 28, Kranjska Gora - 28, Krvavec - 11, Ljubljana - 9); 34% stated spa centers in Slovenia (Čatež - 31, Moravske toplice - 27, Laško - 21); 28% would go to Dalmatia (Dubrovnik - 25, Split - 15, Pag - 10); 22% of interviewees would choose another place on the Slovenian coast (Koper - 50, Izola - 38, Ankaran - 7). Among more remote destinations, Tunisia (13), the us (13), Sicily (11), London (11), Vienna (11) and Spain (9) were mentioned most frequently. In Table 1, the mean values of destination competitiveness elements ratings are presented. Those elements having positive mean value signs are perceived to be Portorož's competitive advantages, while those with negative one competitive weaknesses. The overall mean shows Portorož has a relatively strong competitive position. Its main disadvantages are (presentation of) cultural heritage, price level and the availability of authentic local gastronomy. On the other side, gambling facilities, wellness centers, accommodation quality, health tourism facilities, beaches and safety were assessed as being considerably better than in competitive destinations. This confirms the results of the study Prašnikar et al. (2006), which claims that tourists in Portorož (in comparison to three competitive destinations) are satisfied with the wellness of- Table 1 Mean Values of Destination Competitiveness Elements Destination competitiveness element (1) (2) (3) Gambling facilities 312 0.87 0.79 Wellness centers 343 0.60 0.75 Accommodation quality 366 0.45 0.61 Health tourism facilities 343 0.44 0.81 Beaches 373 0.38 0.89 Safety 369 0.34 0.61 Accessibility, adjacency 377 0.27 0.63 Local transport (bus, taxi) 326 0.25 0.69 Neatness 370 0.24 0.62 Sport and recreation facilities 356 0.23 0.60 Suitability for family holidays 368 0.19 0.58 Restaurants 367 0.17 0.70 Hospitality (local people, tourism 358 0.16 0.60 workers) Relaxed atmosphere 370 0.16 0.59 Shopping possibilities 350 0.12 0.81 Night life, entertainment 292 0.08 0.91 Cultural events 287 0.05 0.77 Pleasant spirit of the place 370 0.03 0.68 Natural attractions 374 0.00 0.67 Authentic local gastronomy offer 361 -0.01 0.65 Prices 369 -0.05 0.72 Cultural heritage 370 -0.12 0.66 Mean 0,22 Notes Column headings are as follows: (1) n, (2) mean, (3) standard deviation. fer and personal safety and dissatisfied with the price level. The elements written in italic were identified by the researchers as having some positive impact on the quality of local people's lives. They were chosen on the basis of previous research findings. Gursoy, Jurowski, and Uysal (2002) found that the environment, economic wellbeing of the community, recreation facilities, and culture crucially influence local community's attitude towards tourism. Munda (2002), in research carried out in Portorož, asked inhabitants what they expect to gain from tourism development. Table 2 Mean Values of Destination Competitiveness Elements by Different Motives of Visit Motive (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) Cultural heritage -0.24 0.09 0.13 0.27 -0.26 4.11 (0.61) (0.69) (0.69) (0.65) (0.75) (0.00) Pleasant spirit of the place -0.04 0.26 0.17 0.09 -0.26 3.34 (0.61) (0.75) (0.78) (0.30) (0.82) (0.00) Shopping possibilities 0.12 0.29 0.17 0.00 -0.30 2.28 (0.80) (0.71) (0.94) (0.63) (0.92) (0.04) Local transport (bus, taxi) 0.20 0.48 0.26 0.09 0.00 2.90 (0.64) (0.65) (0.86) (0.54) (0.87) (0.01) Authentic local gastronomy offer -0.03 0.24 0.13 -0.20 -0.50 6.39 (0.55) (0.64) (0.76) (1-03) (0.75) (0.00) Cultural events -0.03 0.28 0.19 0.00 -0.29 2.46 (0.79) (0.70) (0.75) (0.00) (0.90) (0.02) Night life, entertainment -0.02 0.43 0.24 0.09 -0.48 4.75 (0.89) (0.92) (0.77) (0.54) (0.91) (0.00) Mean -0.01 0.30 0.18 0.05 -0.30 Notes Column headings are as follows: (1) relaxation (standard deviation), (2) fun (standard deviation), (3) wellness (standard deviation), (4) vfr (standard deviation), (5) business, education (standard deviation), (6) f (significance). The highest ranked statements were: nature preservation, neatness, events and sport and recreation possibilities. Simpson (2008) claims the 'community benefit tourism' should (among other factors) take care of the environment and natural assets, infrastructure development (roads, communications, public transport, etc.), safety and security, civic pride in community (culture, heritage, natural resources, unique crafts and skills) and the sense of well-being. Of course, the above selection was to a certain degree subjective, and one could argue the restaurants and entertainment facilities, for example, are also important for the local community. However, as the researchers know the destination exceptionally well, they know that these elements are used only sporadically by local people. Interestingly, those destination features ranked at the top in terms of competitiveness do not contribute (directly) to the local community's quality of life, while the four ranked on the bottom do. These results coincide with the findings of Sobočan (2012) who, on a sample of 135 Portorož inhabitants, found out that only 13% of interviewees think tourism companies in Portorož are responsible in their conducting of business (33% think they are not responsible; the rest answered 'I do not know'). Expectedly, interviewees working in the tourism industry (according to Statistical Office of the Republic of Slovenia (2011) they represent approximately 25% of the active population) were less critical than those who were not. Although several comparisons between a priori segments were made, only the differences between the segments based on the motivation of visit brought to significant differences. In Table 2, comparisons of mean values are presented. From the last row, it can be read that tourists coming to Portorož with business or education reasons are the most critical concerning its competitiveness, as they did not assign any positive value to the seven elements differing significantly among the groups. They gave the lowest marks to authentic local gastronomy and night life/entertainment. In contrast, those tourists who came to the destination to have fun or to enjoy wellness programs found Portorož competitive on all seven elements. The most problematic features seem to be the offer of authentic food, which was assessed negatively by three out of five segments. Discussion The primary aim of this research was to assess the overall competitiveness of Portorož and to identify which elements the destination should improve in the future in order to strengthen its competitive position. The secondary aim was to evaluate whether Portorož is oriented to responsible tourism. While the methodology for the achievement of the former aim was quite straightforward (on-site survey among tourists), the latter was obtained indirectly through an analysis of the relative competitiveness of different elements. We departed from the thesis that responsible tourism development should make a destination appealing for tourists, providing them with pleasant experiences, but at the same time enhance the well-being of destination residents, and preserve and valorize the natural cultural and natural heritage and other resources in a sustainable way. Resorts in the Croatian part of Istria, other Slovenian towns/resorts and spa centers in Slovenia turned out to be the most serious competitors to Portorož in the low season. Generally, the destination holds a relatively strong competitive position, but for three features its performance is worse than in competitive destinations: cultural heritage, price level and the offer of authentic local gastronomy. While due to the shortfall of more in-depth information on the products of competitive destinations, we are reluctant to give recommendations regarding the prices (perhaps high quality may well justify them), we believe that the rich cultural heritage of nearby hinterland, including typical gastronomy, offers enormous unexploited potential and many solutions for overcoming this disadvantage (Brezovec, Sedmak, & Vodeb 2009; Sedmak 2004). This would be especially welcome for business/education visitors and those visiting Portorož for relaxation, who were the most critical in this regard. Moreover, a more intense inclusion of these elements would also make tourism more responsible towards inhabitants. Namely, cultural heritage and local gastronomy play significant roles in the local community as they represent a building block of people's identity and they are something people are proud of (Vodeb, Sedmak, & Brezovec, 2009). The absence of typical/authentic features in the offer of tourism ser- vices might therefore cause a feeling of marginaliza-tion and alienation from tourism. The present perception of local people is that the tourism industry in Portorož is not responsible. Moreover, tourists also assessed that the destination is the most competitive on those features that cause more negative than positive effects on the social and natural environment: gambling and wellness facilities and hotels (except perhaps for people working there). At this point, it should be mentioned that the largest gambling company in the destination has faced serious financial problems in recent years, and there is a real possibility it will have to close down. Bearing all this in mind and the findings of some previous research (Brezovec et al., 2009) showing the relatively high interest of tourists in knowing and learning about cultural heritage, the destination would improve its competitiveness and at the same time become more responsible if it shifted its development efforts towards more authentic products valorizing typical features and heritage. References Abfalter, D., & Pechlaner, H. (2002). Culture management in tourist destination between markets and resources. In V. Stipetič (Ed.), Hotel & tourism 2002: Human capital, culture and quality in tourism and hospitality industry (pp. 263-273). Rijeka, Croatia: Univeristy of Rijeka. Brezovec, A. Sedmak, G., & Vodeb, K. (2009). What is the value of cultural heritage to 3 s tourists. In Resorting to the coast: Tourism, heritage and cultures of the seaside (cd-rom). Leeds, England: The Centre for Tourism and Cultural Change and Institute of Northern Studies. Buhalis, D. (2000). Marketing the competitive destination of the future. Tourism Management, 21(1), 97-116. Cape Town Declaration on Responsible Tourism in Destinations. (2002) Retrieved from http://www.icrtourism.org/ responsible-tourism/ Claver-Cortes, E. C., Molina-Azorin, J. F, & Pereira-Moliner, J. (2007). Competitiveness in mass tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 34(3), 727-745. Cracolici, M. F., & Nijkamp, P. (2008). The attractiveness and competitiveness of tourist destinations: A study of Southern Italian regions. Tourism Management, 30, 336344. Crouch, G., & Ritchie, J. (1999). Tourism, competitiveness, and societal prosperity. Journal ofBusiness Research, 44, 137-152. Dodds, R., & Kuehnel, J. (2010). csr among Canadian mass tour operators: Good awareness but little action. