Macao Residents' Perceptions of the Impact of Tourism on Quality of Life

Home , Cotai, Macau Peninsula

MACAO RESIDENTS’ PERCEPTIONS OF THE IMPACT OF TOURISM ON QUALITY OF LIFE

A Thesis

Presented to the

Faculty of

California State Polytechnic University, Pomona

In Partial Fulfillment

Of the Requirements for the Degree

Master of Science

Hospitality Management

Wai Ian Ng

2017

SIGNATURE PAGE

THESIS: MACAU RESIDENTS’ PERCEPTIONS OF THE IMPACT OF TOURISM ON QUALITY OF LIFE

AUTHOR: Wai Ian Ng

DATE SUBMITTED: Spring 2017

The Collins College of Hospitality Management

Marjorie Ferree Jones, Ph.D. Thesis Committee Chair Hospitality Management

Zhenxing (Eddie) Mao, Ph.D. Hospitality Management

Neha Singh, Ph.D. Hospitality Management

ABSTRACT

This study explored the residents of Macao’s perceived quality of life. Macao is an emerging tourist destination in Asia that has gained popularity as a gaming paradise. Over the past decade, Macao experienced substantial growth in gaming and tourism and that is expected to significantly affect the residents’ perceived quality of life. In April 2015, a questionnaire-based survey was administrated to 252 households, selected on a population proportional to Macao’s seven parishes: Our Lady of Fatima (36.5%), St. Anthony (24.2%), St. Lazarus (11.1%), St.

Lawrence (5.2%), Cathedral (6.7%), and Our Lady of Carmel & St. Francis Xavier Parishes (16.3%).

Data was collected using a structured questionnaire based on a previous survey instrument developed by Kim (2002). Regression results show that the perceived quality of life of residents

was significantly affected by the economic, cultural, and environmental consequences of tourism. Positive impacts such as preservation of culture, increased employment opportunities, preservation of wildlife and ecology, as well as cultural exchanges between residents and tourists, improved the residents’ perception of their quality of life. Conversely, negative impacts such as deterioration of culture, pollution, solid waste, and the increased cost of living, lowered the residents’ perception of their quality of life. The findings of this study should draw public attention to the quality of life issue and provide Macao policymakers with valuable statistics for future policy implementation.

Keywords: Macao’s (Special Administrative Region of the People's Republic of China) tourism development, residents’ perception, impact of tourism, quality of life

iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Signature Page ...... ii

Abstract ...... iii

List of Tables ...... vi

List of Figures ...... vii

Chapter 1 ...... 1

Introduction ...... 1

Purpose of Study ...... 1

Macao’s Tourism Development ...... 2

Chapter 2 ...... 6

Literature Review ...... 6

Quality of Life ...... 6

Perception of Tourists ...... 6

Perception Of Residents ...... 7

Macao’s Tourism Impact ...... 8

Chapter 3 ...... 11

Methodology ...... 11

Research Design ...... 11

Sample ...... 11

Protection for the Human Subjects ...... 12

Research Instrument ...... 12

Data Analyses ...... 15

Chapter 4 ...... 18

Results ...... 18

Response Rates ...... 18

Demographic Profile of Respondents ...... 19

Factor Analysis ...... 20

Multiple Linear Regression Model ...... 22

Chapter 5 ...... 25

Conclusion ...... 25

Discussion of Findings ...... 25

Implications for Policy ...... 26

Limitations and Recommendations ...... 27

References ...... 29

Appendix ...... 36

Questionnaire ...... 36

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. Measurement Items of Tourism Impacts and Quality of Life ...... 13

Table 2. Proportional Stratified Sample Size of Macao Residents ...... 18

Table 3. Demographic Profile of Respondents ...... 19

Table 4. Factor Analysis of the Tourism Impact Items ...... 22

Table 5. Summary of Multiple Regression Analysis ...... 24

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1. Multivariate Outliers Plot Graph ...... 21

Figure 2. Regression Model for the Impact of Tourism on Quality of Life ...... 23

vii

Chapter 1

Introduction

Purpose of study. The purpose of this research was to explore the residents of Macao’s perceived quality of life and to study the relationships that exist between the quality of life and the impact of tourism. Seven underlying constructs were used to define the perceived impact of increased tourism. The constructs were identified as positive impacts including employment opportunity, preservation of culture, cultural exchanges between residents and tourists, and preservation of wildlife and ecology, and negative impact including cost of living, deterioration of culture, and pollution and solid waste. This study provides a better understanding of the

Macao residents’ perspective on the effects brought by increased tourism toward their life satisfaction.

In recent years, among the cities in Southeast Asia, Macao stands out as a vast-growing economic region due to its development in tourism and gaming. With its mega-casinos, Macao has acquired a reputation as a world-renowned gambling city. The gaming industry has become the mainstay of Macao’s economy while benefiting tourism-related industries such as hotels, restaurants, and retail stores. This in turn improves public services, provides jobs, and increases government tax revenues. Economic growth is tied to the current expansion in tourism. Tourism also generates costs for the community, such as cost of living, cultural changes, crowding, and

environmental degradation. McCool and Martin (1994) suggested that the overall purpose of

tourism development should be to enhance the residents’ quality of life while addressing

economic, social, cultural, environmental, recreational, and other benefits of tourism.

Therefore, there is an assumed connection between the residents’ quality of life and the impact

of tourism as Macao’s economy is heavily dependent on the tourism and gaming development.

Different from Korça (1998) and Long and Kayat’s (2011) studies that investigated the residents’ perception of tourism impact and their support for tourism development in their areas, this study explored how the residents’ perceived tourism impact affected their perceived quality of life in the community. Several studies used objective indicators to measure the quality of life to capture the effects of tourism, such as average income, public revenue, per capita GDP, consumption compositions, crime rates, poverty thresholds, and health index (Crotts & Holland,

1993; Diener & Suh, 1997; Meng, Li, & Uysal, 2010). However, for Macao, objective data does not represent the whole picture. The general population did not subjectively feel the benefits of tourism even with tremendous growth in tourism, GDP, public and personal incomes, and employment rates (Zheng & Hung, 2012). A perception study, providing an individual’s perception formed by personal feelings and experiences that are important to him/her, can demonstrate how a subject responds from a subjective human response perspective (Andereck

& Nyaupane, 2011; Johnson, 1998). Therefore, it is in the interest of the policymakers to consider an investigation into the effects of tourism on the quality of life, as interpreted by the residents both objectively and subjectively. The focus of this research is to understand how

Macao residents, in their perspective, report how local tourism affects their perceived quality of life.

