1. 1
Local Attitudinal Responses to Tourism Development in the
South-Eastern Caribbean Towns of Cahuita and Puerto Viejo de
Talamanca, Costa Rica
By: Bailey Stein
Due: December 4th
, 2015

2. 2
Abstract
The researchobjective of this project,conductedfromOctober31st
– November25th
,2015, isto
examine the developmentlife-cycle of tourismandthe attitudinal responsesof localsinthe townsof
Cahuitaand PuertoViejode Talamancainthe Province of Limón,CostaRica. I usedsemi-structured
interviewstoexplorethe attitudesof local residentsandtouristcompaniesthroughaseriesof pre-
determinedquestions. Doxey’sIrritationIrridex of Tourismisusedasa guideline toobserve the
attitudesof localsandcompaniesona scale to create a quantitative ratingof theirsentimentstoward
the tourismmarket. The stagesof thisscale are a range from euphoria,apathy,annoyance to
antagonism.The lengththatthe individualsorcompanieshave livedinthe townsisalso assessedto
determine whentourismenteredthe areaandapproximatelygage the stage of tourismdevelopment,
accordingto Butler’slife-cycledevelopmentmodel. Intotal,50 interviewswere collected;20 local
residentsand5 businessesfromeachtown. The resultsshowedadifference betweenthe twotowns;
Cahuitanlocalsbeingbetweenthe euphoriaandapathystage,while localsinPuertoViejowereclearly
inapathy and approachingannoyance withtourism. Bothtownsare placedbetweenthe development
and consolidationstagesof Butler’smodel due tothe surveyresults. The interview questionsimplicated
goodperceptionsof the relationshipsandpositivebenefitsof tourism, yetfurtherindepthobservations
demonstratednumerousperceiveddisadvantagestothe industryaswell. Thisstudyof local
relationshipswithtouristscanbe utilizedtoaidinfuture managementeffortsandincrease awarenessof
local sentimentstowardtheirprimaryeconomicresource;the tourismindustry.
El objetivode esto proyecto,realizadoentre Octubre 31st – Noviembre25th,2015, es investigarel
desarrollode turismoylasactitudesde localesenlospueblosde CahuitayPuertoViejode Talamanca
enla provinciade Limón,CostaRica. Usé entrevistassemiestructuradas ainvestigarlasactitudesde los
residenteslocalesylascompañíasde turismoentre cuestionespredeterminadas. Doxey’sIrridex de
Turismoestáusadopara unaguía a observarlasactitudesde localesycompañíasen unescalapara
crear un evaluacióncuantitativade lossentimientosael mercadode turismo. Lasetapasde estaescala
son enun alcance de euforia,apatía,molestiaaantagonismo. El tiempoque losindividualeso
compañías hanvividoenlospueblosestambiénconsideradoadeterminarcuándoturismoentróel área
y aproximadamente que eslaetapade desarrolloturístico,de acuerdoal modelode desarrolloturístico
de Butler. En total,50 entrevistasestuvieron colectados;20residenteslocalesy5 negociosenlosdos
pueblos. Losresueltos muestran unadiferenciaentre losdospueblos;loslocalesde Cahuitaestánentre
lasetapasde euforiayapatía, mientrasloslocalesde PuertoViejoestánenlasetapasentre apatíay
acercandomolestiaconturismo. Losdos pueblosestánentre lasetapasde desarrolloyconsolidación
enel modelode desarrolloturísticode Butleracausa de losresueltosde laencuesta. Lascuestionesde
la entrevistaimplicanpercepcionesbuenasparalasrelacionesybeneficiospositivosde turismo,aunlas
observacionesmásprofundosdemuestrandesventajasperceptivasalaindustriade turismotambién.
Esto estudiode relacioneslocalesconlos/lasturistaspuedenestarutilizadoaayudaren gestióndel
futuroy crecer concienciade lossentimientoslocalesasurecursoprimariaeconómica,laindustriade
turismo.

3. 3
Introduction:
Tourismisdefinedasthe commercial organizationandoperationof vacationsandvisitsto
placesof interest. There are manydifferenttypesincluding;ecotourism, rural,communityandmany
otherswhichare all seenwithinthe boundariesof CostaRica,a culturallyrichand ecologically
biodiversecountry. Understandinglocal attitudestowardtourismdevelopmentisvital tothe success
and sustainabilityof these touristorganizations(Dogan 2009).The Caribbeancoastof Costa Rica isa
highlysoughtaftertouristdestinationdue toitsimmensenatural resource attractionsandcultural
diversity. Withinthe province of Limónexiststhe townsof Cahuita,withitsnational parkand
prosperous coral reef andPuertoViejo de Talamanca,one of the country’stopsmall townbeach
destinationswithuniquenightlife. These 2small touristdestinationsare locatedalongthe SouthEast
Caribbeancoastinthe province Limónat9 degrees44’20”N 82 degrees50’ 44”W and 9 degrees39’
30”N & 82 degrees45’ 10”W, respectively. Examiningperceptionsandattitudesof local residentstothe
tourismdevelopmentinthese areas, will allowforincreasedknowledgeof community involvementand
methodsforfuture managementanddevelopment.Itisclearthat touristdestinationsevolveand
change overtime,therefore demonstratingtheirdynamicnature inrelationto the native population
(Butler2006).
In orderto clarifyimpacts of tourismnumerousmodelshave beendeveloped,one of the most
influential being;Doxey’sIrridex model (Figure2) whichdiscussesstagesof residentattitudestoward
tourism(Wang2006). Doxey’s Irritation Irridexof TourismModel suggeststhatcommunitiespass
througha sequence of reactionsinvolvingthe tourismindustryintheirareaandthese perceptions
become more pronouncedandtheirattitudeschange withexperience (Faulkner1997).This model
beginswithaninitial stage of euphoriaandissucceededbyapathy,annoyance andantagonism
(Faulkner1997). Thistheoryassumesthatas tourismdevelopsinanareathe local attitudestowardthe
industrywill diminish,due toavarietyof factors.These levelsof attitudinal responsesare oftenbasedin
the director indirectrelationshipthatlocalshave withtourism(Doxey 1975). Beginningwitheuphoria,
thissignifieslocalsare happythat,althoughfew,touristsare interestedintheirareaandexperience
goodand informal relationshipswithtourists. Doxey’smodelsuggeststhatastourismincreasesapathy
will ensue,meaningthatthe touristsare viewedasa source of moneyand the relationshipwithlocals
becomesmore formal (Doxey 1975). Finally,annoyance andantagonismdevelopasthe destination
attracts more touriststhroughspecificinfrastructurefortourism, over-developmentandnegative
impactswhichare the faultof the tourists(Doxey 1975). However,thismodel alsoassumesalevelof
homogeneityanduni-directional movementof communityreactions;notalwaysseenintourist
communities,whichratherexperience heterogeneity. The resultsmayalsodependonthe active or
more passive role whichthe communitymembersplayaswell astheirlevel of involvementwiththe
tourismindustry(Faulkner1997).It is alsoimportantto note thatdifferentsectorsof acommunitywill
have differingattitudestowardtourismandtherefore allow forover-lappingandcoincidingstagesof
the model tobe present.
Tourismhas numerouseffectsonlocal culture andchangesthe communityasa whole;inboth
negative andpositiveways. Some communitiesbecomeoverlyfocusedonthe monetaryvalue
generatedbytourism,while degradingthe environmentorlosingtheirhostculture whichwasthe
instigationfortourisminthe firstplace (Butler2006). The WorldTravel and TourismCouncil (WTTC) has
statedthat as of the year2014, tourismcontributed9.8% to the world’sGDPand nearly277 million
people are employedthroughtourism,meaningthat1 in 11 people inthe worldworkinthissector.

