This implies that destinations further progressed in tourism
development would be considered less ‘unique’ than a region in which tourism has just commenced.
Literature
The theoretical framework underpinning the measurement system devised for this study derives from a well
developed and established body of tourism literature relating to community (host) perceptions and attitudes
of tourism activity and development (see Pizam, 1978; Belisle and Hoy, 1980; Cohen, 198
; Long and Allen, 1986;
Liu, Sheldon and Var, 1
; Milman and Pizam, 1988; Ap, 1992; Ross, 1992; Madrigal, 1995; Lindberg and Johnson,
1997; Ap and Crompton, 1998; Brunt and Courtney, 1999; Fredline and Faulkner, 2000; Weaver and Lawton, 2002;
Davis and Morais, 200
; Easterling, 200
; Harrill, 200
; Ritchie and Inkari, 2006; Zhong, Deng and Xiang, 2007;
Moyle, Croy, Weiler, In Press). Transformation theory is about structural
change that results from modifications of human institutions (Seliger, 2002). This paradox, however, does not occur consistently and often
development is deliberately cultivated by the community (Gonen, 1981).
Review of the literature indicates that there is a lack of knowledge surrounding the dynamic interaction of
structures and institutions and the reciprocal relationship they have with tourism, particularly at a local level
(Agarwal, 2002; Scott, 2003; Rodriguez, Parra-Lopez and Yanes-Estevez, 2008). One occurs when tourists are
attracted to the unspoiled nature of a destination, but their increasing visitation transforms the destination
and traditional lifestyle into a more urban or globalised one (Bruner, 1991; Dahms and McComb, 1999; Agarwal,
2002; Zhong, et al. This body of literature recognises the separation between structures and
institutions, although they have been labelled objective and subjective indicators (Choi and Sirakaya, 2006). The
aim was to obtain a measurement system for social norms and community perceptions to inform a broader,
more detailed study into the tourism transformation process.
The literature indicates that clusters require leadership to grow and that direction can originate from
government, as well as from the private sector (Pavlovich, 2003; McLennan, 2005). These studies have often been undertaken for two primary
reasons: to overcome barriers to successful and sustainable tourism development (commonly termed
paradoxes) and to provide insight into the level of impact tourism has on the community (Diedrich and Garcia-
Baudes, 2009).