Sustainable tourism: a regional perspective

Pergamon

PII: S026 !-5177(97)00053-8

Tourism Management, Vol. lS, No. 7, pp. 433-440, 1997 © 1997 Elsevier Scicncc Ltd

All rights reserved. Printed in Great Britain 0261-5177/97 $17.00+0.00

Sustainable tourism: a regional perspective

Sue Berry Department of Service Sector Management, University of Brighton, 49 Darley Road, Eastbourne, East Sussex BN20 7UR, UK

Adele Ladkin Department of Management Studies, University of Surrey, Guildford, Surrey GU2 5XN, UK

The aim of this research is to gain an insight into the perception of sustainable tourism, and to examine the ways in which it is implemented at the regional level. Using a case study of East Sussex in the UK, the research explores how the general principles of sustainable tour ism at the macro level can be t ranslated into workable practice. The research is focused on small businesses, as these form the majority of tour ism enterprises. The data were captured using the technique of focus groups. Tracing the development of sustainable tourism as a start ing point, three main themes are then explored. First, how well the concept of sustainabili ty is understood by small businesses engaged in tourism. Second, how these sustainable concepts can be t ranslated into workable practices and finally, the major barr iers to implementing sustainable tourism by small businesses. The research reveals that despite a willingness on the par t of small businesses to engage in sustainable activities those engaged in the tourism business have little understanding of the concept of sustainability. The vague principles do not easily t ranslate into workable practice. The research identifies a number of barr iers to successful implementat ion of sustainable tourism practices, the most prominent being a mis t rus t of government policy, poor adminis t ra t ion and unclear lines of communication. The study concludes that despite the increased importance of sustainable tourism and the formulation of general principles and guidelines, cynical att i tudes towards government policy and its implementat ion are significant barr iers to the implementat ion of sustainable tourism practices in small businesses at the regional level. © 1997 Elsevier Science Ltd

Keywords: sus ta inable , Eas t Sussex, smal l business , publ ic sec tor

Introduction The purpose of this research is to establish what sustainable tourism means to owners of small tourism businesses, and whether they think it has any relevance for them. Given the dramatic increase in the profile of sustainable issues, and the importance of small businesses for the tourism industry, the main aim of this study is to explore how the concept is interpreted by small businesses, and whether it can translate into workable practices at the regional level. In essence, the study takes the all embracing concept of sustainability and explores what that means to small tourism businesses. Following a discussion on the rise of sustainable tourism, three main themes which were identified by a research project are explored. First, how well the concept of sustainability is understood by small

businesses engaged in tourism. Second, how these sustainable concepts can be translated into workable practices and finally, the major barriers to implementing sustainable tourism which are perceived by small businesses. The study does not aim to measure quantifiable take up rates of sustainable practices, nor to compare differences in take up rates between the different sectors of the tourism industry. Instead, what is offered is a case study which is used to examine the practical issues which are associated with the commutat ion of theory into practice.

The relevance of this study stems from the recent interest on the part of local authorities in the UK taking an initiating role in the implementation of sustainable tourism practices, as a direct result of Agenda 21. '-3 If funding is made available to local tourism businesses, then some indication of the

433

Sustainable tourisim: a regional perspective: S Berry and A Ladkin

current perception of sustainable tourism and the difficulties associated with its implementation need to be outlined. At this juncture, the research provides information for local authorities regarding perceptions and current practices. The predomi- nance of small businesses and the heterogeneity of these businesses in the tourism industry (identified by Middleton) creates a particular challenge for the implementation of sustainable practices. Our research indicates that trust, co-operation and co-ordination between the public and private sectors are of prime importance?

The rise of sustainable tourism development As a background to the study and to illustrate where the recent prominence of sustainable tourism at the regional level has arisen from, the importance of the sustainable concept for tourism will be discussed. Comprehensive reviews of the historical development of sustainable tourism are provided by a number of authors, for example, Bramwell and Lane, ~ Murphy," Archer and Cooper 7 and, Harris and Leiper. ~ Whilst a detailed account is not appro- priate here, it is important to set the current research in context. Tracing the beginnings of sustainable issues, Cooper et al. argue that a combination of both the realization of the detrimental impacts of tourism at the destination, and the rise of environmentalism and 'green' conscious- ness in the mid to late 1980's resulted in a reasscss- ment of the role and value placed on tourism at destinations." It was acknowledged that tourism growth could no longer continue at the present rate without addressing the major tourism impacts. The emerging belief encompassed the concept of sustainable development put forward by The Brundtland Report, Our Common Future which defines sustainability as 'meeting the needs" of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs'.'" The message here is that long term preservation of the environment is essential for future use.