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 22(2), 221-224. Dwyer, L., & Kim, C. (2003). Destination competitiveness: Determinants and indicators. Current Issues of Tourism, 6(5), 369-414. Dwyer, L., Kneževič Cvelbar, L. & Mihalič, T. (2012). Fashioning a destination tourism future: The case of Slovenia. Tourism Management, 33, 305-316. Enright, M. J., & Newton, J. (2004). Tourism destination competitiveness: A quantitative approach. Tourism Management, 25,777-788. Gursoy, D., Jurowski, C., & Uysal, M. (2002). Resident attitudes: A structural modeling approach. Annals of Tourism Research, 29(1), 79-105. Mazanec, J. M., Wober, K., & Zins, A. H. (2007). Tourism destination competitiveness: From definition to explanation? Journal of Travel Research, 46, 86-95. Munda, J. (2002). Attitude of local people towards tourism in Portorož, Piran and Lucija (Diploma work). up ftš Turistica, Portorož, Slovenia. Nemec Rudež, H., Sedmak, G., & Bojnec, Š. (2011). Benefit segmentation of seaside destination in the phase of market repositioning: The case ofPortorož. International Journal of Tourism Research, 15(2), 138-151. Omerzel Gomezelj, D., & Mihalic, T. (2008). Destination competitiveness - applying different models: The case of Slovenia. Tourism Management, 29(2), 294-307. Porter, M. E. (1990). The competitive advantage of nations. New York, ny: The Free Press. Prašnikar, J., Brenčič-Makovec, M., & Cvelbar Kneževič, L. (2006). Exploring the challenge of destination management. In J. Prašnikar (Ed.), Competitiveness, social responsibility and economic growth (pp. 245-267). New York, ny: Nova Science Publishers. Ritchie, J. R. B., & Crouch, G. I. (2000). The competitive destination: A sustainability perspective. Tourism Management, 21(1), 1-7. Ritchie, J. R. B., & Crouch, G. (2003). The competitive destination: A sustainable tourism perspective. Wallingford, uk: cabi Publishing. Sedmak, G. (2004). Positioning of tourism destinations through the differentiation of the supply of gastronomic products: The case of Slovene coastal area. Hotel-link, 2(3), 171-172. Sedmak, G. (2006). Differentiation of catering outlets as a variable in tourist destination positioning. In R. Ovsenik & I. Kiereta (Eds.), Destination management (pp. 45-54). Frankfurt am Main, Germany: P. Lang. Sedmak, G., Majdič, U., &Sedmak, S. (2011). Hotel csr factors, case of Slovenia. In M. D. Alvarez (Ed.), Advances in hospitality and tourism marketing and management (476-481). Istanbul, Turkey: Bogazi^i University. Sedmak, G., & Mihalič, T. (2008). Authenticity in mature seaside resorts. Annals of Tourism Research, 35(4), 10071031. Sirše, J., & Mihalič, T. (1999). Slovenian tourism and tourism policy: A case study. Revue de Tourisme, 3, 34-47. Simpson, M. C. (2008). Community benefit tourism initiatives: A conceptual oxymoron? Tourism Management, 29(1), 1-18. Smith, K. H, & Nystad, O. (2006, September). Is the motivation for csr profit of ethics? Paper presented at the The Corporate Responsibility Research Conference, Dublin, Ireland. Sobočan, R. (2012). Responsible tourism through the eyes of local people (Diploma work). up ftš Turistica, Portorož, Slovenia. Spencer, D. M., & Holecek, D. F. (2007). Basic characteristics of the fall tourism market. Tourism Management, 28(2), 491-504. Statistical Office of the Republic of Slovenia (2011). si-Stat Data Portal. Retrieved from http://pxweb.stat.si/pxweb/ dialog/statfile1.asp Van de Ven, B., & Graafland, J. J. (2006). Strategic and moral motivation for corporate social responsibility. Journal of Corporate Citizenship, 22, 111-123. Vodeb, K., Sedmak, G., & Brezovec, A. (2009). Different perceptions of a seaside destination: Views of the residents, the public sector and the tourism industry. In Resorting to the coast: Tourism, heritage and cultures of the seaside (cd-rom). Leeds, England: The Centre for Tourism and Cultural Change and Institute of Northern Studies. Zhang, H., Gu, C.-L., Gu, L.-W., & Zhang, Y. (2011). The evaluation of tourism destination competitiveness by topsis & information entropy: A case in the Yangtze River Delta ofChina. Tourism Management, 32, 443-451. An Empirical Research on the Ecological Orientation of Low Season Visitors to Portorož Helena Nemec Rudež University of Primorska, Faculty of Tourism Studies - Turistica, Slovenia helena.nemec@turistica.si Petra Zabukovec Baruca University of Primorska, Faculty of Tourism Studies - Turistica, Slovenia petra.zabukovec@turistica.si Ecologically-oriented destinations require knowledge and understanding of the ecological attitudes of the tourists visiting them. This paper examines the ecological orientation of tourists in the Slovenian seaside destination of Portorož, with a focus on the low season. More specifically, the environmental awareness of tourists in Portorož and their perception of the ecological orientation of Portorož are investigated. Structured questionnaires were used to interview the tourists in selected locations in Portorož. The research found that the tourists consider the ecological orientation of a destination as neither important nor unimportant in their choice of destination. Furthermore, the tourists perceived its ecological orientation to be at an average level. Comparisons between hotel and non-hotel guests are also observed. Keywords: ecotourism; destination; ecological orientation Background In an increasingly competitive international tourism market, ecologically oriented destination management is vital for positioning destinations in the market. Consumers are increasingly supportive towards social welfare and environmental protection at destinations (Sloan, Legrand, & Chen, 2009). Similarly, Sarigollu (2009) argues that consumers are becoming more sensitive to environmental issues. Moreover, tourists are also aware of the seriousness of environmental degradation, which results in more ecologically conscious tourists who desire to purchase ecologically-friendly products, and who favour businesses that support environmental practices (Roberts, 1996; Kalafatis, Pollard, East, & Tsogas, 1999; Laroche, Bergeron, & Barbaro-Forleo, 2001). Recent research that was undertaken by the Athens Laboratory of Research in Marketing, in collaboration with the Cen- tre of Sustainability about the green marketing, found that more than 92% of consumers have a positive attitude towards environmentally sensitive companies (Papadopoulos, Karagouni, Trigkas, & Platogianni, 2010). However, some research (for instance, Pigram, 1996; Archer, 1996; Thomas, 1992; Garrod & Willis, 1992; Laarman, & Gregersen, 1996) found that consumers increasingly value environmental resources. Some tourism suppliers have attempted to change their corporate structures and cultures to be more environmentally responsible (Dief & Font, 2010; D'Souza & Taghian, 2005). However, Kempton, Boster, and Hartley (1995) stated that consumers do not know enough about environmental issues in order to act in an environmentally responsible way. Ecotourism is a form of tourism that considers the needs of the entire environment. It attempts to harmonise the wants and needs of the tourism industry with the local environment. Price and Murphy (2000) stated that ecotourism is nature based and environmentally educational; it contributes to the quest for sustainability and brings local benefits. Furthermore, Swarbooke and Horner (2007) define eco-tourists as tourists who are largely motivated to see the nature with the purpose of observing wildlife and learning about its environment. Moreover, there are different 'shades of green tourists,' i.e. different types of environmental awareness of tourists on their environmental concern since tourists' attitudes regarding environmental issues are highly dependent on where the tourists originally originate (Ivarsson, 1998; Swar-booke & Horner, 2007). A sustainable-oriented destination calls for ecologically-oriented destination management. Destination policy makers have to understand, plan and manage tourism impacts and attempt to maximise the benefits of tourism in a given destination. It requires cooperation of different stakeholders, including marketing of individual tourism suppliers with the goal of implementing ecological practices within destinations. Middleton and Hawkins (1998, p. 8) state that tourism marketing 'must balance the interests of shareholders/owners with the long-run environmental interests of a destination and at the same time meet the demands and expectations of customers.' An environmental commitment can have an impact on destination differentiation and destination positioning when appropriately communicated to the market. Tourists' understanding of environmental and ecological orientations, and their attitudes represent a starting point for developing their awareness about ecological issues and stimulating ecologically oriented behaviour. However, Poirier (2001, p. 209) stated that environmental concern is lagging behind efforts to change attitudes of tourists. Moreover, Lee and Mos-cardo (2005) stated that environmentally aware consumers are more likely to have pro-environmental behaviour. The current study was undertaken to examine the perception of tourists about, firstly, the consideration of a destination's ecological orientation when choosing a destination and, secondly, the ecological orientation of visitors to Portorož. Tourists in Portorož in autumn and winter were included in the research, representing a limitation of the study. Thus, the findings cannot be generalised to year-round tourism. The goal of the study is to investigate the actual state of the ecological orientation of tourists in Portorož. Moreover, the research reveals the specificities of both hotel guests and non-hotel guests in this regard. Thus, the study is meant to contribute to the discussion of ecological orientation of tourists in Portorož. Research Methodology The research is focused on tourists in Portorož; face-to-face surveys were conducted at selected locations in Portorož, including hotels, the tourist information centre and campsites. Proportional stratified sampling was used, ensuring that the structure of accommodation of respondents was in line with the structure of accommodation of tourists in Portorož. The present research is a part of a broader piece of research on the characteristics of tourists in Portorož in the low season. The survey was performed between November 2011 and January 2012. It was administered by three interviewers who were trained for the interview. Data collection is based on a structured questionnaire, which was divided into two parts. The first part included a five-point Likert-type scale, but just two scales are included in the present research. Respondents were asked to classify their consideration of destination ecological orientation when choosing a destination (1 = absolutely not important, 5 = very important) and their perceptions of the ecological orientation of Portorož on a five-point Likert-type scale (1 = absolutely non-ecologically oriented destination, 5 = very ecologically oriented destination). The Likert-type scale was used because it is the most commonly used technique in tourism surveys, and five- or seven-point scales are the easiest to understand and sufficient for most purposes (Finn, Elliott-White, & Walton, 2000, p. 96). The second part of the questionnaire included the socio-demographic characteristics of respondents. A total of 436 usable questionnaires were collected. There were 223 (51.1%) of women and 194 (44.5%) men included in the survey. The average age of re- Table 1 Consideration of Ecologically Oriented Destination in Destination Choice Item Hotel guests Non-hotel guests Total Very important (5) 17 (5.4%) 2 (1.9%) 19 (4.5%) Important (4) 112 (35.6%) 22 (20.6%) 134 (31.8%) Neither important, nor unimportant (3) 123 (39.0%) 47 (43.9%) 170 (40.3%) Not important (2) 59 (18.7%) 33 (30.8%) 92 (21.8%) Absolutely not important (1) 4 (1.3%) 3 (2.8%) 7 (l.7%) Total 315 107 422 Mean 3.25 2. 