4. 4
There isan expectedgrowthof 3.8% annually,demonstratingthe grandimportance of the tourism
sectorin the world’seconomy(WTTC2015). However,we donotwant to lose sightof the local
communitiesinwhichthesetourismprojectsare beingconductedandthe localsthatinhabitedthe area
before itbecame atouristdestination. Because of that, thisstudybetweenCahuitaandPuertoViejo
will analyze the attitudesof localstotourismatdifferentlevelsof tourisminvolvementwithinthe
towns.
TourismDevelopmentLife Cycles:
Everytouristdestinationissaidtogothrougha gradual life-cycle of development,inwhich
evolutionof the towntakesplace andlocal attitudeschange inaccordance withthe life-cycle changes
(Butler1980). Thiscan be demonstratedonabasicasymptoticcurve as the numberof visitorsincrease
and the destinationbecomesdegraded,thusfollowingalife-cycle thatbeginswithexplorationandends
withstagnation Figure1 & Figure3 (Butler1980). Thismodel describesthe growthof visitorstoa
touristdestinationwithsmall numbersinitiallyandeventuallyinaccordance withmarketingandfacility
provisions,growthwill expand,sometimesbeyondthe currentlocal population. These rapidlevels of
increase canreach carryingcapacity whichmaybe identifiedintermsof environmental orsocial factors
(Butler1980). Inthe laterstagesof thismodel we see stagnationandpossibledecline whichisoften
associatedwithdegradationof attractivenessof the areaitself aswell asoveruse of the areaand
decliningdesire of visitorstoreturn(Butler1980). These stagesof developmentare alsosaidtoattract
specifictypesof touriststhroughoutanareasdevelopmentlife-cycle. Specifically,the adventurous
travelerscome duringthe explorationstage,intoanewlyidentifiedareawishingtoexplore the
destination. Next,those whoappreciate touristaccommodationsandfacilitiescome tovisitthe areaas
growthincreasesandthe area becomesmore accessibleduringthe developmental stage. While,lastly
the calmertraveler’svisitthe areaasit getsolderandoutdatedwithlittle differencestothe countryof
originof the travelers,whichisseenduringthe consolidationandstagnationstages. Usingbothof these
modelsandthe local perceptionsgatheredthroughinterviewsIwill establishthe stage of development
inCahuitaand PuertoViejoandthe overall local attitudetowardtourismdevelopment.Manyof the
attitudesare influencedbynumerous conditionssuchas;proximityof localstotourismsites,lengthof
livinginthe area,jobsrelatedtothe touristmarketand manyothers(Husbands1989). It mustbe
acknowledgedthatthese are hypothetical modelsandeverytownwillnotfitdirectlyintoone category,
therefore assumptionsare made tocreate a level of understandingof bothdevelopmentandattitudinal
responsestotourismwithinthe two towns.
A case studyconductedinSingapore representsthe use of eachof these modelsinregardsto
tourismdevelopmentandlocal attitudestowardthe industry. InTeo’sstudyof Singapore in1991 he
notedthat localshada viewof touristsreceivingbetterserviceandincreasingpricesof the town,but
mostlyforthe reasonof leachingmore moneyfromthem. Thisstudycontained320 Singaporean
respondents. Inthe analysisitwasfoundthat residentshave gone beyondthe euphoriastage andare in
the state of apathy,withinDoxey’sIrridex (Teo1994).Thisresultwasconcludedfromthe continued
welcomingof touristsbylocalsfortheirpositive economicbenefitsandthe observedshortandformal
interactionsbetweenthe two groups,signifyingthatapathywaspresentas the localsviewedtouristsas
solelyamonetarybenefit (Teo1994). RegardingButer’s model of tourism;life-cycledevelopmentin
Singapore wasseentohave reachedthe consolidationstage,where the growthrate decreasesyet
overall visitornumbers are still increasingandexceedsthe local population, aswitnessedbythe tourism
developmentplanimplementedbythe government(Teo1994). There isa pointwhere saturationis

5. 5
reachedandthenstagnationoccurs,howeveraccommodationscanbe made,oftenonpart of the
governmentwhere tourismcanstill be upheldandnotneedarejuvenationstage (Teo1994). Thisis a
beneficial case studytoreviewthe utilityof bothtourismmodelsandhow theycan be appliedtoother
touristdestinationssuchas;Cahuitaand PuertoViejo de Talamanca,CostaRica.
Story of development:
Cahuita:
Cahuitajustrecentlycelebrated100 yearsafterthe town’sfoundationin1915, currently
housing8,293 residents. The uniquenessof the SoutheasternCaribbeanareaandthe pioneerswhich
decidedthe beachwasgoingto be theirhome createda precedentforthe creationof thishistorictown.
The article by costaricaway.netfurtherdescribesthatthishistorycannotbe forgotten;“new laws,new
regulatory plans,newprojectsandnewinterestsmustthinkandtake intoaccountthe uniquenessof
thislandand itsinhabitants…InCahuitaandTalamanca’sfuture plansthere hastobe room for
everyone”(costaricaway.net2015). This formallymentionsthe expansionof the citythroughtourist
effortsyetdemandsrespectforthe historical traditionsandpeople of the region. Italsoalludestothe
importance of a studywhichassessesthe local sentimentstowardtourism inregardstofuture planning.
The coral reefs,a huge part of Cahuita’shistory, providedshelterforships andalsoinstigatedthe
populationgrowthof the regiondue toitsabilitytofosterdiverse species suchasturtles,whichbecame
a primaryattraction forsettlinginthe area(costaricaway.net2015). WilliamSmithwasthe main
founderof Cahuita,whooriginatedfromJamaica,butdecidedtosettleinCahuitain1828
(costaricaway.net2015). As the communitybegantogrow foreigncompaniesrecognizedthe potential
and came intoexploitthe natural resources;forexample, the UnitedFruitCompany,Sinclairoil
companyand manyothers. Yet,the coastline wasrelativelyuntouchedbythese companiessothe
nativesremainedintheircoastal communities andcontinuedsmall conductingsmall cropandproduct
trade.Coconutand cacao were the maincrops alongwithsubsistence fishingactivities,yetwhenthe
Moniliafungus disease hitthe cacaocrop,Cahuitansandnumerousotherregionshadto turnto a new
marketfor theirprimaryincome (Girot1998).
In 1978, the CahuitaNational Parkwascreatedto conserve the biodiversityandabundant
wildlife,whichisnowthe pride andjoyof Cahuita’sinhabitantsandattractsinternational travelersfrom
all overthe world. Todayand the past few decades,Cahuitahasturnedtowardtourismtooffertravelers
the opportunitytodiscoverAfro-Caribbeanculture and the natural environmentthatwasoriginally
discoveredbythe firstsettlers. The entire Caribbeancoastattractsinternational tourism,yetthe census
has determinedthattourismprovides8% of jobsfor the Atlanticcoastin general,yetinCahuitaitis
closerto 20% (Alfaro2007). Thisdemonstratesthe immense importance anddependence whichthese
localshave on the tourismmarket.
Puerto Viejo:
SimilartoCahuita,PuertoViejohasarich historyinregardsto itsdevelopment. Previously
calledOld Harbor until the CostaRican governmentchangedthe official languagefromEnglishto
SpanishandinstitutedPuertoViejoasitsnew title. Like Cahuita,PuertoViejo’spasteconomicstructure
was basedonagriculture,dependentonbananasand cacao. Thiscreatedsome of the biggestchanges
inthe regiondue tothe expansionof foreigninvestment,migrationandlaterdevelopmentof tourism
(Alfaro2007). The regionnotonlygrewinnumber,butalso indiversitycontainingitsnative indigenous