Macao’s tourism development. Today’s Macao, situated in a premier location on the southeastern coast of China, is well-known by its numerous casino resorts and receives a high concentration of visitors from mainland China. All changes on the tourism development began with the transfer of sovereignty of Macao from the Portuguese Republic to the People's

Republic of China. Macao had been a Portuguese colony for over 400 years before its governance was returned to China on December 20, 1999, where it became a special administrative region of China. It operates under the principle of “one country, two systems”, in

2 which Macau retains its own political, legal, and economic systems, separate from mainland

China. Consequently, it benefits from a rich combination of Chinese and Portuguese heritage, leading to an exclusive market segment which intersects gaming, entertainment, and culture.

This cultural melting pot is evident in its architecture, dining, customs, and religion. Li, Ye, and

Wang’s (2011) study revealed that business tourists perceive Macao’s image as a miniature city filled with gambling and entertainment facilities and a variety of festive activities and cuisines that possesses a European urban landscape.

As the Sociedade de Turismo e Diversões de Macau, S.A.’s (“STDM”) 40-year casino monopoly concession expired in 2002, the Macao government granted six new concessions to mostly foreign investors to increase competition among casino operators. The six concessionaires included Sociedade de Jogos de Macao, S.A. (“SJM”), Galaxy Casino, S.A.

(“Galaxy”), Wynn Resorts (Macao) S.A. (“Wynn”), MGM Grand Paradise, S.A. (“MGM”), Venetian

Macao S.A. (“Venetian”), and Melco Crown Gaming (Macao) Limited, (“Melco”). In its policy address for the fiscal year 2002, the government declared that gaming and tourism will be positioned as Macao’s leading industry and driver of the economy. It was an effort to transform

Macao into a regional entertainment center (Macao SAR Government, 2001).

As the only location in China where commercial gambling is legal, Macao’s gaming sector has expanded rapidly since the 2002 liberalization of casino licensing, particularly targeting mainland Chinese customers (Zeng, Prentice, & King, 2014). In 2003, the Chinese government implemented a new visa regulation known as the “Individual Visit Scheme”, which permitted mainland Chinese people to visit Macao on an individual basis (Wan & Li, 2013). As a result, the number of mainland Chinese visitors increased from 4.2 million in 2002 to 21.3 million in 2014 (Macao Statistics and Census Service 2003; 2015a). Casino openings during this period included several popular casino resorts: Sands Macao, in 2004; Wynn Macau, in 2006;

Altira, MGM Macau, and The Venetian Macao, in 2007; Grand Lisboa, in 2008; City of Dream, in

2009; Galaxy, in 2011; and Sands Cotai Central, in 2012. By the end of 2014, Macao was home to thirty-five casinos and became the largest gaming market in the world as measured by gaming revenue (Gaming Inspection and Coordination Bureau, 2015a).

Aside from a gaming destination, the Macao government also promoted non-gaming attractions as a continuing strategy to diversify its economy and to safeguard the stability of its tourism development. One policy they implemented stated that “tourism, gaming, conventions, and exhibitions shall act as the ‘head’, and the service industry as the ‘body’, to drive the overall development of other industries” (Gaming Inspection and Coordination Bureau, 2015b). By following the model of Las Vegas, Macao developed itself into a leisure, business, and entertainment center, widening and expanding its tourism market segments beyond gaming

(McCartney, 2008). The government has persistently rebranded and repositioned the image of

Macao to develop it as a sustainable tourist attraction where one can enjoy various activities, such as international fine dining, upscale shopping, historic sightseeing, thematic resort hotels, spectacular live shows, and relaxed bars and lounges. Non-gaming leisure and entertainment facilities include a world-class convention center and sports complex which brings MICE, variety shows, and international sporting events to expand the entire tourism industry.

According to the Macao Statistics and Census Service (2003; 2009; 2015a), the number of visitors doubled from 11.5 million in 2002 to 22.9 million in 2008, and tripled to 31.5 million in 2014. The majority of visitors were from mainland China (67.4%) while the rest were from

Hong Kong (20.4%) and other countries. Most of these visits were for vacation (58.4%), whereas only 7.3% reported travel to Macao strictly for gambling (Macao Statistics and Census Service,

2015a). In 2014, there were sixty-six hotels and thirty-two guesthouses, with a total 27,904 guest rooms to accommodate the massive influx of visitors. The average occupancy rate was

86.5%. The fast-growing number of tourists can be attributed to the success of Macao’s diversified tourism destination proposition.

Recent research concentrated on studying the growth and development of tourism in

Macao, few explored the effects of tourism development on the residents’ quality of life in a quantitative manner. Chand, Kumar, and Kaule (2016) suggested that tourism helps to identify what may be termed as goals for a better life and society, as tourism nourishes a region’s economy, stimulates development process, and restores cultural heritage. In view of this situation, enhancement of quality of life has become the cornerstone of the Macao government’s forward-looking administrative policy. This policy aims to raise the community’s quality of life. This study investigated how residents’ perceived tourism impact affects their perceived quality of life. The findings of this study should provide policymakers with valuable information for future policy implementation on the community’s quality of life issue.

Chapter 2 Literature Review

This chapter reviews the literature associated with the perception of quality of life, the impact of tourism on quality of life as perceived by tourists and residents, and the positive and negative impact of Macao tourism.

Quality of life. According to the World Health Organization, quality of life is defined as an individual’s perception of his/her position in life in the context of the culture and the value system in which he/she lives and in relation to his/her goals, expectations, standards, and concerns (Skevington, Lotfy, & O’Connell, 2004). This is a subjective measurement of one’s personal satisfaction with life, which reflects his/her feelings and experiences (Neal, 2000).

Similar situations and circumstances may be perceived differently by different people.

Understanding residents’ perceptions regarding their quality of life is the key in growing a sustainable economy. It is important to consider both tourists and residents’ perceptions to better understand the big picture.

Perception of tourists. Residents, as well as tourists can also feel tourism impact imposed through other tourists or tourism enterprises by depletion of natural resources,

ƉŽůůƵƚŝŽŶ͕ĐƌŽǁĚŝŶŐĂŶĚĐŽŶŐĞƐƚŝŽŶ;ZƵĚĞǎΘsŽĚĞď, 2010). A plethora of tourism literature has been developed reporting on the impact of tourism on tourists’ quality of life (Dolnicar,

Yanamandram, & Cliff, 2012; Gilbert & Abdullah, 2004; Neal, Sirgy, & Uysal, 2004). Bagri and

Kala (2015) revealed that environment, weather, tourist activities, hospitality, and safety are important aspects in defining tourists’ satisfaction. They suggested that tourism stakeholders should develop strategies for steady development to enhance tourists’ satisfaction. Some studies examined tourists' satisfaction as a result of their tourism experiences (Biswakarma,

2015; Chand et al., 2016). Similarly, this study also investigated the quality of life as affected by the impact of tourism, as perceived by residents.