8 spondents was 44 years. 319 or three quarters of the respondents (73.2%) stayed at a hotel, 64 (14.7%) at a self-catering apartment, 38 (8.7%) in private rooms, 3 (0.7%) at a pension, 1 (0.2%) at a campsite, and 6 (1.4%) respondents stayed at other accommodation facilities. The study provides a representative sample on national structure of tourists in Portorož. There were 217 Slovene tourists included in the survey, which represented 49.8% of respondents, followed by Italian tourists (113; 25.9%), Austrian tourists (44; 10.1%), German tourists (18; 4.1%) and Croatian tourists (4; 0.9%); 19 respondents were from other countries. The average period of stay of respondents was relatively high. There respondents with four- to seven-night stays in Portorož prevailed, representing 214 or 50.0% of respondents in the survey; 17 (3.9%) of respondents stayed longer than seven days in Portorož, and 197 (46.1%) of respondents stayed in Portorož from one to three days. Among the respondents, there were only 67 (15.7%) respondents who were visiting Portorož for the first time during the survey. Others were return tourists in Portorož and most of them were regular tourists; 168 (39.3%) of them had visited 10 or more times. Therefore, it can be assumed that the respondents know Portorož well. Results Regarding the question about the consideration of a destination's ecological orientation in the choice of destination, respondents gave relatively evenly distributed answers (Table 1); 422 respondents answered to this question. There were 315 hotel guests and 107 non-hotel guests. The mean response for hotel guests was 3.25, and the mean score for non-hotel guests was 2.88. An independent sample t-test shows a statistically significant difference between hotel and non-hotel guests (sig. = 0.000). The latter have lower consideration for a destination's ecological orientation when they choose a destination. The frequency distribution shows that the average score (3 = neither important nor unimportant) prevails. This score was given by 170 or 40.3% of respondents. Moreover, only seven (1.3%) of respondents gave the lowest score (absolutely not important) and 19 or 4.5% of respondents gave the highest score (very important). Furthermore, 421 respondents answered the question about their perceptions of the ecological orientation of Portorož (Table 2); there were 314 hotel guests and 107 non-hotel guests. The overall perception of ecological orientation of Portorož is near average. There is a statistically significant difference between hotel and non-hotel guests revealed by independent sample t-test (sig. = 0.000). Hotel guests perceive Portorož to be a more ecologically oriented destination (mean = 3.01) than non-hotel guests do (mean = 2.51). A total of 153 (36.6%) of respondents gave an average score (neither important, not unimportant) to the ecological orientation of Portorož; among them, there were 122 (38.9%) of hotel quests and 31 (29.0%) non-hotel guests. About one quarter of the respondents rated Portorož as ecologically oriented; among them, there was a higher percentage of hotel guests (96; 30.6%) than non-hotel guests (15; 14.0%). Only five hotel guests rated Portorož as a highly ecologically oriented destination. Additionally, 134 respondents rated Portorož as non-ecologically oriented destina- Table 2 Perception of Ecological Orientation of Portorož Item Hotel guests Non-hotel guests Total Very ecologically oriented destination (5) 5 (1.6%) 0 (0.0%) 5 (1.2%) Ecologically oriented destination (4) 96 (30.6%) 15 (14.0%) 111 (26.4%) Neither ecologically oriented, nor non-ecologically 122 (38.9%) 31 (29.0%) 153 (36.3%) oriented destination (3) Non ecologically-oriented destination (2) 79 (25.2%) 55 (51.4%) 134 (31.8%) Absolutely non-ecologically oriented destination (1) 12 (3.8%) 6 (5.6%) 18 (4-3%) Total 314 107 421 Mean 3.01 2.51 tion; among them, 79 (25.2%) were hotel guests and 55 (51.4%) non-hotel guests. Eighteen (4.3%) respondents rated Portorož as an absolutely non-ecological destination. In summary, it was found that visitors to Portorož evaluate the ecological orientation of a destination as neither important nor unimportant in their choice of destination. Furthermore, they perceive the ecological orientation of Portorož at an average level. Concluding Remarks This research has shed some light on the ecological orientation of visitors to Portorož. The investigation was based on surveys of the low season (autumn and winter). Following the results, it can be concluded that the ecological orientation of Portorož is relatively low in the perspective of tourists in Portorož in the low season. Such tourists are also not ecologically oriented; the ecological orientation of destination does not seem to be important for them when choosing a destination. In this regard, there is also a difference between hotel guests and non-hotel guests. The former are more ecologically oriented and also consider Portorož to be more ecologically oriented. It can be assumed that respondents know Portorož well, since they are mostly repeat tourists and more than half of the respondents were there for a stay longer than three days. Managerial implications are drawn based on the study findings. Firstly, Portorož should attract ecologically oriented tourists in order to develop sustainable tourism through establishing environmental marketing, which would also promote the ecological posi- tioning of Portorož in the tourism market. Secondly, eco-tourism in Portorož should be promoted to different stakeholders in order to raise awareness of ecological issues; implementation of eco-labels and eco-brands should also be considered. Following the trend of the ecological orientation and sustainability of destinations, a need arises for further investigation on how to expose the ecological sustainability of destinations related to sea and nature. Finally, further research should include a correlation between the socio-demographic characteristics of tourists, such as, tourism spending, country of origin, age and ecological orientation of tourists to obtain more in-depth information on the ecological orientation of tourists in Portorož. Longitudinal research on the ecological orientation of tourists in Portorož is planned in order to provide an appropriate time comparison; this should reveal whether there will be any changes or improvement in this regard. Moreover, the ecological orientation of summer visitors (i.e. the high season) is also needed to determine whether seasonal variations of tourists exist. References Archer, B. (1996). Sustainable tourism: Do economists really care? Progress in Tourism and Hospitality Research, 2(3/4), 217-222. Dief, M. E., & Font, X. (2010). The determinants of hotels' marketing managers' green marketing behavior. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 18(2), 157-174. D'Souza, C., &Taghian, M. (2005). Green advertising effects on attitude and choice of advertising themes. Asian Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, 17(3), 51-66. Finn, M., Elliott-White, M., & Walton, M. (2000). Tourism & leisure research methods: Data collection, analysis and interpretation. Harlow, England: Longman. Garrod, G., & Willis, K. G. (1992). The amenity value of woodland in Great Britain: A comparison of economic estimates. Environmental and Resource Economics, 2(4), 415-434. Ivarsson, O. (1998). Going green: Is it important? Green Hotelier, 12, 11. Kalafatis, S. P., Pollard, M., East, R., & Tsogas, M. H. (1999). Green marketing and Ajzen's theory of planned behavior: A cross-market examination. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 16(5), 441-460. Kempton W., Boster, J., & Hartley J. (1995). Environmental values in American culture. Cambridge, ma: mit Press. Laarman, J. G., & Gregersen, H. M. (1996). Pricing policy in nature-based tourism. Tourism Management, 17(4), 247254. Laroche, M., Bergeron, J., & Barbaro-Forleo, G. (2001). Targeting consumers who are willing to pay more for environmentally friendly products. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 18(6), 503-520. Lee, W. H., & Moscardo, G. (2005). Understanding the impact of ecotourism resort experiences on tourists' environmental attitudes and behavioural intentions. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 13(6), 346-565. Middleton, V. T. C., & Hawkins, R. (2002). Sustainable tourism: A marketing perspective. Oxford, England: Butter-worth-Heinemann. Papadopoulos, I., Karagouni, G., Trigkas, M., & Platogianni, E. (2010). Green marketing: The case of Greece in certified and sustainably managed timber products. EuroMed Journal of Business, 5(2), 166-190. Pigram, J. (1996). Best practice environmental management and the tourism industry. Progress in Tourism and Hospitality Research, 2(3/4), 261-271. Poirier, R. A. (2001). A dynamic tourism development model in Tunisia: Policies and prospects. In Y. Aposotolopou-los, P. Loukissas, & L. Leontidou (Eds.), Mediterranean tourism (pp. 197-210). London, England: Routledge. Price, G., & Murphy, P. (2000). The relationship between ecotourism and sustainable development: A critical examination. In M. Ewen (Ed.), cauthe 2000: Peak performance in tourism and hospitality research; Proceedings of the Tenth Australian Tourism and Hospitality Research Conference (pp. 189-202). Bundoora, Australia: La Trobe University. Roberts, J. A. (1996). Green consumers in the 1990s: Profile and implications for advertising. Journal of Business Research, 36(3), 217-231. Sloan, P., Legrand, W., & Chen, J. C. (2009). Sustainability in the hospitality industry: Principles of sustainable operations. Oxford, England: Butterworth-Heinemann. Sarigollu, E. (2009). A cross-country exploration of environmental attitudes. Environment and Behavior, 41(3), 365386. Swarbrooke, J., & Horner, S. (2007). Consumer behaviour in tourism. Oxford, England: Butterworth-Heinemann. Thomas, J. (1992, July). Tourism and the environment: An exploration of the willingness to pay of the average visitor. Paper presented at the conference Tourism