6. 6
tribes,Afro-Caribbeanmigrants,membersof the foreigninvestingcompaniesaswell asothermigrants
whomovedto workinthe area. Alfaro(2007); describesthatthe cacao productionwasprimarilyseen
from1960-1970, while in1980-2000, PuertoViejoslowlydevelopedinatouristiczone. Thisdrastic
change was primarilybroughtaboutbythe Moniliadisease mentionedabovewhichaggressively
attackedcacao cropsand made it a non-viable source of income forahuge part of the economicsector
(Alfaro2007). The banana companiesalsocreatedmuchstruggle inthe developmentof the areadue to
theirlowpaidwages,longhoursandmis-treatmentof workers. Strikesensued,alongwiththe creation
of workers-laborunions,whichfoughtthe companiesforbettertreatment andpay (Alfaro2007).
However,duringthistime the tourismsectorwasalsogrowingandmanyswitchedtothisnew line of
workinsteadof fightingthe foreigntransnational giants. Recently,local pollshave shownthatatleast
30% of the populationin PuertoViejohave jobsassociatedwithtourism, yetitisfairtoassume that
manyothersare indirectlyaffectedbyitaswell (Alfaro2007). Now,PuertoViejo,iswell-knownasa
populartouristdestinationthroughoutthe worldforitsspectacularbeaches,culture and
accommodationswhichcaterto the tourismmarketandallow fora diverse flowof visitorsto
consistentlysupportthe littletownonCostaRicansCaribbeancoast.
Research Problem/Objective:
The researchobjective of myprojectis to examine the developmentlife-cycle of tourismand
the attitudinal responsesof localsinthe townsof CahuitaandPuertoViejode Talamancainthe
Province of Limón,CostaRica. Thiscase studywill provideknowledge of the community’sattitude
towardthe existence of tourisminanimportantareainvolvingthe Caribbeancoastof CostaRica and
the difference betweentwo townsindifferentstagesof tourismdevelopment. Thisstudycanaid future
managementmethodsformonitoringtourismactivitiesandpossiblygage the level of community
involvementandattitudestowardthe tourismwithintheirrespective towns.
Sub-Objectives:
Otherobjectiveswhichwill be addressedinthe researchandimplicate the attitudesof locals
towardtourismwill include:
o Examiningcultural impactperceptionsof tourismdevelopmentinthe respectivetowns
o Examiningenvironmental impactsperceptionsof locals
o Observingthe level of tourisminbothtownstosee if there isa differencein
developmentstage
o Observingtype of touriststereotypes&activitydifferences
o Examiningapossible shiftintourismfromone towntothe otherto demonstrate
difference stagesof tourismdevelopment(Cahuita  PuertoViejo)
Methodology:
I conducteda conveniencesample of interviewsamongnative localsandtouristcompanies
withinthe townsof PuertoViejode TalamancaandCahuita betweenthe datesof October31st
and
November25th
,2015. These 2 small touristdestinationsare locatedalongthe SouthEastCaribbean
coast inthe province Limónat9 degrees44’20”N 82 degrees50’ 44”W and 9 degrees39’30”N & 82
degrees45’ 10”W, respectively. Iusedsemi-structuredinterviewstoexplore the attitudesof local
residentsandtouristcompaniesthroughaseriesof pre-determinedquestions. Doxey’sIrritationIrridex

