Attitudes of local residents towards the development of tourism in Slovenia: The case of the Primorska, Dolenjska, Gorenjska and Ljubljana regions
Milan Ambroz
Faculty of Criminal Justice and Security, University of Maribor, ambrozmilan@siol.net
ABSTRACT
This study focuses on the attitudes of local residents toward tourism development in some tourist areas in Slovenia. Based on the place attachment model, this paper seeks to propose an integral approach to management of the local residents' attitudes towards tourism development. Research data were collected in the Primorska, Dolenjska, Gorenjska and Ljubljana regions. A PCA factor analysis and a hierarchical regression analysis were used to analyze the research data. The findings confirm the proposed hypothesis that attitudes of local residents toward a tourism development are influenced by place attachment, the perception of tourism impacts and by the perceived and desired type of tourism. One important contribution of this study to the understanding of the obstacles to tourism development is the finding that length of residency strongly influences the development process. It can be concluded that long-term residents are generally less favourable to tourism development. In contrast, perceived positive tourism impacts, cultural tourism, quality of tourism and leisure structure and quality of natural environment positively influence local residents' perceptions of tourism development. The economic reasons for tourism development revealed by the attitudes of local residents are evident. In spite of that, local residents are deeply concerned about the quality of their life and for the quality of their environment. Managers and planners should be aware that tourism development activities could evoke strong emotional responses of some groups of local residents. To avoid conflicts, local residents should be actively involved in the decision making process of tourism development.
KEYWORDS: place attachment, tourism, development, local residents, tourism impacts
ANTHROPOLOGICAL NOTEBOOKS 14 (1): 63-79. ISSN 1408-032X
© Slovene Anthropological Society 2008
Introduction
Long term planning in tourism is associated with the reactions of local residents to it. Tourism can develop and grow when local residents have a positive attitude toward it and when they see their role in the process of the tourism development. At the point when a tourism destination is born, the quality of the life of the local residents goes through radical changes, which are not necessarily negative. It is true that there can be more people around, traffic can become difficult, crime rates can increase, and the pollution of all environment resources is possible. Additionally, tourism brings changes that affect traditional way of life, family relations, the nature of the local structures functioning and many not predictable problems (Puczko and Ratz 2005: 458). Conversely, new jobs emerge, old towns, facilities and places are revitalized and social life significantly improves. Local residents do see new business opportunities in tourism and are motivated to explore them. At the same time, they know that some negative physical, cultural, social and economic impacts will emerge. The most complex problems that accompany tourism development, reside in the relationship between tourists and local residents. Furthermore, there are limits of tourism growth that are closely associated with the place capacity and with the quality of life in the local community. When these limits are exceeded, local residents develop negative attitudes towards tourism. When negative attitudes become beliefs, tourism development obstacles appear. The beliefs of the local residents become the most reliable indicator of the limits to the growth of tourism. Tourism can even become "[...] the scapegoat for all the problems in the certain place not regarding that they were there before tourism developed. It is easy to blame tourism for all social and other problems" (Mathieson and Wall, 1982).
Founded on Pearce's (1996) model of tourism community relationship and supported by literature review, the present study proposes an integrated approach to understanding the factors that shape the attitudes of local residents towards tourism. A principal components analysis is used to build a perceptual map, which provides a clearer understanding of the framework and the regression analysis shows the association between tourism development, the impacts of tourism and the role of tourists in it. The implications of this study are apparent in defining management strategies well-suited to the factors that play important role in the general perception of tourism development in a local community.
On the research of local attitudes and tourism development
Farnum et al. (2005) claim that today there is a far greater consensus regarding the constituent elements of a sense of place. At the same time, they are convinced that there is still a fair amount of ambiguity regarding the term of place. This ambiguity is exacerbated by that definitions of sense of place and related constructs are often dependent upon how they are approached. The sociological meaning of place is set by the attributes of the local residents, which are the result of the experiences with the place, the result of the social interaction in the place, and the result of the emotional attachment to the place. The meaning of a place is therefore a complex structure consisting of physical, behavioural, social and psychological processes (Heath, 2003).
In the eyes of local residents the physical place that they live in is an authentic and natural environment. Tuan (1977) observes that places involve meanings and values that facilitate intimate relationships with particular geographical areas. At the same time, a place should be distinguished from the general environment (Farnum et al. 2005). The 'general environment' refers to the biophysical components of the land, components that exist regardless of the types of human connections to them. Additionally, the sense of place consists of the entire set of cognitive, affective sentiments and the meanings one attributes to such areas (Fishwick and Vining 1992; Kaltenborn 1998; Relph 1996; Stedman 2003a) and that are part of a particular geographic locale (Altman and Low 1992; Jorgensen and Stedman 2001). Physical place is the local environment for a variety of social activities, and often the arena for activities in which tourists are involved. Local residents socially interact at the local place, maintain friendships, discuss common issues, resolve problems and even create new entrepreneurial opportunities. Social interactions are sustainable, durable and strongly emotionally induced and the emotional power of these interactions is a result of historical, cultural, and social experiences and the result of the immediate social context (Ambard et al. 2004). According to Williams and Vaske (2003), place attachment is equivalent of the geographer's sense of place. Sometimes it is related to the whole set of phenomena (place dependency, place identity, place satisfaction, place rootedness) as proposed by Kaltenborn (1998). The term 'sense of place' is often used in narrower sense in recreation and tourism. The power of a sense of place is related to the extent to which an individual values or identifies with a particular environmental setting (Kyle et al. 2004: 250). Furthermore, in the term of strength, it is a component of the attachment to the particular place, and this attachment is generally presumed to be positive. Place attachment necessarily involves emotion (Stedman 2002; 2003b). As a concept, a sense of place can be thought of as a collection of place meanings, which express attachment to a place in a very broad sense (Kaltenborn 1998: 172-3). For this research, the meaning of the place is most important as it appears as a symbolic and evaluative set of ideas, beliefs and values that order the opportunities of the tourism development.