in Europe, Durham, England. Quality of Life of Indianapolis Residents: The Role of Cultural Tourism and a Sense of Community Carina King Indiana University - Purdue University Indianapolis, United States carking@indiana.edu Sotiris Hji-Avgoustis Ball State University, United States shjiavgousti@bsu. edu Jinmoo Heo Indiana University - Purdue University Indianapolis, United States jheo@indiana.edu Inheok Lee University of Georgia, United States inheok@uga.edu Urban regeneration and cultural development strategies have become increasingly integrated (Worpole, 1991), and cultural tourism, in particular, is increasingly used as a strategic tool to meet the needs of visitors and local residents (Yang & Shin, 2008). Indianapolis has focused on arts and culture by launching a cultural tourism strategic initiative to enhance visitors' cultural experiences, improve residents' quality of life and foster a stronger sense of community. The Indianapolis example may provide support for the case that cultural heritage tourism can enhance local values, contribute to positive social attitudes and strengthen the sense of local identity (Coc-cossis, 2009). This study attempts to measure public support for the city's cultural tourism strategy by investigating the relationship of Indianapolis' residents' awareness, perceived benefits, and enjoyment of cultural tourism with the sense of community and quality of life via a structural model approach. A total of 350 Indianapolis residents who attended downtown cultural and sporting events participated in the study via convenience sampling in 2011. The overall fit indices for the hypothesised model suggest that the model was a fair fit. Residents who felt a greater sense of community and acknowledged greater benefits than their counterparts were more likely to rate their quality of life as better. Tourism development administrators should involve residents in the planning stages, more effectively communicate indirect host community benefits, and address how social costs, if any, would be mitigated. Keywords: quality of life; cultural tourism; sense of community Introduction Tourism is directly responsible for 5% of the world's Gross Domestic Product and employs one out of every 12 people in advanced and emerging economies (World Tourism Organisation, 2012). According to Global Insight (2006), Indiana tourism generated 4.7% of the Gross State Product and supported 257,785 jobs. Tourism thus presents opportunities for host communities, visitors or neighbouring community residents within proximity of the tourism activity to create both economic and social-cultural value. For example, researchers have noted that cities and townships increasingly rely on tourism for economic regeneration and strategic development (Getz 2012; Law, 2002; Rogerson, 2004). In addition, the interaction between tourists and hosts has been seen to increase the awareness of cultural values, practices and heritage (Li 2003; Prentice 2003), as well as interest in expanding education and knowledge (Hamilton et al. 2007; Nyaupane, Morais, & Dowler, 2006). Other social-cultural effects of tourism include improved awareness and a greater sense of civic pride (Cheng & Jarvis 2010; Fredline, 2005), and the creation of nonmarket cultural values (Throsby, 2003). Since the 1980s, Indianapolis has strategically expanded tourism development via a mix of conventions andmeetings, alongsidesport-andculture-relatedini-tiatives. It is believed that capitalising on the city's tourism amenities and attributes would both attract tourists and improve the quality of life for residents. To date, Indianapolis offers 745,000 square feet of exhibition space, and the convention facility is linked by climate-controlled skywalks to more hotel rooms than in any other us city. The idea of the creative or cultural district serving to create both economic and community value is popular in many urban areas (Bell & Jayne, 2004). When arts and culture are effectively adopted as entertainment and commodity, cultural clusters attract spending and investment (Hing, 2008). Indianapolis is home to six uniquely diverse and authentic cultural districts, ranging from the artsy theatre district called 'Mass Ave' to the hip bar and restaurant scene in Broad Ripple Village. A cultural trail connects these six neighbourhoods and entertainment amenities along the way and serves as the downtown hub for the entire central Indiana greenway system. A range of local small scale to mega international cultural events, either targeting specific interest groups or appealing to the wider general population, are held in the city throughout the year. Tangible and intangible cultural tourism offerings include art and music festivals, culinary fairs, showcases of heritage arts and crafts, artistic performances, historic monuments and sites, heritage and living museums, etc. Cultural and heritage tourism is not a new phenomenon and has been regarded for many years as a catalyst for socio-economic growth and development. Cultural tourism includes cultural attractions, sports, living heritage, recent nostalgia, and the daily life of local communities (Howie, 2000). Therefore, it is essential to understand how the Indianapolis host community perceives and is impacted by such tourism related activities. This study will attempt to measure the public's attitudes towards the city's cultural tourism strategy by identifying the residents' perceptions about cultural tourism development, specifically, their awareness, perceived benefits, enjoyment, sense of community and quality of life. Related Literature Governments consider residents' quality of life to be an integral component in their urban development agenda (Galloway, 2006). Various factors contribute to quality of life, such as satisfaction with employment and income (Brown, 1993), community infrastructure (Filkins, Allen, & Cordes, 2000), and satisfaction with government and non-profit services (Sirgy, Gao, & Young, 2008). Baker and Palmer (2006), for example, demonstrated the details of a systematic process and outcomes of quality of life. Their model explains that community pride and community elements are strong predictors of quality of life. Recreation participation and length of residency were also included in their model, but the impact of those variables on quality of life was negative. In a similar vein, Mak, Cheung, and Law (2009) reported that social support played a prominent role in the sense of community and that the sense of community is associated with quality of life. Research has indicated that the sense of community is an indicator of quality of life among residents. A sense of community is 'a feeling that members have a belonging, a feeling that members matter to one another and to the group and a shared faith that their members' needs will be met through their commitment to be together' (McMillan & Chavis, 1986, p. 9). Feelings of belongingness and identification with the community are central components to evaluate the sense of community. The community may be both constructed through formal and informal connections between social groups, based on physical or geographical locations such as neighbourhoods, towns, and cities (Cicognani et al., 2008). A sense of community is a multidimensional construct that encompasses various concepts such as social participation, social identity, social integration and sense of place. It has parallels with Putnam's (2010) emphasis on social capital, in that connected and inclusive communities are seen to positively add to society. Researchers generally agree that the more residents feel a sense of community, the more likely their quality of life is enhanced (Auh & Cook, 2009; Hombrados-Mendieta, Gomez-Jacinto, &Dominguez-Fuentes, 2009). According to Albanesi, Cicognani, and Zani (2007), a sense of community is associated with social well-being. In order to enhance social well-being, Albanesi et al. suggested that providing opportunities to experience a sense of belonging to the peer group and promote pro-social behaviours in the community is essential. Therefore, positive feelings, attachment to a community, and connection with other residents are fundamental aspects of quality of life. Tourism activities can develop this sense of community and eventually enhance the quality of life of residents. Governments' initiatives to develop tourism tend to be successful if residents' attitudes towards tourism are taken into consideration (Oviedo-Garcia, Castellanos-Verdugo, & Martin-Ruiz, 2008). Urban regeneration and cultural development strategies have become increasingly integrated (Worpole, 1991), and cultural tourism, in particular, is increasingly used as a strategic tool to meet the needs of visitors and local residents (Yang & Shin, 2008). Belifiore and Bennett (2007) noted that art and cultural events, festivals and the arts have a transformative effect that is complex and layered. Host communities not only gain economically from cultural tourism (Rizzo &Throsby, 2006): cultural events improve the quality of life of residents, strengthen the sense of community and affect both status and social recognition of the host community (Bachleitner & Zins, 1999; Liburd, 2007; Liburd & Derkzen, 2009). Having cultural events cannot be an end in itself. Residents need to be aware of the events and tourism development efforts, enjoy the festivities and be part of the tourism efforts as participants or facilitators, and acknowledge the economic and social-cultural benefits derived. For example, Wood (2005) reported that residents who were aware of and attended public sector events reported benefits, looked forward to the event and experienced community pride. Cheng and Jarvis (2010) reported that if event awareness were improved, suburban residents would feel more engaged, and less estranged from the urban 'social-elite' who attended sport and associated cultural events. Residents who were dependent on the tourism sector were more supportive towards cultural tourism (Getz, 1994). In addition, the media effect and publicity can help reposition the host city in the region and globally, and residents' community pride can be enhanced (Dwyer et al. 2000; Waitt, 2003). Methodology Drawing on a number of previous studies, an inte-grative research model that specifies the underlying mechanisms of urban residents' awareness of cultural tourism, perceived benefits of cultural tourism, enjoyment of cultural tourism, sense of community and quality of life (see Figure 1) was hypothesised. The inter-relationships among the variables were assessed using a structural model approach. Sampling and Instrument A total of 350 Indianapolis residents who attended downtown cultural and sporting events participated in the study via convenience sampling during the fall months of 2011. Participants who were attending downtown events, such as Octoberfest and a jazz festival, were asked to complete pen and paper questionnaires at different times of the day. Based on the studies by