Perception of residents. Residents’ perception of the impact of tourism is an important planning and policy consideration for the successful development, marketing, and operation of the existing and future tourism projects (Ap, 1992). Several studies have documented and thoroughly discussed the potential tourism impacts perceived by residents. For instance, Ap and

Crompton (1998) developed a 35-item tourism impact scale that was derived from a comprehensive list of 147 measurement items drawn from literature reviews and personal interviews. The scale is comprised of seven domains: economic, taxes, social and cultural, services, community attitudes, environmental, and crowding and congestion. Their findings suggested that taxes and community attitude domains may be perceived as part of economic and social and cultural impacts correspondingly. Thereafter, Tatoglu, Erdal, Ozgur, and Azakli

(2002) modified Ap and Crompton’s (1998) impact scale to develop a new one that consisted of

33 items and changed one domain from taxes to cost of living.

The domains identified above were defined and evaluated as positive and negative tourism impact that affect residents’ perceived quality of life in this study. Ko and Stewart

(2002) found that community satisfaction was closely related to the perceived positive tourism impact and perceived negative tourism impact. For example, tourism provides elements that may improve the quality of life through tourism products, such as festivals, restaurants, natural and cultural attractions, and outdoor recreation opportunities that can be enjoyed by tourists, as well as, residents and fulfilled their leisure needs. Moreover, an improved quality of life can be perceived through a higher personal standard of living; increased job creation and tax revenues that in turn result in local services to residents, all of which may create a positive impact on a resident’s perception of tourism. Alternatively, negative impacts such as rising crime rates, crowding, creating conflict between tourists and residents, and changing residents’ way of life, all these can be detrimental to life satisfaction (Andereck & Nyaupane, 2011).

In Andriotis and Vaughan’s (2003) study, they labeled the positive consequences as benefits and opportunities, including better employment, business prospects, and increased tax revenues for government. Increased tax revenue improves infrastructure and creates additional recreation opportunities for locals to enrich their social life. Historical sites are restored, and the local culture and natural environment may be preserved. Conversely, negative effects consist of rising housing prices, increased inflation, traffic congestion, cultural changes, and environmental degradation. Generally, residents recognized the positive economic impacts of

tourism development, but were concerned with potentially negative social and environmental

impacts, such as traffic congestion, crime, public safety, and pollution (Perdue, Long, & Kang,

1999).

Macao’s tourism impact. Mainland Chinese tourists are the most important segment of

Macau’s tourism industry. The rise of the mainland Chinese upper middle and wealthy classes

brought compelling business opportunities to the travel and hospitality industries. Wong and

Rosenbaum (2012) revealed that mainland Chinese tourists are looking for assorted travel and

leisure experiences. Many of mainland Chinese visit Macao to view the latest casino architecture

and enjoy the upscale casino facilities, to experience the magnificent service environment, and

to indulge in a fantasy, pleasure, and luxurious lifestyle vacation that may not be available in the

mainland China. The influx of Chinese tourists along with the development of additional tourism

products and services has created both positive and negative impact on Macao residents.

Vong (2008) reported that most Macao residents believed that casino and tourism

development improved the economy by having advanced career opportunities, increased

salaries, wages, and government revenues. The unemployment rate has remained lower than

4% since 2006. Hotels, restaurants, gaming and related services employed approximately

148,000 people, representing 37% of the total employment population in the first quarter of

2015 (Macao Statistics and Census Service, 2015b). Tax revenue from gaming accounted for more than 75% of the Macao government revenue since 2010 (Macao Statistics and Census

Service, 2016). Wan and Li’s (2013) research also concluded that a low unemployment rate and increased government revenue and household incomes were positive economic impact.

As a former Portuguese colony, Macao is home to a priceless tourism resource: numerous world heritage sites (Vong & Ung, 2012). In 2005, the Historic Center of Macao was inscribed on UNESCO’s World Heritage List, which further nurtures the cultural tourism market.

In addition to the unique multicultural environment, the casino resort facilities offer 24/7 gambling services, tax-free shopping, global cuisines, and different types of spa treatments that provide millions of tourist’s leisure travel to Macao, that also can be enjoyed by residents and fulfill their leisure needs. This is considered as positive sociocultural impact to the residents.

However, residents expressed concern of negative economic and cultural impacts, including the rise in property prices and costs of daily necessities (McCartney & Lei, 2016). The tremendous development of tourism has driven a real estate bubble and resulted in calls for more hotels, casinos, and entertainment facilities, which often pose a direct threat to historic preservation and respective urban settings. Also, serious environmental degradation and congestion at Macao’s heritage sites have been reported in the study of du Cros (2009).

Moreover, the massive influx of tourists has created tension between the residents and tourists in terms of recourse allocation and usage and environmental quality. Macao residents expressed their concerns over the crowdedness in the restaurants and public transport and blamed this on the increasing number of tourists (Wan & Li, 2013). Possessing only a limited land area of 30.3 km² (11.7 mi²), the increasing population has caused Macao to become the most population-dense region in the world, with a total population of 636,200 at the end of

2014 (Macao Statistics and Census Service, 2015c). This lack of land combined with growing local

9 and tourist populations has brought significant overpopulation, traffic congestion, crowding, air pollution, and poor waste management.

The impact of Macao’s explosive tourism development necessitates a comprehensive assessment of their residents’ perception on the quality of life. Only then, can policymakers fully understand how to better sustain this development and to provide policy improvements in the future that reflect residents’ perceived quality of life. Therefore, the relationship between residents’ perceived impact of tourism and quality of life deserves examination.

Research question. How is the Macao residents’ perception of quality of life affected by the perceived positive and negative impact of tourism? Macao residents answered a questionnaire to measure the perceived tourism impact constructs and perceived satisfaction with quality of life.

Chapter 3

Methodology

This chapter describes the research methodology employed in this research project including the population, the procedures for selecting the samples, the procedures protecting human subjects, the instrument for collecting the data, and the data analyses.

Research design. This research adopted a quantitative approach to examine the relationship between the residents’ perceived impact of tourism and their perceived satisfaction with quality of life. This study used a one-time, self-administered, web and paper-based survey conducted in person on a proportional stratified sample of Macao residents.