Place attachment itself has received considerable scholarly attention (see Altman and Low 1992; Kruger and Jakes 2003, Farnum et al., 2005). All agree that it is a complex phenomena and only one of the attachments within the larger context of human attachments (Farnum et al., 2005). As previously emphasized, the attachment to place may be based on social relationships or processes that are more important than particular physical landscape characteristics. Beckley (2003) claims that even if the landscape changes, the sentiments do not change. However, the notion that the physical characteristics of the place may change challenges the attachment of the local resident. Dixon and Durrheim for example claim that the place identity is a component of the self-identity and the reference to how one sees oneself is made in relation to the environment (2000: 28). Rowles in this sense (1983) distinguished between three senses of 'insideness', expressing different aspects of his respondents' interaction with their surroundings. 'Physical insideness' designated their 'body awareness' of their environment, expressed as a kind of tacit knowledge of the physical details of place: "Social insideness designated their sense of connection to a local community, recognition of their integration within the social fabric" (1983:
302). Finally, 'autobiographic insideness' designated their idiosyncratic sense of rootedness. In tourism place, identity and place dependency is a commonly used concept. Some scholars view place identity and place dependency as the two fundamental but distinct dimensions of place attachment (see Bricker and Kerstetter 2002; Kyle et al. 2005).
Place dependency and place identity scales are the most used to assess place attachment in recreation and tourism (Farnum et al. 2005). However, when we look at place attachment from the tourist point of view, we see a different picture. Tourists interact with the certain place only for a short time, which is not enough to develop a sense of that place and depend on it. Nevertheless, when tourists interact with a certain place for a long time, they develop some kind of place dependency. The place may even become a part of their identity. When this happens, they develop the desire to visit the place again (Ambro* 2005: 260). There is even a chance that the place becomes a second home for a tourist. Second homes are an integral component of tourism in rural and peripheral areas (Hall and Muller 2004) and this is also evident in some eastern parts of Slovenia.
Place satisfaction, introduced by Stedman (2002; 2003b), is perhaps the most relevant to tourism. As an attitude, place satisfaction is closely related to the quality of place and to the quality of service. Local residents who are highly satisfied and highly attached to the place do not want any changes. Only the residents that are highly attached to the place and are not satisfied with it will try to change it (Farnum et al. 2005).
Development of local residents' gaze
Changes in the physical and cultural environment that mainly result from mass tourism have their impact on values and traditional way of life in the local community. Even family relations and the structure of the local community are affected by these changes. Constant changes demand great effort from the local residents to cope with them. At the same time, changes force local residents to be actively involved in the operations of the tourism planning and development of the tourist destination (Jamal and Getz 1995: 186).
Relationships between local residents and tourists have been part of thorough research for many years (Ambrož 2002; Ambrož 2005; Ambrož and Mavric 2005; Andriotis 2002; Cohen 2001; Gallarza et al. 2002; Gosar 1994; Gosar 1999; Gursoy et al. 2002; Hall et al. 2003; Mason 2003; Ovsenik and Jerman 2004; Page 2003; Pearce et al. 1996; Pearce and Butler 2002). Less research has been aimed at the dynamics of the relationship between local residents and tourists as a source for the shaping and development of the local residents' attitudes and attributes towards tourism and tourists.
The attitudes of local residents are crucial for the construction of their beliefs about tourism development. Local residents hold highly divergent meanings about the growth of the tourist destination (Meinig 1979; Relph 1976). Some researchers even hold the view that the meanings are formed out of social categories and people share them between themselves, empirically and potentially (Ambard 2004). In addition, these meanings are free from restraints, when residents explain them and use them to construct the meaning about tourism development.
Social groups in the local community form their own meanings and attribute them to the certain destination. The power of a social group strongly determines the impact of the groups' meanings on the process of tourism development (Urry 1995). Dominant classes determine tourism politics and distribute the meanings that support it. At the same time, local residents separate the meanings of the physical and social space from the meaning of the tourist destination (Urry 2003: 2). A symbolic concept of a certain physical and social space that consists of attributes from different social groups is a foundation for the abstract concept of the tourist destination.
Tourist lifestyle development
Tourism is one of the core processes where the dissolving of the social classes can be observed. Age, sex, nationality, racial identity, political attitudes and some other features are substitutes for class identity in post-modern times. New concepts have their roots in the individuation and pluralisation of life styles. Some researchers like do not agree with such a radical distinction and Boegenhold (2001: 829) for example argues that social status and social praxis are still connected with the lifestyle of an individual. Zapf et al. (1987) similarly describe lifestyle as a relatively permeable pattern of organization of everyday life and this has been indicated also in my own previous research (Ambrož, 2005: 257).