Cecil, Fu, Wang, and Avgoustis (2008) and Wang, Cecil, Fu, and Avgoustis (2006), three items were constructed to measure 'sense of community.' Respondents were asked to rate their sense of pride in Indianapolis, based on the living conditions, infrastructure, and services, using a five-point Likert scale ranging from 'strongly agree' to 'strongly disagree.' Cronbach's alpha for the sense of community items was .754. An item derived from a survey designed by Cecil et al. (2008) was used to measure quality of life. The respondents were also asked to rate their 'overall satisfaction with the quality of life' based on the five-point Likert scale. Cultural tourism items were adopted from Wang, Cecil, Fu, and Avgoustis's (2008) study on quality of life and sport tourism. Of the 21 items in their study, the nine items that assessed 'awareness,' 'benefit,' and 'enjoyment' were adapted. Examples of cultural tourism items are 'I am aware of the city's recent accomplishments in cultural tourism' (awareness), 'Cultural tourism helps create a positive image' (benefit), and 'I enjoy the culture-related events that I can attend' (enjoyment). Data Analysis The structural equation modelling approach was used to investigate the relationships among the study variables. The model was estimated by using Mplus 6.0 with robust maximum likelihood estimation. Using Table 1 Demographic Characteristics of Respondents Characteristics Frequency Per cent Age (years) 18-30 119 34.0 31-43 128 36.6 44-56 68 19.4 >57 20 5-7 Gender Male 211 60.3 Female 131 37.4 Ethnicity Caucasian African American Asian Hispanic Marital Status Married Never Married Divorced Household Income <$30,000 64 18.3 $30,001-60,000 96 27.4 $60,001-90,000 115 32.9 $90,001-120,000 37 10.6 >$120,000 9 2.6 selected fix indices with apriori acceptable criteria recommended by Hu and Bentler (1995,1999) for model fit (e.g., x2 statistics, standardised root mean square residual [srmr] < .08, root mean square error of approximation [rmsea] < .08, comparative fit index [cfi] > .95, and Tucker-Lewis index [tli] > .90), the study assessed whether the model fits the data well. Results Demographics As shown in Table 1, the gender ratio of respondents was slightly skewed towards males (60.3%) and the two key age groups were 18-30 (34.0%) and 31-43 (36.6%) years old. With regards to ethnicity, most respondents were Caucasian (64.0%) and African Amer- 224 64.0 67 19.1 7 2.0 10 2.9 114 32.6 172 49.1 47 13.4 Table 2 Cut off Criteria and Observed Indices for the Model Fit Indexes Cut-off criterion* Result** Fit — 86.450 No (df= 36) tli 0.90 ~ .00 .971 Yes SRMR <0.08 or <0.1 .038 Yes RMSEA <0.06 .065 No (90% ci) (.048 -.083) cfi >0.95 .955 Yes Notes *Recommended by Hu and Bentler (1995, 1999). "Hypothesised model. ci - confidence interval. ican (19.1%). Approximately 49% of the respondents were never married, and the modal annual household income group was $60,000-$90,000. Structural Equation Model The overall fit indices for the hypothesised model suggests that the model was a fair fit (see Table 2). All parameter estimates and the signs on the parameters were consistent with the hypothesised model for Quality of Life. While enjoyment was not significantly associated with a sense of community, the path coefficients of the sense of community on benefits and awareness were significant, and the parameters had positive signs in accordance with the hypotheses (see Figure 2). Awareness and enjoyment were not significantly associated with quality of life, but the path coefficients of quality of life regarding the sense of community and perceived benefits were significant and showed positive relationships. Also in line with study hypotheses, the sense of community was significantly associated with benefits (.316) and awareness (.206), indicating that individuals who acknowledged greater benefits and were more aware of the city's accomplishment than their counterparts were more likely to feel a greater sense of community. Therefore, the sense of community (.133) and benefits (.385) were significantly associated with the quality of life. Specifically, individuals who felt a greater sense of community and acknowledged greater benefits than their counterparts were more likely to rate their quality of life as better. Discussion and Recommendations The study results suggest that individuals who felt a greater sense of community and acknowledged greater benefits than their counterparts rated their quality of life as better. Thus, ongoing community engagement, the process of working collaboratively with individuals and groups to communicate cultural tourism investments, will allow Indianapolis officials to directly involve their constituencies in the ongoing design, planning, and management of resources. Community engagement provides residents with a venue for participation in and feeling attached to their local community. It also provides a sense of place and offers essential life-enhancing qualities that support community and individual quality of life. Our findings are in congruence with Albanesi et al.'s (2007) study which suggested that sense of community is associated with well-being. By understanding the community benefits of cultural tourism projects, decision makers can develop constituencies that are inclined to sustain their cultural tourism infrastructure over time. According to an IndyGov (2010) demographic profile report extracted from the us Census Bureau, the Indianapolis ethnic breakdown was approximately 70% white, 24% African American, 4% Latino and 1% Asian. Compared against respondent ethnicity, the sample is fairly representative. There were more male respondents (60.3%) in comparison to the Indianapolis population (49%) and the sampled respondents were generally younger in age. Census data put median household income at $40,000 (in 1999 dollars), but study respondents reported higher incomes. This may suggest that the younger and more affluent residents were the ones who participated more often in downtown events, and were thus more disproportion-ally sampled. Faulkner and Tideswell (1997) noted that perceptions about impacts differed due to the extent of exposure while Cheng and Jarvis (2010) found that tourism events held in the heart of the city had an alienating effect on residents who lived in the city outskirts. Thus, in addition to typical resident demographics, length of residency and resident's proximity to the events could be further investigated. Any successful cultural tourism strategy requires considerable investment of time, energy and money by both the public and private sectors. Oviedo-Garcia et al. (2008) reported that tourism initiatives were successful if residents' attitudes were considered. Hence, community input could be key to a successful tourism strategy, especially in financially constrained times like the present. City administrators should do more to encourage community buy-in, especially during the planning stages. Residents' perceptions of and support for cultural tourism development can also vary based on other factors. For example, residents' knowledge about tourism and contact with tourists affected the perceived benefits (Andereck, Valentine, Knopf, & Vogt, 2005). Indianapolis is not as culturally diverse as gateway cities such as New York or San Francisco, nor is it a cultural capital like New Orleans or Nashville. The Indianapolis population is fairly homogeneous, and the type and quality of contact with visitors should be considered. Thus, future investigations should include residents' level of knowledge about cultural diversity. Several studies have documented the positive relationship that exists between the residents' acceptance of tourism and their perceived economic dependency on it (Allen, Hafer, Long, & Perdue, 1993; Jurowski, Uysal & Williams, 1995). In addition, residents are likely to understand event impacts better, by virtue of their proximity to and hosting of the community event (Delamere, 2001). More needs to be done to create awareness and link indirect tourism benefits to the local community. Furthermore, Avgoustis, Cecil, Fu, and Wang (2005) reported that Indianapolis residents find their quality of life to be enhanced mostly by the cultural tourism attractions in the city. Understandably, in contrast, when tourism develops beyond a certain scale, residents may express heterogeneous perceptions towards tourism development (Schofield, 2011). The social costs could range from increased theft in areas frequented by tourists, to traffic congestion and inflated costs of living for residents. In terms of community attachment, McCool and Martin (1994) report that residents who are strongly attached to their communities are more concerned about the negative impacts of tourism development than those less attached. Thus, city planners need to address ways in which the negative externalities of cultural tourism development can be mitigated, and communicate it to the various stakeholders. It should be noted that the study is based on the context of Indianapolis settings, such as the type, scale and scope of the events, etc. Therefore, the general-isability of the findings may be limited. A comparative gap analysis to investigate the perspective from tourism administrators and industry partners is the recommended next step. References Albanesi, C., Cicognani, E., & Zani, B. (2007). Sense of community, civic engagement and social well-being in Italian adolescents. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology, 17(5), 387-406. Allen, L., Hafer, H., Long, P., & Perdue, R. (1993). Rural residents' attitudes toward recreation and tourism development. Journal of Travel Research, 31(4), 27-33. Andereck, K., Valentine, K., Knopf, R., & Vogt, C. (2005). Residents' perceptions of community tourism impacts. Annals of Tourism Research, 32(4), 1056-1076. Auh, S., & Cook, C. (2009). Quality of community life among rural residents: An integrated model. Social Indicators Research, 94(3), 377-389. Avgoustis, S. H., Cecil, A. K., Fu, Y., & Wang, S. (2005). Exploring a relationship between quality of life, enjoyment of cultural tourism and demography. Tourism Today, 5, 35-48. Bachleitner, R., & Zins, A. H. (1999). Cultural tourism in rural communities: The residents' perspective. Journal of Business Research, 44(3), 199-209. Baker, D. A., & Palmer, R. J. (2006). Examining the effects of perceptions of community and recreation participation on quality of life. Social Indicators Research, 75(3), 395418. Belifiore, E., & Bennett, O. (2007). Rethinkingthe social impact of the arts. The International Journal of Cultural Policy, 13(2), 135-151 Bell, D., & Jayne, M. (2004). City of quarters: Urban villages in the contemporary city. Aldershot, England: Ashgate. Brown, R. (1993). Rural community satisfaction and attachment in mass consumer society. Rural Sociology, 58(3), 387-400. Cecil, A. K., Fu, Y., Wang, S., & Avgoustis, S. H. (2008). Exploring resident awareness of cultural tourism and its impact on quality of life. European Journal of Tourism Research, 1(1), 39-52. Cheng, E., & Jarvis, N. (2010). Residents' perception of the social-cultural impacts of the 2008 Formula 1 Singtel Singapore Grand Prix. Event Management, 14(1), 91-106. Cicognani, E., Pirini, C., Keyes, C., Joshanloo, M., Rostami, R., & Nosratabadi, M. (2008). Social participation, sense of community and social well being: A study on American, Italian and Iranian university students. Social Indicators Research, 89(1), 97-112. Coccossis, H. (2009). Sustainable development and tourism: Opportunities and threat to cultural heritage from tourism. In L. F. Girard & P. Njikamp (Eds.), Cultural tourism and sustainable local development (pp. 47-56). Burlington, vt: Ashgate. Delamere, T. A. (2001). Development of a scale to measure resident attitudes toward the social impacts of community festivals. Part 1, Verification of the scale. Event Management, 7(1), 25-38. Dwyer, L., Mellor, R., Mistilis, N., & Mules, T. (2000). A framework for assessing 'tangible' and 'intangible' impacts of events and conventions. Event Management, 6(3), 175-189. Faulkner, B., & Tideswell, C. (1997). A framework for monitoring community impacts of tourism. