Diedrich and Garcia-Buades (2009) show that as tourism grows and has more severe impacts on an area, so does the population's perception of tourism implications. 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 paper primarily focuses on measuring social norms and cultural beliefs
relating to economic and tourism development and discusses findings in the context of Toowoomba. It has been argued that more rapid and intense tourism development may have a less beneficial effect on societies than smaller scale development (de Kadt, 1979; Pierce, 1989; Ratz, 2000). Another paradox occurs where
tourism is initiated to facilitate economic and social development, but the tourists are separated as an elite
social class (Macaulay, 199
). 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.
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). This paper reports on a preliminary investigation into social
values and perceptions of tourism and economic development in the case study of Toowoomba, Australia. 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).