The lifestyle of the tourist has been a focus of research for many decades. Many typologies of tourists have evolved through time. The aim of tourist lifestyle research is to explain the crucial behaviour patterns of tourists. Murphy (1985) identified two general categories of a tourist lifestyle: interactional and cognitive/normative. Lowyck et al. (1992) also differentiate general types from tourist types. Cohen (1972) was convinced that tourist typologies add to the understanding of the tourist self-concept, his values, needs, motives and beliefs, while the interactionist concepts reveal the tourists' motives that attract them to the tourist destinations (Jafari 1988; Ambrož 2005). Plog (1991) even developed distinctive scale to measure the personal characteristics of tourists in the frame of cognitive-normative categories, while Urry (1990) and Bauman (1992) developed the phe-nomenological concept known as the 'tourist gaze', which differentiates between tourists that gaze collectively or individually when they travel.
In my previous research, I researched the tourist type that visits the Slovenian coast regularly (Ambrož 2005) and this work was based on the tourist phenotype developed by Jokinen and Veijola (2002: 23). It is important to argue that tourist typologies do not have a common denominator and are based on the goals of the researchers. The weakest part of the developed tourist typologies are the small samples of the respondents. There are also very few studies that study the attributions of the local residents towards the different types of tourists although this could be one of the core elements of the successful planning of the tourist development on the local level.
The 'tourist gaze' concept (Urry 2002: 3) explains the development of the meaning that tourists attach to the objects and subjects in the environment they gaze upon. This concept, combined with the concept of the accelerating mobility, is essential in shaping the vision of the tourism potential of the local residents and tourists. The gaze is
collectively based, and the beliefs that are built on emotions, expectations and imagination in the process of gazing to construct the tourism destination potential. The Western meta-narrative, which is the essence of the tourist gaze of western tourists, is rooted in semiotics. Tourists and local residents alike look for signs in their environment. They learn how to appreciate their meaning and participate in their exchange. In this way, the tourist experiences the general cultural sphere as well as in specific political, ideological, economic, and social practices (Said 1993: 9). The same learning takes place in the heads of local residents in interpreting the signs that are associated with the tourist type that visits their place.
Attitudes of local residents towards tourists
Most tourism researchers are strongly convinced that a good relationship between local residents and tourists is essential for the long-term development of a tourist destination (Ap 1992; Ap and Crompton 1998) but the attitudes of local residents towards tourism and tourists are strongly differentiated. Milman and Pizam (1988) discovered that local residents have positive attitudes towards tourists. At the same time, they found out that majority of them mentioned negative impacts of tourism. Alcohol, drugs, traffic problems, criminal acts and conflicts between tourists and local residents were most frequently mentioned. Simultaneously, they recognized employment opportunities, income from taxes and increased quality of life as a positive impact of tourism. Although in the early days of mass tourism researchers emphasized only the positive impacts of tourism, the negative social, economic and environmental impacts have been thoroughly researched over the last thirty years (Harill and Potts 2003).
Duvall (2002) confirms the empirical findings of other researchers, but states that they frequently give priority only to the negative impacts of tourism. His studies in Mazatlan in Mexico reveal different tourism realities Local residents in Mazatlan want to attract tourists because the majority of them earn their living from it. Some of them own hotels, bars, restaurants and recreational facilities for tourists. Taxes and prices in this area are high. Locals search for less expensive services and facilities and drink in 'normal' restaurants. Tourists in Mazatlan are welcomed because they bring fun, entertainment, different and more open cultural patterns as well as the desire to learn. There is no vacation for the residents of Mazatlan. Locals need to learn languages and be creative during their leisure time. There are some negative impacts of tourism, too. Tourists have fun and locals have to work long hours to earn money. Older local residents are against American tourists who seek sexual experiences. The locals sometimes try to minimize their feeling of inferiority by insulting tourists and mocking their behaviour. They even rob the tourists, claiming they are taking back what was taken from them. Locals are frequently forced to show folk customs that are staged to please tourists. In spite of this, they encourage their children to interact with American tourists to adopt their attitudes in order to succeed in life and marriages between locals and tourists are not uncommon in Mazatlan.
Researchers used negative and positive attitudes towards tourism to address specific psychological states empowered by perceptions and beliefs about certain reality
(Harrill 2004). These beliefs are related to the deeply rooted values and personal dimensions that cannot be easily changed (Getz 1994: 247) and can be used as a measure of tourism development (Lindberg and Johnson 1997). Crompton (1987) measured cultural capital (the place of birth, the amount time of residency in the certain place) as an indicator of attachment to the local community, while McCool and Martin (1994) researched the correlation between attitudes towards tourism, the time of residency, tourism development and emotional attachment to the place. Williams, McDonald, Riden and Uysal (1995) similarly measured attachment by time of residency in the certain place and correlated it with age and with income of residents and Jurowski (1998) correlated the quality of life of local residents with the satisfaction with their life in local community. Mansfeld (1992: 377) examined the perceptions of local residents who live in the suburbs of the big cities and see the negative impacts of tourism every day. He confirmed that people with higher incomes from tourism hold more positive attitudes towards tourism and he established a model of development phase of tourism and tourist destinations (ibid.: 381), which is based on the characteristics of the tourists. The researches by Choy (1992) and Murphy and Pritchard (1997) also revealed that emotional states and attitudes affect the perceptions regarding that destination more than the tourist infrastructures of a destination.
