Paradoxes often occur if tourism is adopted simply for the economic benefits it can provide, such as
employment opportunities, increased income and standards of living and improvements in infrastructure
(Archer and Cooper, 1998; Lindberg, 2001; Liu and Var, 1986; Allen, Hafer, Long and Perdue, 1993) as it can also have
negative impacts, such as inflation, leakage of tourism revenue, changes in value systems and behaviour,
crowding, littering and water shortages (Buckley, 2001; Ceballos-Lascurain, 1996; Mathieson and Wall, 1982). This implies that destinations further progressed in tourism
development would be considered less ‘unique’ than a region in which tourism has just commenced. A number
of other studies have linked community perceptions towards visitors with the Tourism Area Life Cycle (TALC)
model (Butler, 1980), giving rise to concepts of carrying capacity and management across the triple bottom
line (Belisle and Hoy, 1980; Coccossis, 2002; Diedrich and Garcia-Buades, 2009).
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).
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). Indeed, this has been extended to suggest that population perceptions can be indicators of destination decline (Faulkner & Tideswell, 1997; Diedrich & Garcia-Buades, 2009). Transformation theory is about structural
change that results from modifications of human institutions (Seliger, 2002). This paper reports on a preliminary investigation into social
values and perceptions of tourism and economic development in the case study of Toowoomba, Australia.
When considering tourism planning, a key concern in the tourism transformation literature is the role and
responsibility of government (Haung, 200
; Briedenhann and Butts, 200
; Pavlovich, 2003; McLennan, 2005).