Factors that contribute to using survey research in this study included the size of the

sample of approximately 300 possible participants; confidentiality of what may be considered

sensitive matters addressed in the survey; and the cost savings and convenience with a web-

based survey questionnaire.

Sample. A sample size requirement for factor analysis might generally be categorized

into two ways: a minimum number of cases or a subjects-to-variables ratio required to achieve an adequate sample. Bryant and Yarnold (1995) suggested that the subjects-to-variables ratio for factor analysis should be at least five times the number of variables. Suhr (2006) stated to have a sample of at least 100 cases and a subjects-to-variables ratio of no less than five. As a consequence, a target sample of 300 subjects was decided for conducting factor analysis in this study. Residential demographics were used to ensure the geographically representative sample, which was determined by obtaining the number of households of each parish acquired from the

Macao Statistics and Census Service (2014b). Using a proportionate stratified sampling method, the number of respondents needed for each parish to obtain a total sample of 300 was calculated.

Protection for the human subjects. A protocol application for conducting this research

was approved by the California State Polytechnic University, Pomona’s Institutional Review

Board. The survey participants were informed in the consent form of the questionnaire about

the background of this study and that the collected data was to be used for academic purposes

only. They were also informed that their participation was strictly voluntary, and confidentiality was guaranteed. Respondents indicated their willingness to take the survey by choosing the “I

Agree” at the bottom of the consent form.

Research instrument. Data was collected using a structured questionnaire (see

Appendix) based on a previous survey instrument developed by Kim (2002). Part of his study examined how tourism impacts affect residents’ perceived quality of life in Virginia, USA. He developed a 36-item scale to measure the economic, social, cultural, and environmental impacts of tourism and three items to measure the satisfaction with quality of life as perceived by

residents. In addition to Kim’s (2002) measurement items, this study added four items to

measure the perceived satisfaction with the economic, social, cultural, and environmental

factors. Perceived economic, social, cultural, and environmental impacts could be related to

these items in an attempt to investigate causality.

The questionnaire for this study was comprised of four sections. The first section

included screening questions on participants’ age, length of residence in Macao, and the parish

of their residence. Only residents who were over 18 years of age and had lived in Macao for

more than seven years were selected to take the survey. The respondents were chosen because

they had experienced the rapid growth of tourism in the past decade.

The second section was titled “Your feelings about how tourism impacts your

community” and included twelve economic impact items, six social impact items, nine cultural

impact items, and nine environmental impact items. Respondents were asked to indicate their

12 level of agreement (1 = Strongly Disagree, 2 = Disagree, 3 = Neither Disagree nor Agree, 4 =

Agree, 5 = Strongly Agree) on each item.

The third section was titled “Your feelings about your quality of life” and included four items to measure residents’ satisfaction with the economic, social, cultural, and environmental factors on their quality of life and three items to measure their quality of life in general.

Respondents were asked to indicate their perceived level of satisfaction (1 = Very Dissatisfied, 2

= Dissatisfied, 3 = Neither Dissatisfied nor Satisfied, 4 = Satisfied, 5 = Very Satisfied) on each item. See Table 1 for the list of measurement items.

The last section of the questionnaire covered a respondent’s socio-demographic profile including gender, education, marital status, working industry, household size, monthly household income, and religion, served as categorical variables. The questionnaire for this study was translated from English to Chinese for respondents who use Chinese as their primary language. The questionnaire was developed through an internet site that specialized in developing on-line surveys called Qualtrics.com and its link was located at https://newqtrial2015az1.az1.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_5tEVZrsEyfOdX0h.

Table 1. Measurement Items of Tourism Impacts and Quality of Life Economic Impact of Tourism 1. Tourism creates employment opportunities for Macau residents. 2. Tourism provides desirable jobs in Macau. 3. One of the most important aspects of tourism is that it creates a variety of jobs for the Macau residents. 4. Tourism brings more investment to Macau’s economy. 5. Local businesses benefit the most from tourists. 6. Tourism generates tax revenues for local government. 7. Tax revenues from tourism are used to improve roads and public services for residents. 8. Tourism helps improve the economic situation for many Macau residents. 9. Our standard of living has increased due to tourist spending in Macau. 10. The price of many goods and services in Macau has increased significantly because of tourism. 11. Real estate prices in Macau have increased because of tourism. 12. The cost of living in Macau has increased because of tourism.

Social Impact of Tourism 13. Increased tourism provides more recreational opportunities for local residents. 14. Roads and other local services are well maintained because of tourism. 15. Tourism is a major reason for the variety of entertainment in Macau. 16. During the peak tourist season, I find it harder to get tickets for the theater, movies, concerts or tourism events. 17. Tourism has resulted in unpleasantly overcrowded hiking trails, parks, shopping places, and other public places for local residents. 18. Tourism contributes social problems such as crime, drug use, prostitution, and so forth in Macau. Cultural Impact of Tourism 19. Tourism encourages a variety of cultural activities for local residents. 20. Tourism has increased residents’ pride in the local culture in Macau. 21. Tourism helps keep local culture alive and maintain cultural identity of local residents. 22. Meeting tourists from all over the world is definitely a life enriching experience. 23. The cultural exchange between residents and tourists is valuable and pleasant for you. 24. I would like to meet tourists from as many countries as possible in order to learn about their culture. 25. The commercial demand of tourists causes change in the style and forms of traditional arts and crafts. 26. Tourism encourages residents to imitate the behavior of the tourists and relinquish cultural traditions. 27. Tourism causes the disruption of traditional cultural behavior patterns in local residents. Environmental Impact of Tourism 28. Tourism brings environmental pollution. 29. Tourism produces noise, littering, and congestion. 30. Tourism produces water pollution in the ocean. 31. Tourism (e.g. restaurants, hotels) produces large quantities of waste products. 32. Hotels, airlines, attractions, and other related tourism businesses that serve tourists throw away tons of garbage a year. 33. Tourists’ littering destroys the beauty of the landscape. 34. Tourism has contributed to preservation of the natural environment and protection of the wildlife in Macau. 35. Tourism has improved the ecological environment of Macau in many ways. 36. Tourism does not contribute to the negative effect of vegetation and loss of meadows and green space. Satisfaction with the Economic, Social, Cultural, Environmental Factors on Quality of Life 1. How satisfied are you with the economic factor on your quality of life? 2. How satisfied are you with the social factor on your quality of life? 3. How satisfied are you with the cultural factor on your quality of life? 4. How satisfied are you with the environmental factor on your quality of life? Quality of Life in General 5. How satisfied are you with your life as a whole? 6. How satisfied are you with the way you are spending your life in general? 7. Which of the following statements best fits how you feel? a. My life is much worse than most other people’s. b. My life is somewhat worse than most other people’s.