Theoretical model and research problem
The presented research is founded on the hypothesis that tourism development is associated with the experiences of the tourism impacts, which form the positive or negative attitudes of local residents towards tourism. Additionally, the tourist type is of the highest importance in this process. A different type of tourist triggers different tourism impacts and in some regions some types of tourists are not wanted and tourism development is not based on their participation. Further, it could be expected that the younger population is more confident with tourism development in comparison to the elder population, which is more strongly attached to the place where they live and do not want the many changes that tourism brings. Their scepticism towards tourism development might be related to their perception of tourism as a probable source of income and survival. Figure 1 shows the hypothetical model that proposes interactions among the constructs of tourism development and the impacts of tourism. The choice of each component of the model was based on the literature review. The model's contribution depends upon the interaction between attitudes about tourism development and the experiences with various tourism impacts, tourist types, tourism and leisure infrastructure and a local resident's place attachment. The aim of this study is to provide insights in flexibility of residents' beliefs including perceptions and impacts toward tourism development. These insights reflect local residents' demands for active participation in the tourism development.
length of residency
tourist type visiting local tourism destination		
	-——-	attitudes toward tourism
local residents' place		development
attachment		
tourism impacts		
Figure 1: Tourism development model
On the Research and Analytical Methods
In order to test the proposed hypotheses the survey with six sections was conducted. The first section tries to measure place attachment, while the second measures the attitudes towards tourism development. In the third section, the perceptions of a tourist type are examined. The fourth, the fifth and the sixth sections measure cultural, negative and positive impacts towards tourism.
Local residents' attitudes were assessed by a five-point Likert-type scale. This scale ranged from 'extremely disagree' (1) to 'totally agree' (5). The academic study took place in the regions of Gorenjska, Primorska, Ljubljana and Dolenjska. These regions were chosen because they served the goal of researching the differences between the cognitions of local residents regarding tourism and tourists. The differences were observed on the level of tourism development. Attitudes towards tourism are difficult to measure, because they are often the result of the short interactions with tourists and not the result of their profound experiences with tourism and tourists. Nevertheless, the interactions of local residents with tourism and tourists could be a good source for the development of their attitudes towards tourism and tourists as well as a solid background for the development of their attitudes towards tourism development.
The are two main stages of statistical data analysis in the report. The first stage entails the reduction of the data through the application of PCA to the set of assessed sections. An exploratory factor analysis was undertaken, using Principal Component Analysis with Varimax rotation. Factor analysis can only reflect patterns of scores on items selected by a researcher, and in this instance, the items were selected assuming a conceptual model constructed by the researcher.
To assess the pertinence of using PCA in this research, the Kaiser-Meyer - Olkin (KMO) statistic was computed. The reliability of the obtained factors was measured by a Cronbach's Alfa coefficients (Cronbach 1951). This analysis was carried out with the Statistica statistical package version 7.
A regression model was estimated in the second stage in order to assess the relationship between the dependent variable (tourism development) and a set of independent variables proposed by the theoretical concept in this research.
jSocio-demographic characteristics	Value
Sample	330
Gender	
Male	140
Female	190
Age (mean)	37
Educational level	
Elementary	8%
College	67%
High school	21%
Master's degree	1.51%
Length of residency (mean)	39 years
Tourism income	25%
Table 1: Socio-demographic characteristics
Results
The reduction of the initial 20 place attachment attitudes into six new factors, together accounting for 57.7% of the total variance (KMO = 0.71) was obtained through PCA with normalized varimax rotation. These findings are presented in Table 2. Considering the meaning of the place attachment attitudes with high loadings, they were labelled as natural environment quality, tourism and leisure infrastructure, service accessibility, place satisfaction, quality of living and safety living. Natural environment is the first factor and the strongest factor and is specifically related to the need to take pleasure in intact natural environment.
Place attachment and factor	Loadings	Percent variance explained	Reliability (Cronbach Alfa)	Mean
Natural environment quality				
neat and clean place	0.52			3.5S
natural environment is well preserved	0.78	21.72	0.73	3.40
the place has enough green areas	0.77			3.41
Tourism and leisure infrastructure				
enough leisure structures	0.60			2.82
cultural events	0.67			2.94
quality tourism objects	0.60	11.38	0.68	3.08
enough sports objects	0.65			2.83
cultural interaction	0.54			3.06
educational institutions	0.46			2.60
Service accessibility				
no traffic problems	0.62			2.57
all service availability	0.59	7.29	0.43	3.97
enough shopping malls	0.69			3.39
Place satisfaction				
like living in the place	0.70	6.05		3.90
would not move to another place	-0.73			2.81
Quality of living				
living costs are affordable	0.69			3.24
enough business opportunities	0.55	5.73	0.56	2.79
privacy of life is guaranteed	0.51			3.30
Safe living				
nice people	0.50			3.25
Safety	0.67	5.52		3.61
low criminal rate	-0.72			2.63
Table 2: Place attachment factors
The reduction of the initial five tourism development attitudes into a single factor, together accounting for 44 % of the total variance (KMO = 0.67) was obtained through PCA with normalized varimax rotation. These findings are presented in Table 3. The single factor was labelled tourism development. Knowledge about tourism activities, destination image and variety of tourism services, tourism development and the need for better tourism organization are included in this factor. It seems that the destination's image is the most important item in the set of attitudes about tourism development.