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 5(1), 3-28. Filkins, R., Allen, J., & Cordes, S. (2000). Predicting community satisfaction among rural residents: An integra-tive model. Rural Sociology, 65(1), 72-86. Fredline, E. (2005). Host and guest relations and sport tourism. Sport in Society, 8(2), 263-279. Galloway, S. (2006). Cultural participation and individual quality of life: A review of research findings. Applied Research in Quality of Life, 1, 323-342. Getz, D. (2012). Event studies: Theory, research, and policy for planned events. Oxford, England: Butterworth-Heinemann. Global Insight (2006). The 2006 Economic Impact of Travel and Tourism in Indiana. Retrieved from http://www.in .gov/tourism/pdfs/ TY2006IndianaTourismImpactFINAL.pdf Hamilton, C., Galloway, S., Langen, F., Cran, A., MacPher-son, C., Burns, M., & Snedden, E. (2008). Evaluation report: Scotland's Year of Highland Culture 2007. Glasgow, Scotland: University of Glasgow, Centre for Cultural Policy Research. Hing, A. Y. (2008). Evolving Singapore: The creative city. In P. Cooke & L. Lazzeretti (Eds.) Creative cities, cultural clusters and local economic development (pp. 313337), Cheltenham, England: Edward Elgar. Hombrados-Mendieta, I., Gomez-Jacinto, L., & Dominguez-Fuentes, J. (2009). The impact of immigrants on the sense of community. Journal of Community Psychology, 37(6), 671-683. Howie, F. (2000). Establishing the common ground: Tourism, ordinary places, grey-areas and environmental quality in Edinburgh, Scotland. In G. Richards & D. Hall (Eds.), Tourism and sustainable community development (pp. 101-118). London, England: Routledge. Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1995). Evaluating model fit. In R. H. Hoyle (Eds.), Structural equation modeling: Concepts, issues, and applications (pp. 76-99). London, England: Sage. Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6(1), 1-55. IndyGov (2010). Indianapolis demographic profiles. Retrieved from http://www.indy.gov/eGov/City/DMD/ Planning/Stats/Pages/facts.aspx Jurowski, C., Uysal, M., &Wiiliams, D. (1995). Atheoretical analysis of host community resident reaction to tourism. Journal of Travel Research, 36(2), 3-11. Law, J. (2002). Objects and spaces. Theory, culture and society, 19, 91-105. Liburd, J. (2007). Sustainable tourism, cultural practice and competence development for hotels and inns in Denmark. Tourism Recreation Research, 32(1), 41-48. Liburd, J., & Derkzen, P. (2009). Emic perspectives on quality of life: The case of the Danish Wadden Sea Festival. Tourism and Hospitality Research, 9(2), 132-146. Li, Y. (2003). Heritage tourism: The contradictions between conservation and change. Tourism and Hospitality Research, 4(3), 247-261. Mak, W. S., Cheung, R. M., & Law, L. C. (2009). Sense of community in Hong Kong: Relations with community-Level characteristics and residents' well-being. American Journal of Community Psychology, 44(1/2), 80-92. McCool, S., & Martin, S. (1994). Community attachment and attitudes toward tourism development, Journal of Travel Research, 32(3), 29-34. McMillan, D. W., & Chavis, D. M. (1986). Sense of community: A definition and theory. Journal of Community Psychology, 14,16-23. Nyaupane, G., Morais, D., & Dowler, L. (2006). The role of community involvement and number/type of visitors on tourism impact: A controlled comparison of Annapurna, Nepal, and Northwest Yunnan, China. Tourism Management, 27, 1373-1385. Oviedo-Garcia, M., Castellanos-Verdugo, M., & Martin-Ruiz, D. (2008). Gaining residents' support for tourism and planning. International Journal of Tourism Research, 10(2), 95-109. Prentice, R. (2003). Revisiting heritage: A key sector of the then new tourism-out with the new and out with the heritage. In C. Cooper (Ed.), Aspects of tourism: Classic reviews in tourism (pp. 164-191). Clevendon, England: Channel View. Putnam, R. D. (2010). Bowling alone: The collapse and revival ofAmerican community. New York, ny: Simon and Schuster. Rizzo, I., & Throsby, D. (2006). Cultural Heritage: Economic analysis and public policy. In V. Ginsburgh and D. Throsby (Eds.), Handbook of the economics of art and culture 983-1016. Amsterdam: Elsevier. Rogerson, C. (2004). Urban tourism and small tourism enterprise development in Johannesburg: The case of township tourism. GeoJournal, 60(3), 249-257. Schofield, P. (2011). City resident attitudes to proposed tourism development and its impacts on the community. International Journal of Tourism Research, 13(3), 218-233. doi:10.1002/jtr.814 Sirgy, J., Gao, T., & Young, R. (2008). How does residents' satisfaction with community services influences quality oflife (qol) outcomes? Social Indicators Research, 68(3), 251-298. Throsby, D. (2003). Determining the valuation of cultural goods: How much (or how little) does contingent valuation tell us? Journal of Cultural Economics, 27(3/4), 275285. Waitt, G. (2003). Social impacts of the Sydney Olympics. Annals of Tourism Research, 30(1), 194-215. Wang, S., Fu, Y., Cecil, A. K., & Avgoustis, S. H. (2008, July). Impacts of cultural tourism upon quality oflife: The residents' perspective. Presented at the i-chrie Conference, Atlanta, GA. Wang, S., Fu, Y., Cecil, A. K., & Avgoustis, S. H. (2006). Residents' perceptions of cultural tourism and quality oflife: A longitudinal approach. Tourism Today, 6, 47-61. Wood, E. H. (2005). Measuringthe economic and social impacts of local authority events. The International Journal ofPublic Sector Management, 18(1), 37-53. World Tourism Organisation. (2012). International Tourism to reach one billion in 2012. Retrieved from http://media .unwto.org/en/press-release/2012-01-16/international -tourism-reach-one-billion-2012 Worpole, K. (1991). Trading places: The city workshop. In M. Fisher & U. Owen (Eds.), Whose cities? (pp. 142-152). London: Penguin. Yang, G., & Shin, Y. (2008). Tourism product development and urban tourism: Gwangju experience. Journal ofCul-ture & Tourism Research, 10(2), 21-33. Measuring Performance in the Hospitality Sector: Financial vs. Statistical Data Tanja Planine University of Primorska, Faculty of Tourism Studies - Turistica, Slovenia tanja.planinc@turistica.si Štefan Bojnec University of Primorska, Faculty of Management, Slovenia stefan. bojnec@fm-kp.si Gordana Ivankovič University of Primorska, Faculty of Tourism Studies - Turistica, Slovenia gordana.ivankovic@turistica.si This paper analyses achievements of the hospitality sector in the Slovenian tourism industry by comparing statistical developments and certain financial data results. The analysis was performed for the 1995-2011 period. The statistical results were relatively favourable in terms of the number of tourist arrivals, overnight stays and accommodation facilities. However, the empirical analysis confirmed that less favourable financial results in the Slovenian hospitality sector were achieved even before the economic crisis in 2008. The analysis showed that there is a statistically significant correlation only between certain financial and statistical indicators. Keywords: hospitality sector, Slovenia, performance measurement, financial indicators, statistical data Introduction As an economic activity, tourism plays a prominent role in national economies (Bojnec, 2004). It provides many opportunities for employment, including self-employment, because in many cases this activity is not associated with high initial investment requirements and business risks (Vanhove, 2005). The majority of countries in the world recognize the importance of tourism and almost 130 members of World Trade Organization have made a commitment to open their tourism sector in the desire to attract foreign direct investment (oecd, 2008). The tourism industry is one of the world's largest industries and one of the fastest growing service industries. Due to its labour intensity, it is one of the main generators of employment, partic- ularly in remote and rural areas (wto, 1998). Because of all its positive impacts on economic growth and development, several governments support and promote tourism development (Ivanov & Webster, 2007). Service industries, and among them tourism and hospitality, are gaining importance in national economies; they are, therefore, a subject of research throughout the world (Chenhall, 2003). Hospitality is a significant sector of the tourism industry. According to the wttc (2011), in 2011 there were about 12.7 million hotel rooms worldwide. In Table 1, some basic facts on hospitality worldwide are presented. As evident from Table 1, hotels in Europe reached the highest occupancy rate in 2011. In Europe, the Table 1 Global Hotel Index for 2011 Region (1) (2) (3) Europe 66.3 99.86 66.17 Americas 60.2 80.58 48.53 Middle East/Africa 57-1 125.83 71.87 Notes Column headings are as follows: (1) occupancy (%), (2) average daily rate (€), (3) revenue per available room (€). Source 'str Global Releases World Hotel Performance Results 2011' (2012). highest jump in all three indicators was reported in Venice, Italy ('str Global Releases World Hotel Performance Results 2011,' 2012). As far as Slovenian hospitality sector is concerned, the average occupancy rate in 2011 was 43.1 percent (Slovenska turistična organizacija, 2012). Data for other two indicators are not available for Slovenia. In 2011, the total contribution of tourism to employment in Slovenia was 110,800 jobs or 13.1 percent of Slovenian employment, whilst the total contribution to gross domestic product (gdp) was €4.68 billion or 12.8 percent of Slovenian gdp (wttc, 2013). The main focus of this study is to evaluate the viability and reliability of each performance measurement approach in the hospitality sector in the case of Slovenia. Moreover, with our analysis we aim to answer our research question: is there a statistically significant correlation between financial performance