7. 7
of Tourismisusedas a guideline toobserve the attitudesof localsandcompaniesonascale to create a
quantitative ratingof theirsentimentstowardthe tourismmarket. The stagesof thisscale are a range
fromeuphoria,apathy,annoyance toantagonism.The lengththatthe individualsorcompanieshave
livedinthe townsisalsoassessedtodeterminewhentourismenteredthe areaandapproximatelygage
the stage of tourismdevelopment. The touristcompanieswere ownedbyeitherlocal nativesorforeign
investors. InCahuitaIinterviewed;CocoBoutique,TurMarisenos,MissEdith’sRestaurant,Hakuna
Matata Hostel andmy keyinformantJorge the ownerof Willie’sToursCostaRica. In PuertoViejo,Mar
Boutique,CostaRicaWay Travel,ATEC,a bike shopownerandthe ownerof a souvenir shop. Itwas
more difficulttofindthe ownersof the more establishedandwell-knownbusinesses.
The locals were chosenatrandomand askedfor interviewsvoluntarily,Ilaterdeterminedthe
lengthatwhichtheyhad livedinthe town. Iutilizedasemi-structuredpre-determinedquestionbased
interview. I hadplannedtoconduct 10 interviewswithnativelocalsand10 withtouristcompaniesin
each town;intotal 40 interviews. However,Irevisedthe numberof interview subjectsdue to
constrictionsaswell asdevelopingbeneficial information. Ifeltthatthe local interviewswouldbe much
more diverse andprovide ample datatoanalyze whilethe touristbusinesseswouldlikelyhave similar
attitudestowardtourismdevelopmentintheirrespective towns. Therefore,Irevisedmyinterview
numbersto20 local inhabitantsand5 businessownerswithineachtown,thusconducting50 interviews
intotal. The questions differedslightlyonthe basisof whomis beinginterviewed(companyorlocal).
Yet,both groupswere assessed throughaskingquestionsrelevantto Doxey’sIrritationIrridex of
Tourismto determine theirattitudetowardthe tourismdevelopmentintheirtowns, whichcanbe seen
inAppendix 4,5&6.
I beganeach interviewwithanintroductionstatingthatIam a studentstudyingtourisminthe
area. I wouldelaborate onmy projectif furtherquestionswere asked;rangingfromwhere Iwasfrom,
whatinstitutionIwaswithand where the informationwasgoingtobe published. Fromthere Iwould
followmy interview questionsandsurvey; however,if theywentfurtherintodepthintoaspecificpart
of the interviewIwoulddelvedeeperandsometimesaskfollow-upquestionstogaina full
understandingof theiropinionsandimportance inthe specificsubjectwhichtheybroughtup.
Sometimes,questionshadbeenpreviouslyansweredduringthe conversationtherefore Iskippedsome
laterquestionsinthisevent. The lastquestioninthe surveyrequired themtoreadthe optionsto
describe theirrelationshipwithtouristsandIwouldhandthemthe interview sheet (writteninSpanish)
and theywouldchoose the bestoption,whichIwouldthenwrite downinmynotebook. Forthe survey
I alsohandedthema sheetwritteninSpanishwhichtheywouldreadthe 3 questionsandrespondwith
the bestanswerfor each (Appendix6). Sometimes,respondentscouldn’tchose 1optionandinstead
decidedthatthere wasconflicting optionswhichwere all expressedinthe town’ssentiments,inthis
instance upto 2 or 3 answerswere chosenforthe question. The majorityof respondentsreadand
respondedtothe surveywithease,however1 didn’treadSpanishand1 didn’thave herreadingglasses
so I had to translate orask the questionsorallyinthese cases. Afterrecordingall of theirresponsesI
wouldthankthemfortheirtime andhelpwithmyresearch.
Results:
Gender, Age and Language
In bothtowns,CahuitaandPuertoViejo,interviewswere conductedtodeterminelocal
sentimentstowardtourism. InCahuita,5 local respondentsweremale,whilethe remaining15were

8. 8
female. BusinessintervieweesinCahuitacontained3malesand2 females. InPuertoViejo,7local
intervieweesweremales,while 13were female.Businessesinterviewedcontained2malesand3 female
owners.The agesrangedfrom20-67 inCahuitaand 21-67 inPuertoViejo(Figure 8).The average age of
the respondentsinCahuitawas38.11 years,while the average age inPuertoViejowas39.95 (Table 3).
Interviewswere conductedinbothEnglishandSpanishaccordingtothe abilitiesanddesireof the
respondents. Outof the 50 total interviewsconducted28%,14 of them, were conductedinEnglish,
while the remaining72%,36 interviews,wereconductedin Spanish.
Local Perceptionsof Relationship with Tourists:
Whenthe local residentsinbothtownswere questionedabouttheir relationshipwithtourists
the majorityrepliedsayingitwasa goodrelationshipandthattheyare interestedinthe livesof the
tourists. Outof 20 localsineach town,14 respondedinbothwiththisanswer,andcommentedona
goodrelationship.The nextmostcommonanswer wasthatthe relationshipis formal andthatthe
touristsare viewedasa source of money,4localsin Cahuitachose thisanswer,whileonly3inPuerto
Viejochose this. The nextoptionwasthatthe localsare frustratedwithtouristsbecause of specific
developmentonlyfortourists,none of the localsinCahuitachose thisanswer,while 3inPuertoViejo
did. The final optionwasfocusedonsentimentsof angertowardthe touristsanddescribedhow there
are negative impactswhichare the faultof the tourists. Thisresponse generatedonly1answerin
Cahuitaand 0 in PuertoViejo. Thisrelationshipand comparisonbetweenthe 2townscan be seenin
Figure 4.
BusinessPerceptionsof TouristRelationships:
Out of the 5 businessownersineachtown,4in bothrespondedashavinga goodrelationship
withtouristsandbeinghighlyinterestedintheirlivesbackhome andhere duringtheirtravels.
However,1subjectstatedthat itwas part of his jobwhile runningatourguide companytobe
interestedinthe livesof touristsorelse he wouldnothave asuccessful business. PuertoViejohad1
respondentwhich consideredtouriststobe onlyasource of money,while nonerespondedinthis
mannerinCahuita. However,eachtownhad1 businessownerwhorespondedwithbeingfrustrated
withtouristsdue todevelopmentspecificallydesignedfortourists,while only1in PuertoViejo
describedtheirrelationshipasangeredbythe negativeimpactsthatthe touristswere bringingtotheir
town(Figure 5).
Local Survey Responses Cahuita:
The surveyquestionswere designedtoassessdifferentaspectsof tourismwithineachtown
(Appendix 6). Question#1 addressesthe level of tourismdevelopmentof bothtowns,question#2
assessesthe attitudesof local residentstowardtourismandquestion#3, the sentimentsof local
residentstowardthe touriststhemselves. The numberof responsesvariedpertownforeveryquestion.
The answers for Question#1whichaskedwhichresponse bestdescribesthe touristicdevelopmentof
the area; containedthe 6/20 foranswerC inCahuita(Table 1). Thismeansthat the most respondents
for Cahuitathoughtthatthe destinationisindevelopmentandthe numberof touristsare increasing,
while alsohavingpositivechangesonboththe culture andthe natural environment. The nextmost
popularchoice (5/20) wasA, statingthat the townhad few visitorsandtourismwasnew.
Consequentially,D,E and B were the nextmostpopularchoiceswithDand E each having4 responses
and B having2 (Figure 6).