As the profile of environmental and sustainable issues grew in the political arena during the 1980's, the call for global action with regard to the environment continued. One of the important consequences arising from this call was the 1992 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (The Earth Summit). Originating from this conference arose a detailed blueprint for implementing sustainable development (Agenda 21), and whilst not legally binding, agreements reached at the Earth Summit laid down principles for global sustainable development? ' Travel and tourism was identified as one of the industries which has the potential to make a positive contribution to a healthier planet. According to Beaumont et al., Agenda 21 for the

travel and tourism industry is primarily aimed towards educators and governments, the latter having an important influence on the tourism industry at both national and regional levels.'-"

With sustainable issues firmly established on the political agenda internationally, the issue of the implementation of such development and practices for tourism has become an area for concern for governments at national, regional and local levels. Recently in the UK, local authorities havc been allocated the task of ascertaining the current understanding of sustainable tourism, and how sustainable practices might be implemented at the regional or local level. It is this development that has generated the need to examine what, if any, sustainable tourism practices were used in small businesses and how these businesses perceived the concept.

Sustainable principles One of the main consequences of the incrcasing awareness and importance of sustainable development is the formulation of a range of principles and guidelines for sustainable practice. For example, at the international level the 1992 Rio Earth Summit put forward 12 principles for sustainable development, and Agenda 21 sets nine goals for governments and, ten for the private sector to achieve in order to attain sustainable tourism development. On a National level, public bodies have issued guidelines for acceptable development, for example the English Tourism Board has produced guidelines covering National Parks (in 1990) sustainable tourism practices (in 1991), and on how to maintain the balance between tourism and environmental issues (in 1991). ~-'~ In addition to public sector organizations, the private sector (such as British Airways) are also issuing sustainable guidelines for their work force, operations and customers.'" There is no shortage of further examples of principles for sustainable development. In 1994, Wheeller listed recent publications by: The Tourism Society; The WTTERC; Tourism Concern; The Ecotourism Society; and The Centre for Responsible Tourism. '722 BotterilF ~ identifies that consumer groups are growing in number and exerting greater influence, and guides are available specifically concerning responsible tourism which offer guidelines for the consumer, for example, Wood and House 2~ and, Elkington and Hales£ ~

Whilst it is acknowledged that some codes of conduct are general in terms of geographically applicability, and others very specific to a place (UNEP and, Mason and Mowforth) what many of these principles and guidelines have in common is they are very general in natureY ',27 Although they do have a value by providing a useful way forward for sustainable development, it is argued they are ineffective in producing any measurable improve-

434

ments. '~ Whilst it is acknowledged that principles for sustainable tourism are indeed an adequate starting point, the vague nature of the guidelines does little to encourage enthusiasm for, or an understanding of sustainable tourism development. Taking this a stage further, as the vague nature of the principles have come under criticism so too has the actual applica- tion of sustainable tourism. Pigram argues that despite the acceptance of sustainable tourism as a desirable alternative to more predatory models of development, a large gap exists between policy endorsement and policy implementation. 2~ These failings in the implementation process are a result of the conflict between management agencies, tourist developers and the communities involved. Pigram states

'Sustainable tourism has the potential to become a tangible expression of sustainable tourism development. Yet, it runs the risk of remaining irrelevant and inert as a feasible policy option for the real world of tourism development, without the development of effective means of translating the idea into action. '2<,

The research discussed here echoes that sentiment, as a lack of support and advice at the local level was cited as a reason for difficulty in implementing sustainable practices in small businesses. There is a lack of communication from the top of the hierarchy downwards, combined with little advice on how to translate the general principles into workable practice.