Tourism development and factor	Loadings Percent Reliability Mean variance (Cronbach explained Alfu)
acquainted with tourism activities attractive tourism place variety of tourism services tourism is developing tourism organization as a prime goal	0.56 3.39 0.82 3.71 0.77 44 0,67 3.36 0.64 3.02 0.46 4.15
Table 3: Attitudes about tourism development
Tourist type and factor	Loadings	Percent variance explained	Reliability (Cronbach Alfa)	Mean
Culture seekers				
relaxation and peace	0.49			3.54
interested in culture, culture inheritance	0.75			3.54
and history				
wants to know different cultures, habits	0.75	24	0.85	3.38
and customs				
wants to participate in common life of	0.71			3.33
the residents				
tries to capture as much impacts as	0.80			3.71
possible				
they walk and enjoy the social and	0.70			3.57
physical environment				
they are attracted by our tourist	0.75			3.48
destination				
they want to know us better	0.61			3.20
Consumers				
want to enjoy	0.56			3.33
enj oy shopping	0,67	11.52	0.57	2.98
cheap transportation — reason tu visit	0.59			2.74
Travellers				
very mobile, stop for a short time	0.60			3.39
are on circulate travel with a car	0.80	10.83	0.65	3.22
they come to us because they got lost	0.77			3.03
live in Slovenia - short visit	0.56			3.63
Tourists				
seek business opportunities	0.58	5.81	0.27	2.81
come on vacation every year	0.64			2,90
Adventurers				
seek adventures and dangerous	0.73	5.53	0.64	2,38
situations				
seek sexual pleasures and addictions	0.79			2.24
Table 4: Perceptions of a tourist type
The reduction of the initial 20 tourist type perceptions into five factors, together accounting for 44 % of the total variance (KMO = 0.67) was obtained through PCA with normalized varimax rotation (see Table 4). Culture seekers as a tourist type prevail in the perceptions of the local residents. They account for 24% of the variance. They are perceived as the most frequent tourist type in the places where this research was conducted, or the culture seeker is the most desired tourist type in these places.
The reduction of the initial 14 change perceptions into two factors, together accounting for 36 % of the total variance (KMO = 0.80) was obtained through PCA with normalized varimax rotation (see Table 5). It can be concluded from the results that tourists play an important role in the process of cultural interaction. In contrast, local residents perceive them as troublemakers and as participants in criminal activities. This perception is often related to escapism, which is usually the way to run from the unpleasant and stressing everyday environment. As matter of fact, escapism is a part of the behaviour pattern of the post-modern tourists. They want to escape from the mundane world of everyday life and seek new experiences that often disturb the life of local residents.
Cultural impacts andfactor	loadings	Percent variance explained	Reliability (Cronbach Alfa)	Mean
they make our day interesting	0.70			3.63
they develop different gaze on strangers	0.43			3.66
they provoke thinking about tourism	0,79			3.69
development				
they remove cultural and ideological	0.75	21	0.69	3.35
barriers				
they give us something to think about	0.68			3.52
they bring new consumer patterns	0.66			3.47
they bring income	0.52			4.05
Trouble makers				
they cause trouble and conflicts	-0.79			2.30
they want to merge with the place they	-0.44	13	0.63	2.63
visit				
they want to escape from themselves	-0 71			2.11
they add to the rate of crime	-0.75			1.82
Table 5: Cultural impacts of tourism
The reduction of the initial 13 negative tourism impacts into one single factor accounting for 46 % of the total variance (KMO = 0.90) was obtained through PCA with normalized varimax rotation (see Table 6). Local residents are afraid that tourism development would disturb their calm environment, bring traffic problems and air and environment pollution. Constant crowds and higher criminal rates are also expected.
Negative tourism impacts and	Loadings	Percent	Reliability	Mean
factor		variance explained	(Cranbach Alfa)	
high real estate prices	-0.65			3.51
high costs of living	-0.62			3.28
no privacy	-0.62			2.65
higher criminal rates	-0.71			2.51
many traffic problems	-0,75	46	0,9	3.16
environment pollution	-0.74			2.95
less opportunity to find work	-0.53			2.45
prostitution	-0.59			2.27
more cultural conflicts	-0.65			2.43
air and earth pollution	-0.74			2.54
more noise	-0.78			J.03
too many tourism facilities	-0.65			2.25
constant crowds	-0.71			2.75
Table 6: Perceptions of negative tourism development impacts
The reduction of the initial 14 positive tourism impacts into one single factor accounting for 46 % of the total variance (KMO = 0.91), was obtained through PCA with normalized varimax rotation (see Table 7). Local residents expect better services, tourism development and development of new occupations and better future prospects for young people from positive tourism impacts.
Positive tourism impacts and factor	Loadings	Percent variance explained	Reliability (Cronbach Alfa)	Mean
it is easier to get a job	-0,63			2.87
meeting people from other cultures	-0.68			3.80
better future for young people	-0.75			3.43
a variety of leisure services	-0.65			3.10
people do not leave the place	-0.56			2.88
people have children	-0.45	46	0.91	2.55
quality and variety of services	-0.77			3.15
cultural events	-0.74			3.25
interest for the development of place	-0.77			3.54
possible development of higher	-0.64			3.11
education structures				
entrepreneurial and business	-0.72			3.42
opportunities				
quality products are on the market	-0.67			3.74
development of different occupations	-0.76			3.54
maintaining of the coexistence with	-0.66			3.45
other cultures				
Table 7: The effects of positive tourism impacts
However, despite the fact that these studies provided important contributions in order to define local residents' attitudes towards tourism development in some places in Slovenia, they do not examine the interactions among them.
In order to examine the main hypothesis, the hierarchical regression in one step was conducted. The findings confirm the hypothesis that the attitudes of local residents toward a tourism development depend on place attachment and of the overall perception of tourism impacts. Predictor variables of tourism impacts and place attachment have moderate effects on tourism development (R2 = 0.37; p<.000***). Results indicate that positive tourism impacts (B = 0.21, p< .006***), cultural tourism (B = 0, 19, p<.013**), natural environment quality (B = 0.16, p< .012**), and tourism and leisure structures (B 0 0, 14, p<.037**) positively influence perceptions of a tourism development. The length of residency (B = - 0.19, p<.026**) negatively influence perceptions of tourism development.