9. 9
Question#2; askedto describe the sentimentsof locals aboutthe tourismin the area. Cahuita
contained11/20 responsesforA,statingthatthe local people are happythat the touristsare interested
intheirtown. Response B, the local people are enthusiasticaboutthe ideaof visitorshad 6/20
responses,C, touristsare takenforgrantedhad 1 responses,andD, the local people onlyview the
touristsas a source of moneyhad4 responseswhile E;the local people blamethe touristsforall
negative impactshad0 responses(Table 1).
Question#3; askedaboutthe descriptionof the relationshipamongthe local residentsandthe
tourists. Majority16/20 respondedwithA, agood relationshipbetweenlocalsandtouristswhere they
are interestedinthe activitiesandlivesof the tourists.Next mostcommonanswerwasD2/20; over-
developmentannoysthe local peopleandtheyare frustratedwiththe tourismindustry (Table1). Both
B, the relationshipisformal andthe localsare notas interestedandC, the local people are un-interested
inthe activitiesof the touristswhenthe numbersincreaseandthe relationshipisdegraded,had1
response (Table 1).
Local Survey ResponsesPuerto Viejo:
Question#1; aboutthe developmentof the area contained4/20 for the answerstatingthe
destinationhasfewvisitorsandisnewtotourism, 8/20 describedthe locationasgrowingwithtourism
as infrastructure changeswithmaintenance of local values,3/20for the developmentisgrowingand
there are positive impactsonthe environmentandculture,5/20for touristnumericgrowth,but
negative changestoculture andenvironmentand1/20 for the developmentisonlyproducingnegative
impacts. The surveyquestionsandoptionsare listedinAppendix6.
Question#2; describingthe localssentiments totourismcontained12/20 answers forlocal
people are happythattouristsare interestedintheirtown,4/20 answers for local people are
enthusiasticaboutvisitors,none forthe touristsare takenforgranted,4/20 answers forlocal people
onlyviewtouristsasa source of moneyand1/20 answers forthe local people blame the touristsforall
of the negative impacts.
Question#3; describingthe local residentsperceivedrelationshipwiththe touristscontained;
12/20 answers fora good relationshipwhere localsare interestedinthe livesof tourists,4/20 answers
for the relationshipisformal andlocalsare notas interestedinthe livesof the tourists,3/20 answers for
the local people are un-interestedwithtouristsastheirnumbersgrow,2/20 answers forover-
developmentannoysthe local peopleandtheyare frustratedwiththe tourismindustryandnone forthe
local people are angeredbythe tourists. All of these responsesare listedincomparisonto Cahuitain
Table 1.
Beginning of Tourism:
In Cahuitathe mostcommonresponse forwhentourismbeganwasbetween1975 – 1985,
whichcorrespondsdirectlytothe creationandpromotionof the national park. Whereas,PuertoViejo
residentsstatedthattourismbeganin1985 – 1995 and hasbeencontinuallygrowing. Also,manyof my
subjectsdiscussedhowthere hasbeenashiftintourismfromCahuitatoPuertoViejowithinrecent
years. Tourismissupposedlystillgrowinginbothareas,asthe majorityof the residentshope formore
people tocome inand bringeconomicgain,yetthe changesinthe areas have createdmanydiffering
sentimentstoward the tourismindustry. The mostcommonresponse forwhytouristswanttovisitthe

10. 10
area wasa variationon the beauty,beachesandtranquilityof the areawhichwasdescribed by100% of
the respondents inbothtowns. Numerousinterviewees whenaskedaboutwhethermore people live in
the area due to tourismrespondedpositivelystatingthere were numerousamounts. Manydescribed
that a varietyof tourists simplycome,enduplovingthe areaandbuyinglandto stayand live. Some
describesforeignbusinessinvolvementintheircities,yetthiswasmuchmore commonamong
responsesinPuertoViejothanCahuita. Cahuitainhabitantsclaimedtobe mostlyrunbylocalswith
small businessowners,whilePuertoViejohardlyhadanylocallyownedbusinessesleftandprimarily
functionedthroughthe growthof foreignbusinessaid. This coulddirectlyrelate tothe stagesof
tourismdevelopmentwithineachtownaswell ascontribute tothe local sentimentstowardthe tourists.
Perceived Culturaland EnvironmentalChanges /Advantagesand Disadvantages:
Specifically,culturalandenvironmental changeswere addresseddue totheirrelevance tolocal
attitudestowardtourismandcommunitywell-beingasawhole. InCahuitathere wasa sense of
protectionthatwassaid to come withtourism. Due to the creationof the park and the intrigue of the
townfor itsenvironment, the localsfeel thatitisalsoprotectedbythe touristsand the moneythey
bringin. Asfor culture;Cahuitansbelieve thatamix has beencreatedfromall the diversitywhich
tourismbrings. Some believe thisisabenefit,creatingauniversal view of the world,withshared
knowledge andideas,6/20 respondents,while 7/20respondents recognize the lossof local music
traditions,increase indrugtrade andadoptionof the touristlifestyle forthe town’syouth. Regarding
the advantagesanddisadvantagesof tourisminCahuita100% of respondentsstatedeconomicgainas
an advantage,while othersconsistedof meetingnew people,4/20, and learnedaboutothercountries
and the world,6/20. Disadvantagesrangedalongthe linesof increasingcrime (3/20),youthcopyingthe
touristlifestyle (2/20),increaseddrugtrade (11/20) and the seasonal lags (8/20) whentourismislow
and moneydoesn’tcome intothe town.
PuertoViejo,whileverysimilartothe sentimentsof localsinCahuitahadsome differences.
One subjectdescribedthe change inculture throughfood,byassociatingchangesfromtraditional foods
like rice andbeansto the nowmore commonlysoldpizza,Italianandothertypesof foods. She stated
that these have beenimportedforthe tourists anddrainthe traditional culture fromthe area. She
statesthat “I don’tchange,but otherbusinesseschange –I do myculture because itiswhat I know”.
She isa 67 yearold local inPuertoViejo,whohaslivedthereforover 40 years. Also,respondents
describedthe increase inthe Englishlanguage asthe primarymeansof communication,aswell as
increase inmigrationtothe area includingforeignbusinessownersandfromborderingcountries
lookingforwork. SimilartoCahuita,the existence of drugtrade and youngmenusingthisas theirline
of workwasconsistentlystatedthroughoutthe local interviews (5/20). Inregardsto the natural
environment,few respondersdescribedsignificantchanges. However,those whichappearedmore
knowledgeable aboutthe subjectdescribedimmense deforestation,lossof animal species,andlossof
traditional methodsof agricultureandfishingformore environmentallyintensive methods (4/20).
These changeswere broughtaboutbyincreasinginfrastructure anddevelopmentaccording toa few
local respondentswho describedPuertoViejoasbeingmuchmore natural inthe past,while now there
are more businessesandfocusoneconomicgain. The advantagesdescribedweresimilartoCahuita;
economicgain,knowingotherpeople andunderstandingothercultures (15/20). However,the listof
disadvantagesisimmense;describinglossof culture,increase inprostitution,drugtrade,environmental
pollutionandoverall dependence onthe unstable systemof tourism(9/20). The seasonal influx of
tourismandyearlychange inlevelswere statedasahuge factor inpeople’shappiness,andlife