and statistical tourism development indicators of the Slovenian hospitality sector? The rest of the paper is organized as follows. We first explain the meaning and the importance of measuring the financial performance and then the importance of tourism statistics in the system of national accounts. Next, we briefly present the methodology of the analysis. Finally, the main results are presented and explained, focusing on the statistical and financial indicators that are calculated for the Slovenian hospitality sector. Recommendations for further work are presented in the final section of the paper. The Importance of Tourism Statistic Tourism statistics play a vital information role, because (among other things) they can also reflect the level of economic development of the country. Throughout the world as well as in Europe, there are many international organizations (e.g., World Tourism Organization, World Travel & Tourism Council, International Association of Scientific Experts in Tourism, Eurostat) that deal with the statistical monitoring of tourism. It is in the interest of each country to closely monitor the individual sectors of the economy. Among other things, this enables them to estimate how each sector will develop in the future. In Slovenia, there are several organizations involved in statistical data collection and monitoring of the tourism sector (e.g. the Statistical Office of the Republic of Slovenia (sors), the Agency of the Republic of Slovenia for Public Legal Records and Related Services (ajpes), the Bank of Slovenia and the Slovenian Tourist Board). These organizations also issue various publications on tourism topics. ajpes is an indispensable primary source of official public and other information on business entities in Slovenia. For a financial analysis, focusing on how Slovenian business entities have operated over a longer time period (from 1994 onwards), this agency offers access to a database of complete financial statements and the most influential financial indicators about companies, cooperatives, sole proprietors and associations. In a desire to measure the contribution of tourism to the national economy, a tourism satellite account (tsa) has been developed by United Nations World Tourism Organization and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (European Commission, 2011). In 2009, sors monitored the effects of tourism via the tsa methodology (Kalin, 2012). Based on the intensive development of tsa, we can assume that traditional tourism statistics (which are based on flows: number of tourists, overnight stays) became insufficient to analyse the tourism sector. Specifically, debate on the adequacy of statistical data when presenting performance of Slovenian tourism regularly appears in the media (Lipovšek, 2010, 2011a, 2011b, 2012; Pihlar, 2012). In our opinion, statistical data should serve as an introduction or as a basis to performance analysis. Both types of data (statistical and financial) should be used in a combination in order to obtain the full picture of the performance of the hospitality sector. Measurement of Financial Performance A business success is defined as an income or a benefit that the company wants to achieve by carrying out commercial activities (Koletnik, 1997). The goal of measuring financial performance is to determine how efficiently the business has functioned, and to compare and evaluate that performance to specific benchmark measures (Hales, 2005). This is also true for measuring the financial performance of a specific sector of the national economy (Planinc, Bojnec, & Planinc, 2012). Keown, Martin, and Petty (2010) stated that the most appropriate way to measure financial performance is with the use of financial ratios. They give managers basic information and the ability to identify the strengths and weaknesses of a company's performance. According to Otley (2002), there are three main functions for financial performance measures: as a tool of financial management; as a major objective of a business organization; as mechanisms for motivation and control within the organization. Financial ratios can be calculated using the accounting statements, such as the balance sheet, income statement, cash flow statement (Wheelen & Hunger, 2005). According to Harris and Mangiello (2006), performance measurement is also an essential component of the decision-making processes. Meyer (2002) asserts that a perfect performance measurement should consist of relatively few measures to keep track of; that the same measures would apply everywhere; that the measurement system would be stable; and that the non-financial measures would be leading performance indicators. He then also explains the practical reasons such a perfect measurement does not exist: companies operate with too many measures; it is difficult to pinpoint non-financial measures that predict financial performance; non-financial measures are never static; compensating people for performance on multiple measures is extremely difficult. With the usage of a uniform accounting system, it became possible to determine industry norms on regional, national and international levels. Furthermore, annual industry statistics were produced on the ba- sis of uniform accounting systems. This means that annual performance indicators and analysis of industry trends became available (Harris & Brander Brown, 1998). There is a large volume of published studies describing the role of financial analysis of hotel performance. Baker and Riley (1994) suggest the use of ratios; Donaghy, McMahon and McDowell (1995) propose the use of yield management in order to analyse the efficiency of hotel management. Many studies have determined that budgeting as an indispensable tool for performance measurement in the hospitality industry (Atkinson & Brown, 2001; Cruz, 2007; Hak-tanir & Harris, 2005). Meyer (2003) examines seven purposes of performance measurement, which are divided into two groups; one group is more common for most organized firms (look ahead, lookback, motivate, compensate). The other group of purposes is more significant among larger and complex firms (the roll-up, the cascade-down, to compensate). In contrast, however, Phillips (1999) stated that the hotel industry relies too heavily on budgeting as a tool for performance measurement. Furthermore, budgeting is also criticised (Atkinson & Brown, 2001; Hansen, Otley, & Van der Stede, 2003). Ghalayini and Noble (1996) argue about problems when using only financial measures. One of their claims is that traditional performance measures tend to quantify performance, although there are many factors that are difficult to quantify; financial reports are expensive to prepare, closed monthly and, therefore, too old to be useful; measures are not related to corporate strategy. There are also studies of performance comparisons in the hotel industry (Pine & Phillips, 2005). Furthermore, Hua, Nusair, and Upneja (2012) in their study suggest using industry medians to benchmark financial performance in order to determine the financial outer performance of a lodging firm. Hotel performance was also viewed from the investor viewpoint. Gu (1994) studied the risks and returns in a 10-year comparative measurement. He concluded that hotels do not represent good investment opportunities. Along the way, a shift to the use of non-financial measures has been made. Kaplan and Norton (1992) propose their Balanced Scorecard, combining financial measures with operational measures, consequently yielding a comprehensive view of the business. The hotel industry took a step forward in the implementation of Uniform System of Accounts for the Lodging Industry (usali). usali is now in its 10th edition, and its main purpose is the establishment of a uniform responsibility accounting system for the lodging industry ('Uniform System of Accounts for the Lodging Industry,' 2007). Numerous countries have implemented this standard, but Slovenia, unfortunately, is not one of them. According to Guilding (2012), this standard represents the first attempt to implement a uniform accounting system in a specific business, and it also allows comparison across hotels. Kavčič and Ivankovič, 2003 researched implementing usali standards in Slovenia. Their main finding is that according to the existing accounting system in Slovenia, a number of accounting categories defined by usali are not possible to calculate or further convert. In 2009, a report on performance measurement of hospitality companies in Slovenia was issued. A model for performance measurement was proposed and authors provided internationally comparable indicators for measuring the performance of hotel companies (Mihalič, 2009). After the literature review, it was obvious that in order to obtain the full picture of performance of the hospitality sector, it is necessary to take into consideration not merely the financial indicators. This is in line with the finding of Meyer (2003, p. 30) that 'no single measure provides a complete picture of the performance of the organization.' In our opinion, this can also be true for a specific sector of a national economy. Methodology In order to obtain an answer to our research question, we analysed the financial indicators on the basis of data provided by ajpes and the statistical tourism development indicators obtained from sors. The financial analysis was performed for companies for the 1995-2011 period. The average number of companies in the hospitality sector was 203, while the average number of employees was 6,672 or 32.91 per company (ajpes, 2013). We included those financial indicators that are related to the business performance of enterprises in the hospitality sector: return-to-equity (roe), return-to-assets (roa), total revenue, total revenue per employee, and value-added per employee. We also analysed labour costs and average net monthly salary. In addition to the financial indicators, we analysed the main statistical tourism development indicators of the Slovenian tourism sector (e.g., number of tourist arrivals, overnight stays, and tourist beds). Statistical data for the years 2010 and 2011 are gathered according to the new methodology (owing to the break in time series), which was introduced by sors. The nominal financial data were deflated to the constant 1995 prices as the base year in order to obtain real values of financial indicators over the analysed years. The deflator for value of inflation was obtained from sors. In the next step, we calculated if there are statistically significant correlations between financial performance indicators and statistical tourism development indicators of the Slovenian hospitality sector. We used spss statistical software to conduct this analysis. The value of the correlation coefficient can be between -1.0 and +1.0. In the first case, we would have perfect negative correlation among variables, while in the second case we would have perfect positive correlation (Veal, 1997). The correlation coefficient does not imply a causal