Table 8: Regression results of the effects on tourism development (N=330, p<.01***)
Independent variables	R square	B	Partial	t	P
length of residency	0.61	-0.19	-0.15	-2.23	0.03**
natural environment quality	0.34	0.16	0.17	2.52	0.01+*
tourism and leisure infrastructure	0.37	0.14	0.14	2.10	0.04**
positive tourism impacts	0.51	0.21	0.19	2.79	0.01***
culture seekers	0.53	0.19	0.17	2.51	0.01**
Table 9: Predictors of tourism development(p< 0.05**, p<0.01***)
Discussion and conclusion
The theoretical model proposals offer a logical sequence of the formation of local residents' perceptions. The empirical study proves that perceptions of tourism development by local residents are based on what kind of tourism they prefer and what its impacts are. Place attachment represented by natural environment quality, tourism and leisure facilities and length of residency play a significant role in their perceived tourism development.
In the model, the relationship between negative impacts, cultural change impacts, service accessibility, place satisfaction, quality of living and safety of living and tourism development is not significant, and that proves that local residents are more supportive of tourism development when they are newcomers and when they clearly perceive positive tourism impacts. The relationship between the length of residency and tourism development in the model is negative. Long time residents are generally less favourable to tourism development. These findings tend to confirm that attached residents who are favourable toward tourism may be expressing ties to the overall development of the place more than ties to the community. In places that seem to evoke strong emotional responses, managers should be especially aware of how place attachment will influence attitudes of local residents toward tourism development.
It seems that sense of place is an important factor in the forming of tourism development attitudes. Previous studies, along with this study, confirm its role in tourism development. Still, there is enough evidence to suggest it should be of at least moderate
importance to recreation and tourism managers and planners. How integral may depend on such variables as the perception of a desired type of tourism, the magnitude of perceived positive impacts to the area and of perceived threats to the natural environment as well as to the accessibility of the tourism and leisure structures by local residents. Locally-based place meanings make tourism policy development and processes difficult to manage. It can be concluded that sense of place, place attachment, and other places-related concepts are factors strongly related to recreation and tourism. Thus, research in local residents' attitudes toward tourism development can be helpful as managers face and often struggle with resource allocation issues that affect recreation and tourism resources and opportunities.
The major findings of this study have some significant tourism development implications. The study shows what local residents know about and believe about tourism, including perceptions and impacts. The study also embraces future development tourism in the places in this study and reveals some facts for the control and development and other relations to the other aspects of social and community life. Flexible attitudes toward tourism development along with the belief that tourism will bring prosperity to the area are a solid basis for the tourism development. In some of the researched places, there is a shortage of tourism and leisure facilities and that could cause significant problems in the future tourism development. The quality of the natural environment is clearly an asset and its protection should be carefully considered when tourism development is planned. The findings of this study confirm my previous research findings, which state that the local community should play the primary role in the tourism development process in the field of community-led and entrepreneur-led tourism development (Ambrož, 2006: 41).
Bibliography
Altman, Irwin & Low, Setha. 1992. Place attachment. New York: Plenum.
Ambard, Marke, Thomas M. Beckley, Richard C. Stedman and Sara Wallace. 2004. A new tool for understanding sense of place. Sustainable forest management network. Edmonton: University of Alberta.
Ambrož, Milan. 2006. 'A Third Way' of Tourism planning: Case of Slovenia. In: Rok Ovsenik and
Iwona Kiereta (eds.), Destination management. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, pp. 26-44. Ambrož, Milan. 2004. Local tourism development strategy. In: Milan Ambrož (ed.), Strategic partnerships for the development of tourist destinations. Portorov Turistica - College of Tourism Studies, pp. 5.
Ambrož, Milan. 2005. Sociology of Tourism: The basis for the investigation of travelling cultures. Portorož: Turistica.
Ambrož, Milan and Mišela Mavric. 2005. Socially represented knowledge about tourism. In: Zvone Vodovnik (ed.), Intellectual capital and knowledge management: proceedings of the 5th International Conference of the Faculty of Management Koper, University of Primorska, 18-20 November, Congress Centre Bernardin, Portorož, Slovenia. Koper: Faculty of Management, pp. 365-375.
Andriotis, Konstantinos. 2002. Resident's satisfaction or dissatisfaction with public sector governance:
The Cretan case. Tourism and Hospitality Research: The Surrey Quarterly Review 4(1): 53-68. Ap, John. 1992. Resident's perceptions on tourism impacts. Annals of Tourism Research 19(4): 665690.
Ap, John and John Crompton. 1998. Developing and testing a tourism impact scale. Journal of Tourism Research 37(2): 120-130.
Beckley, Thomas. 2003. The relative importance of sociocultural and ecological factors in attachment to place. In: Linda E. Kruger (ed.), Understanding community forest relations. Portland: Forest Service, pp. 105-125.
Boegenhold, Dieter. 2001. Social Inequality and the Sociology of Life Style: Material and Cultural Aspects of Social Stratification. American Journal of Economics and Sociology 60(4): 829-847.
Bricker, Kelly & Deborah Kerstetter. 2002. An interpretation of special place meanings Whitewater recreationists attach to the South Fork of the American River. Tourism Geographies 4(4): 396-425.