11. 11
satisfactionbecause if tourismwasn’thighthe communityhadnoothermethodof makingmoney. This
was seeninbothtowns where the excessivedependence onone sectorof the economyleftthem
indebtedtothe touristsandthe industrywhichbringsthemthere.
Discussion:
Doxey’sIrritation Index Classification:
ThroughusingDoxey’sIrridex of Tourismtoassessthe relationships of local residentsand
tourist’sone can establish asense forthe community’s sentimentstowardtourismandtherefore
implementfuture managementstrategicplanningaccordingtothese desires (Faulkner1997). As seen
inthe results(Figure 4) the local residentsof eachtownhave similarsentimentstowardtourists. The
majority14/20 respondentsdescribedagoodrelationshipwiththe touriststhattheyencounterintheir
town. Thus,onlyleaving6 respondentsthatdidn’tshare thispositiveattitude. Othersinthe townssaw
touristsas solelyasource of money,while some were frustratedorangeredbytouristsandtheir
negative impactsonthe community. Thisrange of responsesmakesitdifficulttocategorize the
populationsintoasingle categoryof Doxey’sIrridex. However,fromthe responsesgivenandwhatwas
observedthroughvariouspersonalcommunicationsIwouldassume thatthe townof Cahuitawouldbe
placedbetweeneuphoriaandapathysince all butone respondedstatedeitheragoodrelationshipor
viewingtouristsasasource of money. Onthe otherhand,PuertoViejohad3 respondentswhosaid
theywere frustratedwithtouristsbecauseof specificinfrastructurecreatedforthe tourists,while
Cahuitahad 0 (Figure 5). Throughthese resultsandfurtheranalysisof the personal communicationsI
wouldplace PuertoViejoinDoxey’scategoryof apathywithsome residentsleaningtowardannoyance.
Thisrating wascausedby the many residents whichdiscussedincreasedprices,drugsandthe party
reputationof the townas a disadvantage of tourisminthe area. Local people were verydisheartened
by thischange intheirhome and local culture. Thisleadsme tobelievethatfromthe small sample
whichI gatheredthere are mostlikelymanymore residentswhohave similarsentimentsalongthe lines
of annoyance andapathy.
Furthermore the surveyanswersalsoprovide insightonthe sentimentsof the localstowardtourism
and howtheyviewthe communityasa whole feelsaboutthe industryand the tourists. Questions#2&3
fromthe surveyare relevanttolocal sentimentstowardtourismwhichcanbeenseeninTable 1. The
majorityof the respondentsinCahuita (17/20) respondedthatthe local people are happythattourists
are interestedintheirtownandare enthusiasticaboutthe ideaof visitors (Table1). The remaining
respondentsansweredinthe mannerthattouristsare takenforgrantedand/orlookedatas solelya
source of money (5/20). This demonstratesagainthatthere isstill asense of euphoriaoverthe ideaof
tourisminthe area, butapathy ispossiblybeingapproacheddue tothe answerswhichdemonstrate
moneyas the maininterestforlocalsinregards to tourists. InPuertoViejo,the majorityof locals
(16/20) were alsohappyaboutinterestedtourists andenthusiastic,whilethe remaining(5/20) stated
theyviewtouristsasa source of moneyand/orblame the touristsforall the negative impactswhichare
occurringin the town (Table 1). Thisdemonstratesmore extreme sentimentsthanwe saw inCahuita
due to blamingof touristsfornegative impacts,thussupportingthe categorizationof apathyand
annoyance todescribe local sentimentsinPuertoViejo.
Butler’s Life-CycleDevelopmentCurve:

12. 12
Question#1 of the surveydirectlyappliestoButler’sdevelopmentscale whichwasusedto
determine the tourismstage of development. There wasa diverse amountof answersforthisquestion
makingitdifficultto place eachtownintoa categoryof development. However, accordingtothe results
fromlocalsin Table 1, the majorityof residentsdescribedtheirtownasindevelopment, the numberof
tourist’sincreasescausingpositive changestothe culture andthe environmentof the area. In Puerto
Viejothe mostcommonanswertothe developmentquestionwasthattheirtownwasgrowingand
infrastructure waschanging,butthere wasa maintenance of local valuesandculture. Usingthe results
of thisquestionandobservationsfrompersonalcommunications Iwouldplace bothCahuitaandPuerto
Viejobetweenthe developmentandconsolidationstages,accordingthe Butler’slife-cycleof
developmentscale. Thissignifiesthatthe townsare a well-definedtouristmarketareawhilestill
containinglocal involvementandcontrol,butare likelytolose thisinthe nearfuture (Butler1980).
Interestingly,Alfaro’sarticlediscussesthe percentage of local versusforeigncompaniesineacharea;
PuertoViejocontaining36%foreignbusinessownerswhileCahuitahasrisentoalmost65% (Alfaro
2007). These drasticobservationspointtowardButler’sconsolidationstage where; changesinphysical
appearancesof the area are startingto appearas peakperiodsof tourismexceedthe local permanent
population. The rate of increase of visitorswilldecline,althoughthe total numberswill still increase and
a huge part of the town’seconomywill be intertwinedwiththe tourismmarket(Butler1980). From
interviewswithnumeroussubjectsinbothtownsthisisclearlythe cycle whichthe townsare entering.
Many commentswere made discussingthe slowingof seasonal growthof tourismandextreme
dependence whichthe townshave onthe tourismmarket. Butler1980, evenstatesthat“such trends
are evidentinareasof the Caribbeanandonthe northernMediterraneancoast”.
PersonalObservationsand Conclusions:
My stayin these twotownswasshort,althoughveryinformative. Italkedwithnumerouspeoplefor
hoursabout the town’sinflux of tourismandthe historywhichledthemtochoose thismethodof
economicincome. Ibelieve thatthere isastrong disconnectbetweenthe local populationsperceptions
of tourismandtheireconomicdependence onthe industry. Isaw thisstemmingfromthe resultsof my
surveysandthe overall descriptionsof disadvantagesof tourism. Aswe see inTables1&2, the overall
perceptionsof tourismare favorable;withthe majorityof localsansweringthatgoodrelationshipsare
maintained andthatdevelopmentandtourismare beneficial tothe community. However, fromthe
furtherdescriptionsof the disadvantagescategoryInoticednumerousstatementsaboutcorruptionof
youth,lossof traditionvaluesaswell asincreasesindrugtrade, prostitution andprices. Thisisthe
disconnectwhichIbelieve existsamongthe datasetbecause the local people perceive tourismas
beneficial inaneconomicsense,whichblurstheirvisiontothe disadvantagesuntil directlyaskedwhat
consequencesthereare tothese typesof tourist destinations.
FutureImplications:
Cahuitaand PuertoViejoare small touristcitiesandthe residentswishtokeeptheirlocal culture,
people andvaluesingrainedinthe society,yettheyare alsoheavilyreliantonthe influx of tourismfor
dailyincome. Thiscreatesaconundrumfor the upcominggenerationandthe current
developmental/tourism committees whichregulate the town’sgrowth,sincetheyneedmore economic
gainbut don’twantto lose more of theirnatural environmentorculture due tothe influencesof
tourism. Thistype of studyallowsforthe voicesof the localsto be heard andtheirideasto be noticedin
a mannerthat wouldotherwisenotgetnoticedbythe committeesand /orgovernmentalorganizations