The study region: East Sussex, UK The case presented here is the county of East Sussex, situated on the south coast of England (Figure 1). The county (which is an administrative area) contains a mixture of seaside resorts, historic towns and the open countryside of the South Downs which are popular with walkers. Two-thirds of the


county is designated an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. There is a combination of historic attractions and modern leisure facilities including country houses and gardens, fun parks and zoos, castle and religious foundations, sports facilities, theatres and shopping centres. East Sussex contains some of the largest and most well known seaside resorts in the UK, Brighton and Hove, Eastbourne and Hastings. Situated 1 hour's drive from London, East Sussex is a top tourist destination and the tourism industry is an important component of the local economy. In 1993, the latest year for which figures are available, 2.28 million visitors stayed for a total of 12.5 million nights and spent &pound- 435 million in the county? ' Domestic tourism in 1994 accounted for 1.9million trips, 6.8million nights, and a total spending of &pound246 million. In 1991 there were an estimated 18900 employees (excluding the self-employed) in tourism related industries in East Sussex. Over the period 1981-1991 employment in the above sectors rose by ca 3000. Employment in tourism related industries accounted for ca 8% of jobs in the county in 1991. 2" At the national level the Employment Department estimates that self-employment accounts for about 12% of all employment in these tourist related industries.

In a sense while the region presents the bound- aries of this particular case study, location is not an important factor. The study could be replicated in any location where tourism is undertaken as an economic activity, and where small businesses dominate.

The commissioning of the study The research presented here was commissioned by the Planning Department of East Sussex County Council which has responsibility for the oversight of tourism planning in the county. This research is

- . - . . t " - ' l

, I EAST sUssE× ~ . . ~ . ~ l .' g " " " ~ Ii

Figure 1 The reg ion and the locat ions.

Pr~ish Chaco.el

435


taken from part of a larger undertaking funded by the European Union and co-ordinated by the Assoc- iation of European Regions (AER). This larger research project included three regions; East Sussex in the UK, Norbotten in Sweden; and Telemark in Norway. The objectives and methodology were the same in each country. The purpose of the A E R commissioned research was to identify which environmental issues were the most important to local small businesses in the tourism industry. The A E R recognized that communications and co-operation from the tourism industry are essential when attempting to implement any policies relating to sustainable tourism at the regional level. Each of the regions was instructed to set up their own consultative group, and the results were fed back to the AER. The intention was that any recommenda- tions would be filtered to national governments and the European Union to establish programmes of assistance for regions, or to take action itself.

Methodology The information for this research was obtained using focus groups. Presently these are an under utilized method of data collection in the tourism field, with many researchers opting for quantitative techniques?" Focus groups are commonly used in commercial research, especially with reference to developing and monitoring advertising campaigns. In this sense they have also been used for political campaigns?" Focus groups generally consist of eight to ten participants, with the aim of creating free flow discussion which will obtain views representa- tive of a wider population. The researcher acts as a modera tor or facilitator, and records the discussion taking place. The advantages of focus groups are those associated with group dynamics, for example cumulative group discussion obtains a wider opinion than from an isolated individual, there is security in group numbers, ideas can be debated, and single comments can provoke further discussion. Focus groups can provide high quality, reliable research results which allow for a thorough, in-depth understanding of the topic under investigation. The synergy of a group helps to provide a wide and stimulating discussion. Detailed accounts of the focus group technique are provided by Robson and Wardle and Ryan? '

For this research project, three focus groups were run. The three meetings were held in different towns in East Sussex, all of which were selected to represent categories of sett lement which are characteristic of East Sussex: market towns; seaside resorts; and villages. Each focus group had a distinctive identity which reflected the nature of the small tourism business in the locality. At Lewes, a historic small market and county town 8 miles north of Brighton, the group was dominated by serviced accommodation, especially smaller bed and break-

fast businesses. At Alfriston, a small village, attractions and self catering were more strongly represented. At Hastings, one of the oldest seaside resorts in Europe, the mixture was attractions, small bed and breakfast accommodation and, a family run caravan site.