Choy, Dexter. 1992. Life cycle models for Pacific island destinations. Journal of Travel research 30(3): 26-31.
Cohen, Eric. 1972. Toward a sociology of international tourism. Social Research 39: 164-182.
Dixon, John A. and Kevin Durrheim. 2000. Displacing place identity: A discursive approach to locating self and other. British Journal of Social Psychology 39: 27-44.
Duvall, Tracy. 2002. Tourists and locals: the people of Mazatlan, Mexico have many reasons for welcoming visitors. Retrieved 7 December 2007 from http://findarticles.com/plarticles/mi_go2295/ is_200209/ai_n7275358.
Farnum, Jenifer, Troy Hall and Linda E. Kruger. 2005. Sense of place in natural resource recreation and tourism: an evaluation and assessment of research findings. Portland: Forest Service.
Fishwick, Linda and Joanne Vinning. 1992. Toward a phenomenology of recreation place. Journal of Environmental Psychology 12: 57-63.
Gallarza, Martina, G., Irene Gil Saura and Haydée Calderón Garcia. 2002. Destination Image: Towards a Conceptual Framework. Annals of Tourism Research 29(1): 56-78.
Getz, Donald. 1994. Resident's attitudes towards tourism development: A longitudinal study in Spey Valley, Scotland. Tourism management 15(4): 274-258.
Gosar, Anton. 1993. International Tourism and Its Impact on the Slovenian Society and Landscape. GeoJournal 30(3): 339-348.
Gosar, Anton. 1999. Zrno do zrna pogaea, kamen na kamen (turistična) palača: nadnacionalna raba naravnih in kulturnih virov - temelj sonaravnega turističnega razvoja ob tromeji Italije, Avstrije in Slovenije. In: Anton Gosar and Jurij Kunaver (eds.), Sonaravni razvoj v slovenskih Alpah in sosedstvu. Ljubljana: Oddelek za geografijo Filozofske fakultete, pp. 27-46.
Gursoy, Dogan, Claudia Jurowski and Muzaffer Uysal. 2002. Resident Attitudes: A Structural Modelling Approach. Annals of Tourism Research 29(1): 79-105.
Hall, C. Michael and Dieter K. Muller. 2004. Tourism, Mobility and Second Homes. Buffalo: Multilingual Matters and Chanell View Publications.
Harill, Rich and Thomas D. Potts. 2003. Tourism planning in historic districts: attitudes toward tourism development in Charleston. Journal of American Planning Association 69(3): 233-244.
Harrill, Rich. 2004. Residents' Attitudes toward Tourism Development: a Literature Review with Implications for Tourism Planning. Journal of Planning Literature 18(3): 251-266.
Heath, Ernie. 2003. Towards a model to enhance destination competitiveness: A Southern African Perspective. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management 8(1): 33-42.
Jafari, Jafar. 1988. Soft tourism. Tourism Management 9(1): 82-84.
Jokinen, Erik and Soile Veijola. 2002. The Disoriented tourist: The figuration of the tourist in contemporary cultural critique. In: Chris Rojek and John Urry (eds.), Touring Cultures: Transformations of travel and theory. London: Routledge, pp. 23-52.
Jurowski, Claudia. 1998. A study of community sentiments in relation to attitudes toward tourism development. Tourism Analysis 3(1): 17-34.
Kaltenborn, Bruno, P. 1998. Effects of sense of place on responses to environmental impact: a case study among residents in an Arctic community. Applied Geography 18(2): 169-189.
Kruger, Lorenz, E. and Pamela J. Jakes. (2003). The importance of place: advances in science and application. Forest Science 49(6): 819-821.
Kyle, Gerard, Alan Graefe, Robert Maning and James Bacon. 2004. Effect of Activity Involvement and Place Attachment on Recreationists' Perceptions of Setting Density. Journal of Leisure Research 36: 213-225.
Kyle, Gerard T., Alan R.Graefe and Robert E. Manning. 2005. Testing the dimensionality of place attachment in recreational settings. Environment and Behavior 37: 153-177.
Lindberg, Karina and Leonard R. Johnson. 1997. Modeling resident attitudes toward tourism. Annals of Tourism Research 24(2): 402-424.
Lowyck, Eric, Luk Van Langenhove and Livin Bollaert. 1992. Typologies of tourist roles. Choice and demand in tourism. England: Mansell Publishing.
Mansfeld, Yoel. 1992. Group-Differentiated Perceptions of Social Impacts Related to Tourism Development. Professional Geographer 44(4): 377-392.
Mason, Peter. 2003. Tourism Impacts, Planning and Management. London: Butterworth Heinemann.
Mathieson, Alister and Geoffrey Wall. 1982. Tourism: Economic, Social and Environmental Impacts. London: Longman.
McCool, Stephen. F. and Steven R. Martin. 1994. Community attachment and attitudes toward tourism development. Journal of Travel Research 32(2): 29-34.
Meinig, Dann. W. 1979. The interpretation of ordinary landscapes. New York: Oxford University Press.
Milman, Ady & Pizam, Abraham. 1988. Social impacts of tourism on Central Florida. Annals of Tourism Research 15(2): 191-204.
Murphy, Peter, E. 1985. Tourism: A Community Approach. London: Routledge.
Ovsenik, Rok and Janja Jerman. 2004. Opportunities and Contradictions Involved in the Development of a Tourism Destination: A Model of Tourism Management in the Area of the Slovene Alps. In: Joze Jesenko and Iwona Kiereta (eds.), Management in Tourism. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, pp. 125-143.