14 c. My life is about the same as most other people’s. d. My life is somewhat better than most other people’s. e. My life is much better than most other people’s.

The selected respondents were asked to complete the survey mainly online on an iPad, and paper questionnaires were distributed to several groups at different locations as well. In the beginning of the survey, each participant was informed about the intent of the study, that the results of analysis were going to be used only for academic purposes, and the respondent was assured of confidentially. Respondents then indicated their willingness to take the survey by

choosing the “I Agree” at the bottom of the consent form. The time to complete the survey was

approximately 10 to 15 minutes. The researcher collected 295 questionnaires. Data was either

downloaded from Qualtrics or entered manually into an Excel file, and then was uploaded for

analysis.

Data analyses. The collected survey responses were analyzed through the statistical

package of SPSS version 22.0. In the analyses, the response rate was computed; the

characteristics of the population were examined; and the outliers were identified prior to

conducting factor analysis to check for validity of the tourism impact constructs and testing

alpha coefficient to check for internal consistency of the tourism impact constructs; and multiple

regression analysis were performed.

A factor analysis was conducted to extract factors from the thirty-six items dealing with

respondents’ perceived tourism impacts. The extracted factors determine which items show a relationship among themselves. As suggested by Walker and Maddan (2009), variables can be grouped by their correlations so that variables within a group are highly correlated among themselves, but have relatively small correlations with the variables in a different group. Each group of variables represents a single underlying factor, which is responsible for the observed

15 correlations. Also, to perform the reliability analysis by evaluating the stability and consistency of the variables comprising each factor.

In the process of factor analysis, variables with a low extraction communality or factor loading were eliminated. The communality of variable is the proportion of variance explained by the underlying factors. Communalities range from 0 to 1.The closer the communalities are to 1, the better the factors are at explaining the original data (Field, 2009). There are different views on the extraction communalities to be considered low. While Child (2006) recommended variables with communalities with less than 0.2 to be low and should be eliminated. Hair, Black,

Babin, Anderson, and Tatham (2006) suggested communalities of less than 0.5 should be dropped from further analysis.

Further exploration on factor loading represents the correlation between a variable and

a factor that has been extracted from the data. It shows how strongly each variable is loaded on

each factor and assures that variables make meaningful and useful contributions to the factors.

So, the greater the loading, the more the variable is a pure measure of the factor. Comrey and

Lee (1992) suggested that loadings should be within a range from 0.31 (poor) to 0.71 (excellent).

Stevens (2002) recommended interpreting only factor loadings with an absolute value greater than 0.4. For this study, only variables with extraction communalities greater than 0.4 and factor loadings greater than 0.4 were retained.

The purpose of this research was to detect the relationships that might exist between

the impact of tourism and quality of life as perceived by residents. Using a principal axis factoring analysis with Equamax rotation, the thirty-six impact items were extracted into seven underlying factors. Chronbach’s alpha coefficient was used to determine the reliability of the tourism impact scales. Upon validation of the seven factors, factor scores to be used as

16 predictors in a multiple regression to detect the possible links between respondents’ perceived seven tourism impact constructs and quality of life.

Chapter 4

Results

This chapter reports the response rates; demographic profile of the respondents; and the results of the factor analysis and multiple regression analysis. The intent of this research was to assess the relationships between economic, social, cultural, and environmental impacts of tourism and quality of life as perceived by residents in Macao. This study investigated how residents’ perceived positive and negative tourism impact affect their perceived quality of life.

Seven underlying constructs were used to define the perceived tourism impact, and were identified as either a positive or a negative impact that affects the residents’ perceived quality of life.

Response rates. A total of 295 questionnaires were collected face to face in April 2015, and 252 questionnaires were completed without missing values for a response rate of 84.0%

(i.e., 252/300). The parish response rates were 75.1% (i.e., 92/122) for Our Lady of Fatima,

88.9% (i.e., 61/69) for St. Anthony, 150.9% (i.e., 28/19) for St. Lazarus, 44.2% (i.e., 13/29) for St.

Lawrence, 80.4% (i.e., 17/21) for Cathedral, and 103.0% (i.e., 41/40) for Our Lady of Carmel and

Saint Francis Xavier Parishes together (see Table 2). Invalid responses included respondents, who resided in neighboring cities, lived in Macao fewer than seven years, or refused to finish all questions. The chosen subjects who had at least seven years of residency were the key individuals encountering the impact of tourism on the quality of life in Macao.

Table 2. Proportional Stratified Sample Size of Macao Residents Parish 2012/2013 Household Target Sample Full responses Our Lady of Fatima 73,920 (40.8%) 122 92 St. Anthony 41,423 (22.9%) 69 61 St. Lazarus 11,198 (6.2%) 19 28 St. Lawrence 17,746 (9.8%) 29 13 Cathedral 12,761 (7.0%) 21 17

Our Lady of Carmel 24,026 (13.3%) 40 41 St. Francis Xavier Totals 181,074 (100.0%) 300 252 Macao Statistics and Census Service (2014b)

Demographic profile of respondents. Table 3 shows the profile of the respondents. All respondents had lived in Macao for at least seven years and are considered permanent residents. The general population is not reflected in terms of age, as the majority of respondents are between the ages of 18 and 34 (73%). There were some variances in gender and employment industry, as compared with the general population distribution. The survey included 6% more females than the general female population of 51%, as recorded in 2013.

Among all respondents, 27% work in gaming and hospitality industries, which is less than the

41% recorded in the last quarter of 2013 (Macao Statistics and Census Service, 2014a). More than 60% had at least a college degree, which was similar to the educational of the Macao population. The median monthly household income ranges from $3,750 to $5,000, which is verified by the actual median monthly income of $4,600 per household in September 2012 to

September 2013 as published by Macao Statistics and Census Service (2014b). The majority of respondents (96%) have lived in Macao for over ten years. These are the key individuals who witnessed the changes of the tourism development and perceived the impact that might affected their quality of life.