13. 13
whichmandate these typesof decisionsinregardstodevelopment. Aswe have seenthe amountof
jobswhichthe tourismsectorof the economicmarketprovidesissubstantial aswell asgrowing(WTTC).
It isa sectorthat cannot be pushedaside orsolelyrunbyforeignmarkets. The townswhichthese
sectorsare growingare bestknownbythe native residentswhodeserve totake partin the decision-
makingandgrowth of the sector. Specifically,inCahuitaand PuertoViejowe have seenthe influence
that thismarkethas had,the viewsof the local residentsandwhattheywantfromthe future of
tourism. Throughthisassessmentfuture managementplanscanbe made to aidthe growthor structure
of thismarketwhichthe people dependuponfortheirdailylivelihood. We saw an example of thisin
Teo 1994, where governmentinterventionwasutilizedtorevitalize andchange aspectsof the tourism
marketinSingapore. Some subjectsmentionedaneedformore governmentassistance with
advertisementof theirdestinationsormoneytofinance furtherdevelopmentandmaintenance of
currentinfrastructure.
The social exchange theoryisone whichcanaid inthese future implicationsbyunderstandingthe
relationshipwhich the governmentagencieshave withthe local people. Thistheorycanbe understood
as the local residentsevaluatingthe expectedcostsandbenefitsthatderive fromtourismandthe
serviceswhichare suppliedfortourists (Caliborne2010). Essentially,“the theoryisbasedonthe
assumptionthattourismdevelopmentcomeswitheconomicbenefitsinexchange forsocial and
environmental impacts”(Caliborne 2010). Through whatI observedinthe townsof CahuitaandPuerto
Viejothe peoplehave highexpectationsof tourisminthe areadue totheiroverall dependence onthis
sectorof the economy. The resident’s initialattitudesare favorable,yetIsaw that as local participation
diminishedmanyresidentsbecameperturbedbythe levelof foreigninvestors;givingwaytofrustration
and passive attitudes. Caliborne 2010, statesthat “withinthe contextof tourismplanning[is]…a
processof involvingall stakeholders…insuchaway thatdecision-makingisshared”. Thisdemonstrates
the needforcommunal planningof tourisminthese typesof destinationswherethe local people have a
huge stake inthe industry. Fromthisstudy,itisclearlyshownthattourismisthe primarymode of
income forthe local residents,whether directorindirect. Due tothis stake inthe industrya shared
planningforthe future isa necessity;communitycommitteesaswell asgovernmentalorganizations
needtocooperate to ensure awell-plannedandsatisfactoryfuture forall sectorsof society. Through
my time spentinthe townsandinterview observations;Ibelieve thattourismneedstobe better
monitoredinregardstoinflux of drugsandotherinfluenceswhichnon-localsbringintothe towns. Also,
increasedoptionsforworkcouldbenefitthesetownssince Icommonlyencountereddescriptionsof lack
of tourisminlow-seasonswhichinturnleadstofinancial misfortune fornumerouslocals duringcertain
timesof the year. Overall,more cooperationamongadvertising,tourismorganizational committees,
governmentandthe locals needstooccurto furtherpropagate a tourismindustrywhichensures
benefitsforall stakeholders.
Limitationsand Biases:
As anystudy,there are limitationsandbiaseswhichmayskew the datagatheredandanalyzed.
In mystudyI attemptedtolimitthese throughplanningmymethodsandstructuringmyinterviews
before doingthe fieldwork,howeverIstill ranintosituationsinmydatawhichcouldhave created
biasesorlimitationsinmydataset. For example,femaleswere interviewedwithmore frequencythan
malesinbothtowns. Thiscould have beenaccountedtothe timesof day in whichthe interviewswere
conducted;people couldhave beenawayfromtheirhome andat theirjobs duringthe daytime. The
language barrierwasmostlyanotherlimitation of the studydue tonone of the respondentshaving

14. 14
Englishastheirfirstlanguage andmy limitedunderstandingof the Spanishlanguage. The initial
interviewswere conducteddirectlyaccordingtothe pre-determinedquestions,yetasIgot more
comfortable withthe topicandquestionsthe interviewsbegantoflow more easilyandIcouldask
follow-upquestions,thusmakingthe interviewsmore indepthwiththe laterrespondents. Time
limitations were alsoahuge factorin thisstudydue to gettingmore familiarwiththe town’sgeography
and organizationsastime passed. Ifeltthatif I had more time I couldhave foundmore keyinformants
and keyorganizationsrelatedtotourismdevelopmenttointerview duringthistime period. The level of
educationof the respondentsmayhave alsobeenafactoraffectingthe results. Insome interviewsI
had to readthe surveyquestionstothe respondentdue tolanguage difference orthemnotbeingable
to readthe questionsthemselves. Finally,the sample sizeonly grazedthe entirepopulationof the
townsand therefore probablydoesnotgive a fully representativesampleof the sentiments of local
townspeople.

15. 15
References:
Alfaro, E. M. (2007). El encuentro entre lógicas globales y locales: Empleo bananero y turístico en
Cahuita y Puerto Viejo. Revista de ciencias sociales, (117-118).
Butler, R. W. (2006). The concept of a tourist area cycle of evolution: implications for management of
resources. The tourism area life cycle, 1, 3-12.
Claiborne, P. (2010). Community Participation in Tourism Development and the Value of Social
Capital. University of Gothenburg, Master of Science in Tourism and Hospitality Management.
Doxey, G. V. (1975, September). A causation theory of visitor-resident irritants: Methodology and
research inferences. In the impact of tourism sixth annual conference proc of the travel research
Association.
Faulkner, B., & Tideswell, C. (1997). A framework for monitoring community impacts of tourism. Journal of
sustainable tourism, 5(1), 3-28.
Girot, P. O., Weitzner, V., & Borrás, M. F. (1998, June). From Conflict to Collaboration: The Case of
Cahuita National Park, Limon, Costa Rica. InCrossing Boundaries," the seventh annual conference of the
International Association for the Study of Common Property, Vancouver, British Columbia.
WorldTravel & TourismCouncil.(2015) http://www.wttc.org/research/economic-research/economic-
impact-analysis/

16. 16
Appendix 1:
Figure 2; Doxey, G. V. (1975, September). A causation theory of visitor-resident irritants: Methodology
and research inferences. In the impact of tourism sixth annual conference proc of the travel research
Association.
Butler, R. W. (2006). The concept of a tourist area cycle of evolution: implications for management of
resources. The tourism area life cycle, 1, 3-12.

17. 17
Appendix 2:
a b c d
Cahuita 14 4 0 1
Puerto Viejo 14 3 3 0
14
4
0 1
14
3 3
0
0
5
10
15
#ofRespondents
Letter Choosen
Figure 4: Relationship Comparison:
Cahuita vs. Puerto Viejo
Cahuita Puerto Viejo
Figure 3; Butler, R. W. (2006). The concept of a tourist area cycle of evolution: implications for management of
resources. The tourism area life cycle, 1, 3-12.

