Health, Wellness and Tourism: healthy tourists, healthy business ...

supportive because of the type of tourism they were evaluating. The results of the Sheldon
and Var (1984) study appears to support this theory as it determined that residents living in
higher density areas are more likely to have positive attitudes toward tourism because they
favoured it over other industries.
The contact frequency with tourists (Akis et al. 1996; Sheldon & Var 1984) and the fact of
working or not in the tourism sector and being economically dependent from it are relevant
linkages to better understand residents’ attitudes. Studies, in generally confirms the existence
of a relationship between an individual’s economic dependency on tourism and their overall
attitude toward tourism (Brunt and Courtney 1999; Pizam 1978), showing that individuals
who are connected to tourism employment are more favourable to his development.
Once the purpose of this study is to determine the effect of tourism impacts perception on
residents’ perceived quality of life it is essential to know how residents most frequently
perceived tourism. The more significant and frequent impacts considered in tourism area (Ap
1992; Akis et al. 1996; Belisle and Hoy 1980; Jurowski 1994), that will be considered in this
study, are the economic, social, cultural and environmental ones, which matches the presented
WTO definition.
The literature review suggests, as main ideas, that tourism is widely perceived as a way to
improve quality of life, such as employment opportunities, however it can have negative
impacts, e.g. by increasing traffic, crime or by changing hosts’ way of life. There is a strong
perception among residents of investments and profitable local businesses but also the
recognition of negative effects such as an increase in the cost of living (Ap and Crompton
1992; Andreck and Vogt 2000; Andreck et al. 2005; Akis et al. 1996; Belisle and Hoy 1980;
Dyer 2007; Gursoy and Rutherford 2004; Jurowski et al. 1997; Perdue et al. 1987).
Another important concept in this study is the one of well-being. Diener (1984) suggests that
there are three hallmarks in subjective well-being area. For the author it is subjective because
it resides within the experience of the individual, it is not just the absence of negative factors
and it includes a global assessment. However, although these hallmarks serve to delimit the
area of study, they are not complete definitions of subjective well-being.
The literature review points out to the need of distinguishing various dimensions of wellbeing,
taking into account their inherent objective and subjective nature. The well-being
domains considered in this study are organized into four groups as Sirgy (2002), Kim(2002)
of various aspects that the residents take into consideration when evaluating their well-being.
First the material well-being including issues like house ownership, stable employment and
income are explored by authors like Andrew and Withey (1976); Campbell et al. (1976);
Cummins (1996). Second the community Well-being that includes aspects related to
community life, integration and social participation Davis et al. (1988). Third the emotional
well being witch explore subjects like the affective component of life, namely love and family
life (Andrews and Withey 1976; Lane 1994) and finally health and safety well-being that
include items such as the absence of sickness or the feeling of security in the residence area
(Andrew and Withey 1976; Brown 1998).
According to the World Health Organization (1994:5) "Quality of life is defined as
individuals' perceptions of their position in life in the context of the culture and value systems
in which they live and in relation to their goals, expectations, standards and concerns.” For