Table 3. Demographic Profile of Respondents Demographic Percentage (N = 252) Gender Male 43.3 Female 56.7 Age 18 - 24 45.2 25 - 34 27.8 35 - 44 11.1 45 - 54 8.7

ш 55 7.1 Marital Status Not married 67.9 Married 32.1 Educational Attainment Without a college degree 34.9 With a college degree or above 65.1 Employment Industry Gaming & hospitality 26.6 Others 46.8 Not working 26.6 Household Income (USD) < $1,250 15.9 $1,250 - $2,500 13.9 $2,500 - $3,750 15.5 $3,750 - $5,000 17.5 $5,000 - $6,250 13.5 $6,250 - $7,500 9.9 > $7,500 13.9 Length of Residency (Years) 7 - 10 4.4 11 - 20 20.6 > 20 75

Factor analysis. Prior to performing a factor analysis, eleven outliers were identified.

“Respondent 16” checked “agree” to all the statements and was considered an outlier. Next, a multivariate outliers plot graph of Mahalanobis distances versus respondents showed that ten cases were identified as outliers (See Figure 1). The remaining 241 non-outlying cases were used to conduct a principal axis factoring analysis and then appropriate reliability tests were performed.

Under the decisions of eliminating variables with low extraction communalities and factor loadings, eleven variables (items 4, 5, 6, 9, 13, 15, 16, 17, 18, 25, & 36) with the extraction communalities of less than 0.4 were dropped from further analysis and another three variables

(items 7, 8, & 14) with factor loadings of less than 0.4 were removed from the rotated factor matrix. The results indicated that twenty-two of the thirty-six variables were valid and reliable.

Figure 1. Multivariate Outliers Plot Graph. Note: the ten dots above the Mahalanobis Distance of 67.99 were identified as outliers with the corresponding respondent number; Chi-square (ɲс .001; df = 36) = 67.99.

Table 4 shows the factors that were extracted through the principal axis factoring

analysis with Equamax rotation. The factors were identified as follow: (F1) pollution and solid

waste; (F2) cost of living; (F3) preservation of culture; (F4) cultural exchange between residents

and tourists; (F5) employment opportunity; (F6) deterioration of culture; and (F7) preservation

of wildlife and ecology. In relation to the reliability, the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin measure of sampling adequacy (KMO = .77) was quite high, and Bartlett’s test of sphericity was significant (Approx. ʖϮ

= 2381.22, df = 231, p < .001). Additionally, Cronbach’s alpha is a measure of the inter- correlation of a set of items. The internal consistency of the factors was considered satisfactory, with alpha coefficients ranging from 0.67 to 0.88. The twenty-two variables loaded reasonably on the seven factors and had strong reliability. All factors with eigenvalues greater than 1.0

explained 72.32% of the total variance. Factor loadings varied from a low of 0.53 to a high of

0.89.

Table 4. Factor Analysis of the Tourism Impact Items Factor Eigen- % of Cronbach's Loading value Variance Alpha (F1) Pollution and Solid Waste 5.04 22.95 .878 Produces large quantities of waste. .759 Brings environmental pollution. .751 Produces noise, littering, and congestion. .695 Destroys the beauty of the landscape. .673 Throws away tons of garbage a year. .667 Produces water pollution in the ocean. .609 (F2) Cost of Living 3.62 16.43 .785 Increases cost of living. .892 Increases prices of many goods & services. .717 Increases real estate prices. .616 (F3) Preservation of Culture 2.00 9.11 .845 Increases residents’ pride in the culture. .795 Keeps the culture alive and maintains .740 cultural identity of residents. Encourages a variety of cultural activities. .691 (F4) Cultural Exchange between Residents and Tourists 1.41 6.39 .803 Meeting tourists from all over the world is a .772 life enriching experience. Meeting tourists from as many countries as .748 possible to learn about their cultures. The cultural exchange between residents .657 and tourists is valuable and pleasant. (F5) Employment Opportunity 1.38 6.27 .686 Provides desirable jobs. .831 Creates a variety of jobs. .562 Creates employment opportunities. .526 (F6) Deterioration of Culture 1.34 6.08 .669 Causes disruption of traditional cultural .689 behavior patterns. Encourages residents to imitate the behavior of the tourists and relinquishes .675 cultural traditions. (F7) Preservation of Wildlife And Ecology 1.12 5.11 .764 Improves ecological environment. .828 Preserves natural environment and protects .688 wildlife. Note: Kaiser-Meyer Olkin = .77; Bartlett’s test of sphericity significant at p < .05; total variance explained = 72.32%.

Multiple linear regression model. Factor scores were utilized in a multiple linear

regression analysis to examine the relationships between the perceived seven impacts

22 constructs and quality of life. In Figure 2, there are seven independent variables and one dependent variable in the linear regression model to test a hypothesis, which proposed that tourism impacts correlate with residents’ perceived quality of life.

(F1) Pollution and solid waste

(F2) Cost of living

(F3) Preservation of culture

(F4) Cultural exchange between residents and tourists Quality of life

(F5) Employment opportunity

(F6) Deterioration of culture

(F7) Preservation of wildlife and ecology

Figure 2. Regression Model for the Impact of Tourism on Quality of Life.

The regression results in Table 5 show that tourism impacts significantly affected perceived quality of life. The significance level of the overall F test is less than 0.05; F (7, 233) =

10.045. The coefficient of determination (R2) implies that 23.2% of the variance in perceived

quality of life is explained by the seven impact constructs. Standardized coefficients (ɴ) are used for comparing the effects of the independent variables on the dependent variable. It is revealed that preservation of culture (ɴ = .269) has the most influence on quality of life, followed by

deterioration of culture (ɴ = -.245), employment opportunity (ɴ = .219), cultural exchange

ďĞƚǁĞĞŶƌĞƐŝĚĞŶƚƐĂŶĚƚŽƵƌŝƐƚƐ;ɴс͘ϭϲϬͿ͕ƉŽůůƵƚŝŽŶĂŶĚƐŽůŝĚǁĂƐƚĞ;ɴ = -.154), cost of living (ɴ =

-.153), and preservation of wildlife and ecology (ɴ = .134). As a result, the hypothesis is

supported by the data.

Table 5. Summary of Multiple Regression Analysis Independent Variable ɴ t p (Constant) .000 1.000 (F3) Preservation of culture .269 4.642 .000 (F6) Deterioration of culture -.245 -4.242 .000 (F5) Employment opportunity .219 3.804 .000 (F4) Cultural exchange between residents and tourists .160 2.771 .006 (F1) Pollution and solid waste -.154 -2.673 .008 (F2) Cost of living -.153 -2.653 .009 (F7) Preservation of wildlife and ecology .134 2.323 .021 Dependent Variable: Quality of Life Note: Adjusted R2 = .209 (p < .05); F (7, 233) = 10.04.