relationship between the variables, but only indicates that there is a correlation between variables (Buckingham & Saunders, 2007). Finally, to conclude our empirical analysis, we performed a partial regression analysis in order to predict the value of our dependent variable. Results and Discussion As far as tourism accommodation facilities are concerned, the results indicate that the number of rooms ranged from nearly 28,000 rooms in 1995 to almost 45,000 rooms in 2011. By far the most rooms are in hotels. In 1995, 49.51 percent of registered rooms were in hotels, while by 2011 this percentage had slightly declined and stood at almost 49.20 percent. Figure 1 shows the number of overnight stays and arrivals of all tourists to Slovenia in the 1995-2011 period. It can clearly be seen that the numbers are constantly increasing. The average annual rate of growth for overnight stays is at 3.05 percent, while for tourist arrivals is at 4.64 percent. As a consequence, there is a decline in the average length of stay of tourists. Number of overnight stays 10,000,000 9,000,000 8,000,000 7,000,000 6,000,000 5,000,000 4,000,000 3,000,000 2,000,000 1,000,000 - 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Figure 1 Number of Overnight Stays and Arrivals for the 1995-2011 Period (sourca: sors, 2013) Number of arrivals Table 2 Number of Employees in Hotels and Similar Accommodation Facilities Item 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 n 5,536 5,633 5,468 5,314 5,947 6,461 6,363 6,287 6,340 6,578 6,959 6,966 7,889 8,076 8,137 7,962 8,015 Tk 1-75 -2-93 -2.82 11.91 8.64 -1.52 -1.19 0.84 3-75 5-79 0.10 13-25 2-37 0.76 -2.15 0.67 Notes n - number of hotels and similar accommodation facilities, Tk - annual rate of growth. Source: ajpes (2013). Table 2 shows the number of employees in hotels and similar accommodation facilities in the 1995-2011 period. As can be seen, the number of employees has increased. However, the annual rate of growth (Tk) has varied by individual years from declines in some years (e.g., 1997-1998, 2001-2002 and 2009-2010) and increases in other analysed years, particularly in 1999 and 2007. On average, the annual rate of growth was 2.47 percent. Table 3 shows financial indicators in hotels and similar accommodation facilities in real 1995 amounts in euros. A quick view onto the selected financial indicator in nominal amounts reveals that the values are on the rise. However, inflation is increasing faster than the values of some financial indicators. The consequence is that the real values are increasing much more slowly (total revenue and labour costs) or are declining (total revenue per employee, value added per employee and monthly salary). We also found that the average annual rate of growth of total revenue is lower than the average annual rate of growth of the number of employee (1.57 and 2.47, respectively). This does not seem to be a strong signal as far as the efficiency of employees is concerned. We can also see that the roe and roa indicators worsened in the year 2007, i.e. before the economic and financial crisis. Therefore, it cannot be argued that the financial results have worsened only due to the global economic and financial crisis. The values of both financial indicators are unfavourable for hotels and similar accommodation facilities. Therefore, managers in hotels and similar accommodation facilities should concentrate their efforts on improving the value of both financial indicators. An important step in this direction is to determine the causes of operating costs, and then managers should find ways to rationalize them (Ivankovič, Jerman, & Jankovič, 2009). The values of the value-added per employee are presented only for the 2002-2011 period, because ajpes started to calculate this financial indicator in 2002. This indicator is a fundamental measure of an economic activity success, as it shows how much value-added was created by each employee in the company. The higher is the indicator value (assuming that the company has a profit), the higher is the quality of the products and services (ajpes, 2010; Kavčič et al., 2005). In 1998, Slovenian tourism managers stated that Slovenian tourism was lagging behind in creating added value (Gomezelj Omerzel, 2006). In 2009, the Slovenian Chamber of Commerce and Industry Table 3 Financial Indicators in Hotels and Similar Accommodation Facilities (in Real 1995 Amounts in Euros) (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (4) (5) (6) 1995 185,286,195 33,469 -2.2 -1.7 61,608,037 682 1996 191,513,870 33,998 -2.8 -2.0 57,964,222 625 1997 177,006,943 32,372 -5.5 -3.8 52,991,496 614 1998 154,104,825 29,000 -3.9 -2.7 47,521,895 544 1999 159,796,959 26,870 -1.4 -1.0 53,120,582 540 2000 171,618,493 26,562 -2.0 -1.4 54,223,767 501 2001 165,521,321 26,013 0.1 0.1 52,859,705 499 2002 173,978,386 27,673 0.7 0.4 51,265,290 23,830 488 2003 168,291,554 26,544 1.9 1.2 50,338,259 22,532 473 2004 176,011,389 26,758 -1.5 -0.1 53,524,036 22,906 481 2005 183,285,577 26,338 -0.5 -0.3 59,192,052 22,715 505 2006 195,183,658 28,019 2.5 1.4 53,246,138 24,709 509 2007 224,293,068 28,431 2.0 1.1 56,776,766 24,389 515 2008 238,094,983 29,482 -2.6 -1.3 66,449,370 24,313 554 2009 227,992,201 28,019 -3.7 -1.7 73,607,581 23,271 553 2010 231,925,103 29,130 -6.4 -2.7 72,263,523 22,838 554 2011 229,744,889 28,666 -8.4 -3-6 70,966,937 22,922 538 Notes Column headings are as follows: (1) year, (2) total revenue, (3) total revenue per employee, (4) roe (%), (5) ROA (%), (6) labour costs, (7) value added per employee, (8) monthly salary. Source: ajpes (2013). conducted a survey on the state of breakthrough innovation in Slovenia. It was envisaged that in order to achieve breakthroughs in innovation, Slovenia should create new jobs that meet the added value-of €50,000, and restructure jobs that generate less than €30,000 of added value (Ložar, 2009). Labour costs have increased over the analysed period. The hospitality sector is a labour-intensive activity and the human factor is essential in performing tourist services. The labour costs in Slovenia have been over-burdened by taxes and social contributions (Vodopivec, Dolenc, Vodopivec, & Balde, 2007). Kosi and Bojnec (2010) found that in Slovenia the tax burden on labour is more than 40 percent, which ranks Slovenia among the countries with the highest taxbur-dens among Mediterranean countries. The results of high tax burdens are lower net salaries (Daneu, 2010). Such a high tax burden on labour has a negative impact on the competitiveness of Slovenia as a tourist destination (Kosi & Bojnec, 2010). In addition, we analysed whether there are statistically significant correlations between the financial indicators and statistical performance indicators of the Slovenian hospitality sector. Table 4 presents the results. It is evident that in some cases there is a statistically significant correlation among selected indicators. There is a strong positive correlation between the number of tourist arrivals and total revenues. This means that the higher number of tourist arrivals is reflected in the higher total revenues. Nevertheless, the coefficients are relatively far from being 1.0, which calls for additional analysis. A closer look at the numbers reveals that the average growth of revenues in the analysed period is 1.57 percent, while the average growth of arrivals is 4.64 percent. This leads us to think that either the prices of accommodations are falling or that tourists are spending less on accommodations. There is also a strong positive correlation between the number of tourist arrivals and the number of employees. Again, we can assume that a higher number Table4 Correlation Coefficients among Selected Indicators Indicators (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) Number of arrivals p 0.804** 0.942** 0.673** -0.234 0.018 -0.332 -0.372 Sig. 0.000 0.000 0.003 0.365 0.947 0.192 0.142 N 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 Number of overnight stays p 0.770** 0.929** 0.637** -0.197 0.058 -0.371 -0.417 Sig. 0.000 0.000 0.006 0.448 0.824 0.143 0.96 N 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 Number of rooms p 0.856** 0.769** 0.882** -0.656* -0.417 0.111 0.146 Sig. 0.039 0.001 0.000 0.004 0.057 0.671 0.575 N 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 Notes Column headings are as follows: (1) total revenue, (2) number of employees, (3) labour costs, (4) roe, (5) roa, (6) revenue per employee, (7) salary. p - correlation coefficient, Sig. - significance: ** correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed), * correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed), N - number of observations. §3 9,000 - sy .2 8,000 CP g H 7.000 o , ^ 6,000 5,000 1.500.000 1.700.000 1.900.000 2.100.000 2.300.000 2.500.000 2.700.000 2.900.000 Figure 2 Dependence of the Number of Employees on the Number of Tourist Arrivals (y = 2e-9x2 - 0.0053* + 14911; R2 = 0.9682) of tourist arrivals reflects the higher number of employees. The consequence of a higher number of employees is reflected in higher labour costs. The average growth of the number of employees in the analysed period is 2.45 percent. There are also positive correlations between labour costs and the three statistical indicators. There is a moderate negative correlation between the number of rooms and the return on equity. This suggests that companies have invested a share of their profit in expanding accommodation facilities. Consequently, an increase in the number of rooms means higher operating costs (Daneu, 2010). This might be the reason for a moderate negative correlation. Among other statistical and financial indicators, there are no statistically significant correlations. To complete our analysis, we also performed a partial regression analysis. In all three cases, our independent variable was the number of tourist arrivals. As can be seen from Figure 2, the dependent variable was the number of employees. We opted for the non-linear re- gression analysis, because the selected data better fit a quadratic equation rather than linear equation. With the value of the coefficient of determination, we can assess the quality of the regression model. In this case, we can see that the quality of the regression model is suitable, because of a high value of the coefficient of determination. With the use of a regression equation, we can predict the number of employees in the hospitality sector, if we know the number of tourist arrivals in Slovenia. In the second case, the dependent variable used was total revenues. Again, we opted for the non-linear regression analysis and the coefficient of determination is also quite high. With the use of a regression equation (shown in Figure 3), we can predict the total revenues in the hospitality sector, if we know the number of tourist arrivals in Slovenia. Finally, the dependent variable used was the average monthly salary. The regression model is presented in Figure 4. Again, we opted for the non-linear re- g 300,000,000 ■ (3 jS 250,000,000 ■