As an incentive to come, the participants were invited to attend the focus group and then stay on for a buffet meal afterwards and to claim their travel expenses. When dealing with small businesses, researchers and their clients cannot expect help with projects without offering some incentive. The sample consisted of a selection of people who ran small businesses, such as bed and breakfast estab- lishments, small hotels, farm attractions and self catering accommodation, and was selected randomly using local tourist information guides. Thirty letters of invitation were sent out for each venue. Within 2 days, we had the ten people we needed for each location. This was an excellent response, and far more people wanted to attend. This willingness to participate was not expected, given the usual difficulties faced due to business proprietors having little free time.

As a starting point for the discussion the focus group members were shown a list of the ten private sector priority action areas as identified by Agenda 21 for the Travel and Tourism Industry." The ten areas covered were: waste minimization; energy conservation; management of fresh water resources; waste water management; hazardous substances; transport; land use planning and management; involving staff and customers and communities in environmental issues; design for sustainability and developing partnerships. Comments were then invited and the discussion of the three main themes on which this article explores were generated from this starting point.

The findings The analysis of the discussion generated by the three focus groups revealed three key themes on which a wealth of information was obtained. A discussion of all the findings is beyond the scope of this paper, but is published elsewhere? 2

The striking characteristic of the results is that all three focus groups shared concerns even though each had a different mix of businesses and were in contrasting locations.

Relating to the three main themes of perception of sustainable tourism, implementation of sustainable tourism, and barriers to its development, the findings revealed the following.

Local perception of the sustainable tourism concept With regard to the perception of sustainability, all of the groups expressed some concern about the definition of 'sustainable'. They felt that it was a poorly defined concept which was increasingly used as a

436

marketing tool, but had little substance. There was a general feeling expressed that jargon like 'green' , 'eco ' and 'responsible ' tourism only confused visitors and businesses alike. The respondents could provide no clear definition of the concept, and could not identify what constitutes sustainable tourism. At the regional level, the respondents felt that sustainability really meant maintaining tourism in such a way that the environment was not allowed to deteriorate and yet people were able to get to their destinations and enjoy them once there. There was a recognition by small businesses that a well cared for environment is essential to them to preserve the future of tourism. The decline of the quality of the built environment (specifically in the old seaside resorts such as Brighton and Hastings which are famous for their Georgian architecture) were cited as examples of the negative impacts of environmental decay on tourism. Interestingly, the small businesses felt the area had the ability to absorb more visitors. Increasing visitor numbers was seen as a welcome move, although it was argued they should be better 'managed ' to stay longer in one particular area. The respondents felt that 'sustainable' was relevant to them, as a quality environment was regarded as an asset which would attract more visitors. The view was also held that many areas had already reached their capacity, and more visitors could only result in more damage.

From sustainable concepts to workable practice

In terms of whether sustainable concepts could be turned into workable practices, four issues were identified. First, all of the groups were concerned that sustainability must be compatible with accessi- bility. Therefore, all of the groups were in favour of road improvements and saw the alleviation of congestion as a way in which tourism could become more sustainable. The argument was that 'traffic on the move ' was less damaging than 'traffic at a stand- still'. Efficient road systems could enhance the quality of the environment for the county as a whole, and would be less detrimental to the health of visitors and residents. Improved public transport was called for, paying particular regard to a regular service offering good quality travel. The improvements of transport in the region was seen as a way in which sustainable ideas could translate directly into workable solutions.

Local residents' travel movements were thought to be a bigger environmental issue (due to the far greater volume) than tourists travelling and that all forms of transport had their strengths and weaknesses. Trying to manage transport as if the dominance of the car would soon be over was considered totally unrealistic.

Second, good marketing was perceived as an effective management tool, aiding sustainable tourism by dispersing people to localities which

Sustainable tourisirn: a regional perspective: S Berry and A Ladkin

could cope best with numbers. All of the groups were concerned about marketing particularly by the overlap between public sector bodies who were often in control of marketing. The majority wanted to see integrated, hierarchical marketing structures with clear lines of responsibility and terms of reference. The regional tourist board were not perceived as giving a regional focus. The groups felt that an integrated approach could use resources more efficiently by encouraging people to stay longer in one place rather than travelling long distances, thus reducing the impact on the environment. Once visitors were in the region, well organized services could disperse tourists around the region thus using the less well known places more. Such a strategy would take pressure off any points which required protection from being overused. Fragile areas or over visited areas would not be advertised. The respondents also felt that if the region could be marketed to the consumer as a destination that operated 'sustainable' practices. This image would be a positive move to encourage more visitors of the kind who appreciated environmental quality. The proprietors were happy to use 'sustainable' tourism as a marketing tool in this way.