Regarding the factors that influence perceived quality of life, respondents expressed satisfaction with the economy (median = 4, IQR = 1), neutral with the culture (Median = 3, IQR =

2), and dissatisfaction with the environment (median = 2, IQR = 1). The last question of the survey measured how respondents feel about their life as compared with others. 60% of respondents (N = 145) indicated their life is about the same as most other people’s.

Chapter 5

Conclusion

This chapter includes a discussion of findings, implications for policy, and limitations of the study and recommendations for future research.

Discussion of findings. The reported data primarily identified the residents’ perceptions to economic, social, culture, and environmental impacts of tourism. A principal axis factoring analysis was performed to obtain an underlying factor structure from a set of thirty-six tourism impact items. Seven latent constructs related to economic, cultural, and environmental consequences were identified as positive and negative impact of tourism. Next, a multiple regression analysis was tested for a statistically significant relationship between the seven latent constructs and the residents’ perception of the dependent variable of quality of life.

This study demonstrated the correlations between residents’ perceived quality of life and the perceived positive and negative impact of tourism. The results of the analyses revealed

that the identified tourism impacts including perseveration of culture, employment opportunity, preservation of wildlife and ecology, and cultural exchange between tourists and residents correlated positively with residents’ perceived quality of life. Alternatively, deterioration of culture, pollution and solid waste, and cost of living correlated negatively with perceived quality

of life. In the other words, the positive impact including preservation of culture, increased

employment opportunities, preservation of wildlife and ecology, as well as cultural exchanges

between residents and tourists improved quality of life as perceived by residents. Conversely,

negative effects including deterioration of culture, pollution, solid waste, and the increased cost

of living lowered quality of life as perceived by residents.

These results were similar to those in earlier studies that indicate residents’ perceived

quality of life is positively associated with their perceived benefits of tourism (Liao, So, & Lam,

2016; Wan, 2012). However, it does not necessarily translate to their overall satisfaction of life, as residents were more concerned with problems arising from tourism development such as traffic congestion, overcrowding, and the higher cost of living (McCartney & Lei, 2016). If negative impacts outweigh positive impacts, residents will eventually perceive a lower quality of life and their displeasure may be openly displayed to tourists.

Implications for policy. This study provided important implications and directions for policymakers. The most effective way to improve the perceived quality of life is to preserve and support local cultural activities, protect cultural identity for residents, increase their pride in local culture. It is just as important to avoid the disruption of traditional cultural behavior patterns and to not relinquish cultural traditions. These findings are supported by McDowall and

Choi’s (2010) study; their results also revealed that culture was one of the top tourism impacts

perceived by Thai residents and suggested that Thailand needs to preserve and protect its

culture in order to ensure its tourism sustainability. Therefore, the Macao government should

put a greater effort into the cultural preservation.

Furthermore, the government should minimize the negative environmental outcomes

for the benefit of residents. Findings show that respondents were well aware of negative

consequences that tourism brings to the community, such as noise and water pollution, littering,

congestion, and degradation of the natural environment. Previous study also revealed that

worsening traffic congestion, air pollution, and over-crowding were the major negative environmental impact perceived by Macao residents (Vong, 2008). Corresponding to Yu’s (2008) study, environmental problems have been a long-term impact. Unfortunately, no improvements were made to alleviate this issue in the past few years. Disregarding these negative consequences may make promoting tourism difficult and could lead to resentment among residents.

Consequently, the destination’s image will be damaged by not having friendly and hospitable residents. The goodwill and cooperation of the local community are critical for the success of tourism development (Gursoy, Jurowski, & Uysal, 2002; Stylidis, Biran, Sit, & Szivas,

2014). Lin, Chen, and Filieri’s (2017) findings also showed that if residents are generally satisfied with their life, they will respect tourists and provide support for the tourism development. Thus, awareness of residents’ perceptions of tourism development and its impacts can help planners and developers to identify real concerns and issues for appropriate policies and action to take place, optimizing the benefits and minimizing the problems.

Policymakers must understand the importance of balancing their residents’ perceived quality of life with the costs and benefits of tourism in order to pursue long-term stability in the tourism industry and in Macao’s economy. They should focus more on generating and

promoting cultural benefits, because this study’s results indicate that they are more important

than economic benefits in influencing residents' perceived quality of life.

Limitations and recommendations. This study utilized a pre-existing survey which was translated from English to Chinese. By not conducting a pilot study to verify the accuracy of the

translation and its context, this may be considered as a limitation to the study. Hazzi and

Maldaon (2015) claim that translated questions or items must be piloted and analyzed to prove

validity.

In the data analyses, this study attempted to identify patterns in a respondent’s

perceptions of the impact of tourism by comparing their demographics using cluster analysis.

However, the result of hierarchical clustering indicated an insufficient number of valid cases to

perform a cluster analysis. Therefore, there are no distinctive differences between age ranges,

education, household income, and other demographic characteristics, as most of the respondents were young adults under 34 years of age who might share similar perceptions.

In future studies, researchers may identify and categorize tourism impacts into costs and benefits to test its relationships with quality of life. Some studies used social exchange theory to explain residents’ perception on the positive and negative impact of tourism that was illustrated with residents’ benefits and costs on the economic, social, cultural, and

environmental dimensions. Long and Kayat’s (2011) study confirmed the usefulness of the social

exchange theory in explaining residents’ perceptions of tourism. As suggested by Carmichael,

Peppard and Boudreau (1996), it would be desirable to have an overall question summarizing

residents’ feelings about the benefits and costs of tourism as it affects them personally.

Perceived positive and negative impact could be related to this question in an attempt to

investigate causality.

Finally, this study was an investigation undertaken in 2015, when tourism was the core

pillar of Macao’s economic growth. All six casino concessionaires each had at least one new

project under construction, including SJM’s Lisboa Palace, Galaxy’s Galaxy Phase 2, Wynn’s

Wynn Palace, MGM’s MGM Cotai, Venetian’s Parisian Macao, and Melco’s Studio City. Lee and

Back (2006) and Perdue et al. (1999) found that residents had significantly different perceptions,

dependent upon specific periods of casino development. Therefore, a study during this period

served as a benchmark against later studies to measure changes in residents' perceptions.

References

Andereck, K. L., & Nyaupane, G. P. (2011). Exploring the nature of tourism and quality of life

perceptions among residents. Journal of Travel Research, 50(3), 248–260.

Andriotis, K., & Vaughan, R. D. (2003). Urban residents’ attitudes toward tourism development:

the case of Crete. Journal of Travel Research, 42(2), 172–185.

Ap, J. (1992). Residents’ perceptions on tourism impacts. Annals of Tourism Research, 19(4),

665–690.