18. 18
Appendix 3:
Local SurveyResponsesCahuitavs.PuertoViejo (PV):See Legend
BusinessSurveyResponsesCahuitavs.Puerto Viejo(PV):See Legend
Table 2 survey a b c d e
Cahuita 1 0 2 2 1 1
2 2 1 0 1 1
3 3 0 1 0 1
PV 1 0 1 1 3 1
2 2 1 1 2 1
3 3 1 0 1 0
Table 1 survey a b c d e
Cahuita 1 5 2 6 4 4
2 11 6 1 4 0
3 16 1 1 2 0
PV 1 4 8 3 5 1
2 12 4 0 4 1
3 12 4 3 2 0
4
0
1
0
4
1 1 1
0
1
2
3
4
5
a b c d
#ofrespondents
Response
Figure5: Business Relationship Question
Responses: Cahuita vs. Puerto Viejo
Cahuita Puerto Viejo

19. 19
Appendix 4:
Table 3
Locals Cahuita
Puerto
Viejo
Average Age 38.11 39.95
Minimum 20 21
Maximum 67 67
InterviewQ’sTouristOrganization:
1) Edad de la organización
2) ¿Dónde nacióusted?
3) ¿Cuándoempezósuorganización?¿Quiényporqué empezó?¿Qué recibióel dineropara
empezar?
4) ¿En su opinióncuándoempezóel turismoenestaárea?¿En qué anoshabía la mayoría de
turismo?
5) ¿Qué tiposde actividadesofrecenparalos/lasturistas?¿Cuántocuestan?
6) ¿Cuántosturistasrecibanpormes?¿El numeroestácreciendoono?¿Por cuántotiempolos/las
turistasquedanaquíen general?
7) En su opinión,¿Porqué los/lasturistasvistaeste lugar?
8) ¿Piensaque los/lasturistasyel turismotieneunapequeñaogran influenciaenlacultural de la
comunidad?¿Ambiente? ¿Quiere másturismo?
9) ¿Qué quiere de turismoparael futurode su pueblo?
10) ¿Cuálessonalgunasventajasydesventajasde turismoparalacomunidadlocal enel pueblo?
11) ¿Piensaque el turismoayudalagente local?
- ¿Piensaque el turismoayudanlosextranjerosoel gobierno?
12) ¿Cuálessonlosbeneficiosde turismo?Excepto,trabajosydinero…
13) ¿Ha habidocambiosenla industriadel turismoenlacomunidadconrespectoal pasado?Por
ejemplo:cantidadde visitantes,cantidadde oferentes,tipode turistasque vienen,actividades
que buscan)
14) ¿Cómodescribe surelaciónconlos/lasturistas?
a. Buena– ¿estáinteresadoenlasvidasde los/lasturistas?
b. Una relaciónformal – los/lasturistasestánunfuente de dinero
c. ¿Esta frustradocon los/lasturistas?¿Algunostiposde desarrolloespecíficamente para
los/lasturistas?
d. ¿Está enojadoconlos/lasturistas?¿Desarrollotieneimpactosnegativos?¿Eslaculpade
los/lasturistas?
InterviewQ’sLocal Perceptions:
1) Nombre /Edad
2) ¿Dónde nació?
3) ¿Cuantosañosustedvive aquí?

20. 20
Appendix 5:
4) ¿Qué essu trabajo?
a. Si es un sectorde turismo;¿Tiene dinerosuficientede turismoparapagar susgastos?
5) ¿En su opinióncuandoempezóturismoeneste área?¿Enqué anoshabía lamayoría de
turismo?
6) ¿Qué tipode turismoexiste? ¿Cuál eslaformamás popular?(ecoturismo,rural,granescala,
pequeño,nacional vsinternacional)
7) ¿Qué tipode los/lasturistasexisten? (edad,etnia,actividades)
8) ¿Piensaustedque el turismohaafectadolacultura,ambiente olaregiónengeneral de su
pueblo?
9) ¿Hay más personasque vivenenestaáreaa causa del turismo?
10) En su opinión,¿Porqué los/lasturistasvistaneste lugar?
11) ¿Qué expectativastiene del turismoparael futuro?
12) ¿Cuálessonalgunasventajasydesventajasde turismoparalacomunidadlocal enel pueblo?
13) ¿Piensaque el turismoayudalagente local?
- ¿Piensaque el turismoayudanlos extranjerosoel gobierno?
14) ¿Cuálessonlosbeneficiosde turismo?Excepto,trabajosydinero…
15) ¿Ha habidocambiosenla industriadel turismoenlacomunidadconrespectoal pasado?Por
ejemplo:cantidadde visitantes,cantidadde oferentes,tipode turistasque vienen,actividades
que buscan)
16) ¿Cómodescribe surelaciónconlos/lasturistas?
a. Buena– ¿estáinteresadoenlasvidasde los/lasturistas?
b. Una relacióninformal –los/lasturistasestánunfuente de dinero
e. ¿Esta frustradocon los/lasturistas?¿Algunostiposde desarrolloespecíficamente para
los/lasturistas?
f. ¿Está enojadoconlos/lasturistas?¿Desarrollotieneimpactosnegativos?¿Eslaculpade
los/lasturistas?

21. 21
Appendix 6:
Survey:Choose the bestoptionforthe followingquestions
1) Whichof the followingbetterdescribesthe currentstate of tourismdevelopment:
a) Destinationhaslittlevisitorsandtourismisnew
b) Tourismisgrowingand infrastructure ischangingbutmaintenance of local valuesandculture is
still intact
c) The destinationisdevelopingandthe numberof touristsisincreasing( positive changesare
startingto occur in culture andenvironment)
d) The destinationisdevelopingandthe numberof touristsisincreasing( negative changesare
startingto occur in culture andenvironment)
e) Now,developmentonlyproducesnegativeimpacts(writesome examples
2) Whichof the followingbetterdescribesthe feelingslocalshave abouttourists
a) Local people are happythattouristsare interestedintheirtown
b) Locals are enthusiasticaboutthe ideaof people visiting
c) Touristsare takenforgranted
d) Onlyviewtouristsasa source of money
e) Locals blame the touristsforall the negative impacts
3) Whichof the followingbetterdescribesthe relationshipsbetweenresidentsandtourists?
a) Good relationshipbetweenlocalsandtourists –interestedintheiractivities/lifes
b) The relationshipbetweenlocalsandtouristsismore formal –not as interested
c) Locals become un-interestedintouristactivitiesasnumbersincrease –relationshipisdegraded
d) Over-developmentannoyslocalsandtheyare frustratedwiththe tourismindustry
e) Locals are upsetwiththe touristsandshow theirfrustrationwiththem