Third, the general consensus was that visitors and local people needed some education about the need for sustainability. The groups suggested that the government and the local tourism industry should collaborate to educate people to be more respectful towards the environment, with children being the most receptive. The objective should be to encourage pride in the environment. Local action could also help to boost the economy, for example, encouraging local shops (including supermarkets) to stock local produce. Local produce would not only preserve a sense of local identity, which is partly why visitors come to the area, but would also save the transport costs, effluent etc. which are associated with the movement of goods. Local educational campaigns were seen as a positive action which would raise the profile of sustainable development, and encourage people to participate locally.

With regard to energy conservation, all groups said they did their best to save energy and recycle but some doubts were expressed in both groups as to the degree to which recycling really did save resources. Some people commented upon the amount of conflicting evidence about paper and waste recycling which was in the media. At an attraction near Alfriston, water recycling was amongst one of the conservation actions being taken, pay back in 4years was attained. In Eastbourne, hotels sought ideas which would help them to operate in environmentally sensitive ways and many hotels in the town already recycle cans, bottles, paper and glass. More recycling collection points and initiatives from the council were hoped for. These comments indicate ways in which on a

437


very small scale, positive local action can be taken to reduce negative environmental impacts. Small accommodation operators said that the cost of some recycling and other ventures at their scale outweighed the benefits, and monetary grants would help resolve this. The groups felt that the County Council could advise and educated more about recycling, and offer a more efficient service.

These issues of reducing traffic congestion, marketing, education and energy conservation indicate that despite a confusion surrounding the definition of sustainable tourism, there is potential for small scale positive action.

Barriers to the implementation of sustainable tourism

The third issue to emerge from the focus groups was that concerning the main obstacles to developing and implementing sustainable tourism. The main factor here was identified as the role played by the public sector in the administration and legislation of sustainable policies.

The groups expressed concern over who would pay for environmental initiatives when they are associated with legislation. The industry is dominated by small businesses who feel that their costs are increased by legislation to the degree that the smaller marginal businesses could be endangered. If funds were available to counteract these costs, the rate of implementation would be higher.

Administration of legislation was also criticized, and it was suggested that administration should be local so that people can talk to those responsible directly, who have a knowledge of the local area. The present criticism was that the decision makers are too distant, and there was a general feeling in all groups that there was too much anonymity and no one to act as local contact points and to represent the region at the National level. One point of contact instead of many different ones would eliminate the feeling of people being pushed 'from pillar to post'.

Public sector administrative overheads seemed high and the bodies too distant and prone to giving conflicting messages. European Union regulation was perceived as expensive and driving products towards uniformity which seemed to conflict with any concern about sustainable tourism which was perceived to be about emphasizing the identity of places.

The groups saw more need to make what is positive and available work now, and the sentiment was there is no point in adding more legal powers if the existing ones are not used. They also felt that the local authorities should inform people and firms who do damage to the environment by dumping rubbish, and to deal more stringently with the offenders.

To summarize, the focus groups revealed the following important findings:

• an awareness of the importance of tourism as a community activity with many small operators drawn from many backgrounds;

• that the public sector should play a more active role in addressing sustainable issues, acting for example, as an effective co-ordinator;

• a need to define what sustainable tourism encompasses;

• a lack of understanding of the roles of the layers of people who are responsible for the development and management of infrastructure and regulation;

• a belief that the public sector's lack of perception of the private sector's confusion about the role they should play in sustainable tourism development was the root cause of the problem;

• an interest in 'green' activities, but a wish for simple, clear and commercially sensible ideas;

• a willingness to be involved in developments provided they did not absorb a great deal of time because this would not be affordable. Many owners of small businesses cannot spend the time away from their businesses.

• a strong interest in local issues but a limited recognition of their own impact upon that

environment.

Conclusion

Although the results stated here are based on the findings from a single case study, there are a number of issues raised that may have important implications in a wider context.

