Some common paradoxes of transformation are cited within the literature. This body of literature recognises the separation between structures and
institutions, although they have been labelled objective and subjective indicators (Choi and Sirakaya, 2006). , 199
; Perdue, Long and Allen, 1990). Social norms and cultural beliefs are critical to the tourism transformation process which indicates that
resident attitudes and perceptions need to be understood and monitored (Johnson, Snepenger and Akis, 199
;
Sheldon and Abenoja, 2001; Choi and Sirakaya, 2006). For
example, Saarinen (200
) argued that a destination’s image, knowledge, meanings and natural and cultural
features over slowly stereotype and modify over the course of the transformation process, resulting in a loss of
differentiation between destinations.
Institutions and perceptions are an important element of transformation (Mwangi, 2006), so it is appropriate
that the dynamics of tourism transformation have been frequently investigated using resident perceptions of
the industry (Allen, Long, Perdue and Kieselback, 1988; Andereck, Valentine, Knopf and Vogt, 2005; Andriotis,
2005; Ap, 1992; Belisle and Hoy, 1980; Besculides, Lee and McCormick, 2002; Harrill, 200
; Horn and Simmons, 2002;
Johnson, et al. Institutions are collective human-
designed action, such as government strategies, plans, policies or laws, business or industry norms, social
norms, cultural beliefs or the general patterns of consumer behaviour (Mantzavinos, North and Shariq, 200
). This literature shows that the social impact and sensitivity of an area can be measured by monitoring local community perceptions of tourism through
3
social impact or evaluation studies (Fredline, Deery, &
Jago, 2005 ; Delamere, 2001; Delamere, Wankel and Hinch,
).
Arguably, tourism can deliver socio-cultural transformations (Ratz, 2000; Sebastian and Rajagopalan, 2009). As the transformation process is
intertwined with human institutions, a detailed model of the process must consider both structure and
institutions; yet many structural models omit institutional factors and this has been considered their greatest
weakness (Williamson, 2000).