Page, J. Stephen. 2003. Tourism Management. Managing for Change. London: Butterworth Heinemann.
Pearce, Douglas G. and Richard W. Butler. 2002. Desenvolvimento em turismo: Temas contemporaneous. Säo Paul: Editora Contexto.
Pearce, Philip. L., Gianna Moscardo and Glenn F. Ross. 1996. Tourism Community Relationships. James Cook University of North Queensland: Pergamon.
Pearce, Philip. L. and Gianna Moscardo. 2002. Tourism Community Analysis. In: Douglas G. Pearce and Richard W. Butler (eds.), Contemporary Issues in Tourism Development. London: Routledge Advances in Tourism, pp: 31-51.
Plog, Stephen. 1991. Leisure Travel: Making it a Growth Market? Again! New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Puczko, Laszlo and Tamara Ratz. 2000. Tourist and Resident Perceptions of the Physical Impacts of Tourism at Lake Balaton, Hungary: Issues for Sustainable Tourism Management. Journal of Sustainable Tourism 8(6): 458-479.
Relph, Edvard. 1996. Sense of place. Ten geographic ideas that changed the world. New York: New Brunswick Rutgers University Press.
Rowles, G. David. 1983. Geographical dimensions of social support in rural Appalachia. In: David G. Rowles in Russel J. Ohta (eds.) Aging and milieu: Environmental perspectives on growing old. New York: Academic Press, pp. 97-107.
Said, Edward W. 1993. Culture and Imperialism. New York: Vintage.
Simmel, Georg. 1971. On Individuality and Social Forms. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Stedman, Richard, C. 2003. Is it really just a social construction: the contribution of the physical environment to sense of place. Society and Natural Resources 16: 671-685.
Stedman, Richard. 2004. A picture and 1000 words: using resident-employed photography to understand attachment to high amenity places. Journal of Leisure Research 36(4): 580-606.
Tuan, Yi Fu. 1977. Space and place: the perspective of experience. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Urry, John. 1990. The Tourist Gaze. London: Sage.
Urry, John. 1995. Consuming Places. London: Routledge.
Urry, John. 2003. Global Complexity. Cambridge: Polity.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2005. CPNWR Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan Wilderness Stewardship Plan and Environmental Impact Statement. Retrieved 1 September 2007 from http:/ /www.fws.gov/southwest/refuges/Plan/current%20Draft%20Eis.pdf.
Williams, Daniel R. and Jerry J. Vaske. 2003. The measurement of place attachment: validity and generalizability of a psychometric approach. Forest Science 49(6): 830-840.
Williams, Daniel R., Cary D. McDonald, Carl M. Riden and Muzaffer Uysal. 1995. Community Attachment, Regional Identity and Resident Attitudes Toward Tourism. In: Proceedings of the 26th Annual Travel and Tourism Research Association Conference Proceedings. Wheat Ridge, CO: Travel and Tourism Research Association, pp. 424-428.
Zapf, Wolfgang, Sigrid Breuer, Jürgen Hampel, Peter Krause, Hans-Michael Mohr and Stefan Weick, Erich Wiegand. 1987. Individualisierung und Sicherheit. Untersuchungen zur Lebensqualitat in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland. Munich: Beck.
POVZETEK
Prispevek se usmerja k proučevanju stališč lokalnih prebivalcev do razvoja turizma v nekaterih turistično bolj in manj razvitih krajih v Sloveniji. Študija izhaja iz modela pripadnosti lokalnih prebivalcev lastnemu kraju in poskuša predlagati celovit pristop k upravljanju razvoja turizma na lokalni ravni. Podatke za raziskavo smo zbrali v primorski, dolenjski, gorenjski in ljubljanski regiji. Izidi naše raziskave potrjujejo pomembno vlogo pripadnosti določenemu kraju, vlogo zaznav in vplivov turizma in vpliv zaznanega in želenega tipa turizma. Naša raziskava prispeva k ugotovitvi, da je dolžina bivanja v določenem kraju osrednji dejavnik, ki predstavlja oviro za razvoj pozitivnih stališč do turizma. Prebivalci, ki dalj časa bivajo v določenem kraju, imajo pogosto bolj negativna stališča do razvoja turizma, kot tisti, ki v kraju bivajo krajši čas. Po drugi strani zaznani pozitivni vplivi turizma, želeni tip turizma in kakovost življenja in naravnega okolja, pozitivno vplivajo na zaznave in stališča lokalnih prebivalcev. Poleg tega imajo ekonomski učinki na razvoj turizma prevladujoč vpliv na stališča lokalnih prebivalcev, ki hkrati pričakujejo višjo kvaliteto življenja in bivanja v kraju, kjer se turizem razvija. Upravljalci in načrtovalci razvoja turizma morajo vso pozornost posvetiti vlogi lokalnih prebivalcev v tem procesu. Izključevanje lokalnih prebivlacev iz razvojnih procesov turizma lahko spodbudi čustvene odzive, ki sprožijo konflikte ali celo zavrejo razvoj turizma.
KLJUČNE BESEDE: pripadnost prostoru, turizem, razvoj, lokalni prebivalci, vplivi turizma
CORRESPONDENCE: MILAN AMBROŽ, Faculty of Criminal Justice, University of Maribor, Kotnikova 8, 1000 Ljubljana. E-mail: ambrozmilan@siol.net.