The research reveals that local tourism businesses do not have a clear perception of sustainable tourism or its implementation. Many of the respondents felt they were already 'sustainable' because they were not offering environmentally damaging activities. The argument put forward was that all small businesses are sustainable, particularly those related to the tourism industry. Environmentally damaging businesses were perceived as being confined to those associated with other industries. This perception of 'sustainable' proved to be the first difficulty involved when trying to implement sustainable practices, that of convincing the owners of businesses that improvements could be made. A major criticism was that so many words are used which mean the same, there is little understanding of what can be called 'sustainable' and what is not. The respondents stated universally they are inter- ested to learn more about the concept of sustainability, but are confused by the lack of a clear definition. They all felt the standard definition to be acceptable in theory, but unworkable in practice. This should act as a reminder that theoretical concepts which lack practical definition make small

438

businesses very wary of those who seek to implement legislative sustainable tourism practices. The lack of practical advice seems to create suspicion and mistrust on the part of the operators, and that the government is simply acting in its own self interest.

In terms of awareness of the importance of sustainable tourism, many of the people in the focus groups are successful entrepreneurs in tourism. They are well aware of the need to carefully maintain the environment from which they earn their living, and with as much sense of local identity as is possible for it to be successful as a tourism product. The view was also held that if the region could market itself as promoting 'sustainable' tourism this would result in increased business. What this indicates is that contrary to popular opinion, local businesses are receptive to new ideas and are willing to try to make a positive contribution. The greatest stumbling block to a positive response is perceived extra cost, and the lack of faith in the governing bodies. If the public sector could work towards emphasizing the benefits to the businesses created by sustainable policies, this would undoubtedly increase interest at the local level.

The role of the public sector came under considerable attack from the respondents with regard to the development of sustainable tourism. Most of the participants in the focus groups were wary of the public sector's management of sustainable tourism, perceiving a lack of common sense and realism. They felt that the taxes they pay are wasted by the lack of co-ordination, the conflicts within and between policies, the overlap in administrative responsibilities and the lack of awareness of how to implement policies. The public sector was doing more harm that good by being poorly managed, and to them as taxpayers and subscribers to tourist services run by the public sector, wasteful of resources (mainly by duplicating marketing services). Many were frustrated by the amount of talk and the number of reports and the lack of positive action.

The respondents appeared unaware of the recent good practice handbooks or manuals produced for small businesses, for example the Green Aud# Kits produced by the West Country Tourist Board in 1993 and the Rural Development Commission in 1996. The public sector was also criticized for being too distant, and the groups felt the decision makers should be more accessible at the local level. This finding is supported by Human (1994) from research undertaken in the town of Cambridge. Human identified that the extent of strong, direct support decreases with increasing remoteness of the policy making authority? 3

This consensus calls for sustainable policies being developed after consultation with the tourism sector, and to have members involved in helping to refine


policies and implement strategies to ensure they are realistic. This would eliminate differences between the public and private sector, and illustrates a clear need for partnerships, co-ordinated by the public sector at the local level. The importance of the integrated approach and continuity of decisions and policy is explored in detail by Human with reference to visitor management in the public planning context.

The lessons to be learnt here are that despite little understanding of the concept of sustainable tourism at the local level, small businesses are willing to co-operate if given workable solutions and practical advice, particularly if it can be seen to safeguard the future of their tourism businesses. This would enhance the credibility of the concept and provide a way forward for sustainable tourism development. Any attempts to promote sustainable practices must be decided upon and co-ordinated at the regional level, with a single clear contact point for support and advice. In view of the clearly felt cynicism towards government policies and administration, which is a major stumbling block for the implementation of sustainable ideas, strategies that alleviate this would be a step towards implementing sustainable tourism at the regional level. Finally, two key points, there is a place for the general macro principles of sustainable tourism. Second, decision making and implementation must have a strong regional and local focus in order to these principles to become workable practice.

References

1. Preparatory Committee, Agenda 21: United Nations Confer- ence on the Environment and Development at Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. United Nations' Preparatory Committee, New York, 1992.

2. UNCED, Agenda 21: Programme of Action for Sustainable Development: the Final Texts of Agreements Negotiated by Governments at the United Nations' Conference on Environ- ment and Development. UNCED, New York, 1992.

