Linking Culture and the Environment

254 The Attitudes of Community Residents Towards Tourism
the area as a child, and personal benefit from tourism indicating that those
who are older, who did not live in the area as a child and who perceive less
benefit from tourism are more likely to feel tourism lifestyle costs. The variable
lifestyle costs are indirectly explained via personal benefit in the same
way as is community degeneration.
The final analysis in the Arizona study considered all of the potential
explanatory variables on resident support for community development
(Table 14.7). Support is directly explained by community enhancement, economic
improvement, community degeneration, personal benefit from tourism,
distance of residence from the tourism area and frequency of visits to the
tourism area. Those who more strongly feel tourism enhances and improves
the economy of a community, benefit more from tourism, live further from
the tourism area and visit the tourism area more frequently are more supportive
of tourism. As well, those who feel tourism causes community degeneration
are less supportive of tourism. All of the personal characteristics
variables, personal benefit from tourism and involvement in tourism also
have indirect effects on support for tourism.
Conclusion from the Arizona Study
In sum, several variables emerge as particularly important to explaining
Arizona resident attitudes towards tourism. Some of the resident characteristics
variables are important. Age is related to attitudes with older residents
perceiving more positive and fewer negative consequences of tourism than
younger people even though they apparently perceive less personal benefit.
Gender and education play weak roles as variables in the explanatory ability
of community enhancement. The respondent’s frequency of visits to the tourism
area of the community is a variable that is especially important, with those
visiting more often being more involved in tourism, perceiving greater benefits,
feeling tourism results in greater positive community impacts and that it
does not result in negative impacts than those visiting less often. Undoubtedly
those visiting the tourism area of the community are taking advantage of the
amenities that tourists also enjoy and are thus positively inclined towards this
enrichment of their quality of life. Where people live with respect to the tourism
area of the community also is a predictor, though not strong, of some of
the attitude items with those living farther away perceiving greater personal
benefit as well as more economic improvement and fewer lifestyle costs than
more proximate residents. Having lived in the area as a child is related only to
the negative attitude variables, with those who spent at least part of their childhood
in the community being more likely to disagree that tourism results in
community costs. Arizona residents living in more tourism-dependent communities
are less positive about tourism than those in communities with less
tourism development. Though past research has found involvement variables
to be related to resident attitudes, the Arizona study found involvement to be
only a moderate predictor of community enhancement and not in the direction
that might be expected. Personal benefit of tourism, however, has the