3. The Global Partnership for Environment and Development: A Guide to Agenda 21. UN, New York, 1933.

4. MiddletonV. T. C., Market maturity or Industry maturity. Insights March 1993, Al15-Al17.

5. BramwellLane, B., Sustainable tourism: an evolving global approach. Journal of Sustainable Tourism 1993, 1(1), 6-16.

6. Murphy, P., Tourism and sustainable development. In Global Tourism: The Next Decade, ed. W. Theobald. Butterworth Heinneman, Oxford, 1994, pp. 274-290.

7. Archer, B. and Cooper, C., The positive and negative impacts of tourism. In Global Tourism: The Next Decade, ed. W. Theobald. Butterworth Heinneman, Oxford, 1994, pp. 73-91.

8. Harris, R. and Leiper, N., Sustainable Tourism: An Australian Perspective. Butterworth Heinneman, Australia, 1995.

9. Cooper, C., Fletcher, J. and Wanhill, S., Tourism Principles and Practices. Pitman Publishing, London, 1993.

10. World Commission on Environment and Development, Our Common Future. Oxford University Press, New York, 1987.

11. WTTC, WTO and the Earth Council, Agenda 21 for the Travel and Tourism Industry. WTFC, WTO and the Earth Council, London, 1995.

439


12. Beaumont, J., Penderson, L. and Whitaker, B., Managing the Environment. Butterworth Heinnneman, Oxford, 1993.

13. ETB, Tourism in National Parks. ETB, London, 1990. 14. ETB, The Green Light: A Guide to Sustainable Tourism. ETB,

London, 1991. 15. ETB, Tourism and the Environment: Maintaining the Balance.

ETB, London, 1991. 16. British Airways, Tourism and the Environment Report. British

Airways, London, 1992. 17. Wheeller, B., Egotourism, sustainable tourism and the

environment--a symbiotic, symbolic or shambolic relation- ship? In Tourism--The State of the Art, ed. A. V. Seaton. Wiley, Chichester, 1994.

18. The Tourism Society, Sustainable Tourism--Development in Balance with the Environment. The Tourism Society, London, 1991.

19. W'lq'ERC, World Travel and Tourism Environmental Research Centre Report on Environment and Development. WTTERC, Oxford, 1993.

20. Tourism Concern, Beyond the Green Horizon, Tourism Concern and WWT. Roehampton Institute, London, 1991.

21. Ecotourism Society, A Guide for Planners and Managers. Ecotourism Society, Vermont, USA, 1993.

22. Centre for Responsible Tourism, Code of Ethics for Tourists. Centre for Responsible Tourism, California, USA, 1993.

23. Botterill, T. D., A new social movement: tourism concern, the first two years. Leisure Studies 1991, 10(3), 203-217.

24. Wood, K. and House S. L., The Good Tourist. Mandarin, London, 1991.

25. Elkington, J. and Hailes, J., Holidays that Don't Cost the Earth. Victor Gollancz, London, 1992.

26. UNEP, Environmental Codes of Conduct in Tourism. UNEP Technical Report No. 29, UNEP, Paris, 1995.

27. Mason, P. and Mowforth, M., Codes of conduct in tourism. Progress in Tourism and Ho~witality Research 1996, 2(2), 151-167.

28. Pigram, J. J., Sustainable tourism policy considerations. The Journal of Tourism Studies 1990, 1(2), 3-9.

29. East Sussex County Council, Tourism in East Sussex. East Sussex County Council, Lewes, 1994.

30. Ryan, C., Researching Tourism Satisfaction. Routledge, London, 1995.

31. Robson, S. and Wardle, J., Who's watching whom'? A study of the effects of observers on group discussion. Journal of the Market Research Society 1988, 30(3), 333-360.

32. Berry, S., Ladkin, A. and Hudson, S., Sustainable Tourism, the Regional Perspective: A Focus Group Study. DSSM, Brighton Business School, University of Brighton, Eastbourne, 1996.

33. Human, B., Visitor management in the public planning context: a case study of Cambridge. Journal of Sustainable Tourism 1994, 2(2), 221-230.

Received October 1996 Accepted April 1997

440

Documents

Sustainable tourism: a regional perspective