Ap, J., & Crompton, J. L. (1998). Developing and testing a tourism impact scale. Journal of Travel

Research, 37(2), 120–130.

Bagri, S. C., & Kala, D. (2015). Tourists’ satisfaction at Trijuginarayan: an emerging spiritual and

adventure tourist destination in Garhwal Himalaya India. International Scientific Journal

Turizam, 19(4), 165–182.

Biswakarma, G. (2015). On the dimensionality of measuring tourist satisfaction towards

homestay. International Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Systems, 8(2), 51–63.

Bryant, F. B., & Yarnold, P. R. (1995). Principal-components analysis and exploratory and

confirmatory factor analysis. In L. G. Grimm & P. R. Yarnold (Eds.), Reading and

understanding multivariate statistics (pp. 99–136). Washington, DC: American

Psychological Association.

Carmichael, B. A., Peppard Jr., D. M., & Boudreau, F. A. (1996). Megaresort on my doorstep:

local resident attitudes toward Foxwoods Casino and casino gambling on nearby Indian

reservation land. Journal of Travel Research, 34(3), 9–16.

Chand, M., Kumar, A., & Kaule, H. (2016). Association between tourist satisfaction dimensions

and nationality: an empirical investigation. International Journal of Hospitality &

Tourism Systems, 9(2), 74–82.

Child, D. (2006). The essentials of factor analysis (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Continuum

International Publishing Group.

Comrey, A. L., & Lee, H. B. (1992). A first course in factor analysis (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ:

Erlbaum.

Crotts, J. C., & Holland, S. M. (1993). Objective indicators of the impact of rural tourism

development in the State of Florida. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 1(2), 112–120.

Diener, E., & Suh, E. (1997). Measuring quality of life: economic, social, and subjective

indicators. Social Indicators Research, 40(1), 189–216.

Dolnicar, S., Yanamandram, V., & Cliff, K. (2012). The contribution of vacations to quality of

life. Annals of Tourism Research, 39(1), 59–83. du Cros, H. (2009). Emerging issues for cultural tourism in Macao. Journal of Current Chinese

Affairs, 38(1), 73–99.

Field, A. P. (2009). Discovering statistics using SPSS: (and sex, drugs and rock ’n’ roll) (3rd ed.).

Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications Inc.

Gaming Inspection and Coordination Bureau. (2015a). Gaming statistics. Retrieved

from http://www.dicj.gov.mo/web/en/information/DadosEstat/2015/content.html#n5.

Gaming Inspection and Coordination Bureau. (2015b). Macao gaming history. Retrieved

from http://www.dicj.gov.mo/web/en/history/.

Gilbert, D., & Abdullah, J. (2004). Holidaytaking and the sense of well-being. Annals of Tourism

Research, 31(1), 103–121.

Gursoy, D., Jurowski, C., & Uysal, M. (2002). Resident attitudes: a structural modeling

approach. Annals of Tourism Research, 29(1), 79–105.

Hair Jr., J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., & Tatham, R. L. (2006). Multivariate data

analysis (6th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.

Hazzi, O. A., & Maldaon, I. Sh. (2015). A pilot study: vital methodological issues. Business: Theory

and Practice, 16(1), 53–62.

Johnson, R. (1998). What matters in greater Phoenix—1998 editions: indicators of our quality of

life (2nd ed.). Tempe, AZ: Morrison Institute for Public Policy, School of Public Affairs,

College of Public Programs, Arizona State University.

Kim, K. (2002). The effects of tourism impacts upon QOL of residents in the community

(Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University,

Blacksburg, VA.

Ko, D., & Stewart, W. P. (2002). A structural equation model of residents’ attitudes for tourism

development. Tourism Management, 23(5), 521–530.

Korça, P. (1998). Resident perceptions of tourism in a resort town. Leisure Sciences, 20(3), 193–

212.

Lee, C., & Back, K. (2006). Examining structural relationships among perceived impact, benefit,

and support for casino development based on 4 year longitudinal data. Tourism

Management, 27(3), 466–480.

Li, X., Ye, S., & Wang, D. (2011). Non-structured measurement of perceived image in tourism

destinations—taking perceived features of Macao business tourists as a case. Tourism

Tribune, 26(12), 57–63.

Liao, X. Y., So, S., & Lam, D. (2016). Residents’ perceptions of the role of leisure satisfaction and

quality of life in overall tourism development: case of a fast-growing tourism

destination—Macao. Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, 21(10), 1100–1113.

Lin, Z., Chen, Y., & Filieri, R. (2017). Resident-tourist value co-creation: the role of residents'

perceived tourism impacts and life satisfaction. Tourism Management, 61, 436–442.

Long, P. H., & Kayat, K. (2011). Residents' perceptions of tourism impact and their support for

tourism development: the case study of Cuc Phuong National Park, Ninh Binh province,

Vietnam. European Journal of Tourism Research, 4(2), 123–146.

Macao SAR Government. (2001). Policy address for the fiscal year 2002 of the Macao Special

Administrative Region (MSAR) of the People’s Republic of China. Retrieved

from http://bo.io.gov.mo/edicoes/en/raem/lag2002/.

Macao Statistics and Census Service. (2003). Tourism Statistics 2002 [Data file]. Retrieved

from http://www.dsec.gov.mo/getAttachment/6e2159ae-0710-4716-9308-

473f36ec721e/E_TUR_PUB_2002_Y.aspx?disposition=attachment.

Macao Statistics and Census Service. (2009). Tourism Statistics 2008 [Data file]. Retrieved

from http://www.dsec.gov.mo/getAttachment/8410db7e-2bde-4a58-bfea-

866814ed3ab8/E_TUR_PUB_2008_Y.aspx?disposition=attachment.

Macao Statistics and Census Service. (2014a). Employment survey 2013(Q4). Retrieved from

http://www.dsec.gov.mo/getAttachment/562848b0-d8fb-484d-947e-

445feea80c96/E_IE_PUB_2013_Q4.aspx?disposition=attachment.

Macao Statistics and Census Service. (2014b). Household budget survey 2012/2013. Retrieved

from http://www.dsec.gov.mo/getAttachment/8cc48656-dad8-4258-bf8d-

08c9ca122168/E_IOF_PUB_2013_Y.aspx?disposition=attachment.

Macao Statistics and Census Service. (2015a). Tourism Statistics 2014 [Data file]. Retrieved

from http://www.dsec.gov.mo/getAttachment/713ce06c-c4d9-499e-9adf-

d944d7b36a5a/E_TUR_PUB_2014_Y.aspx?disposition=attachment.

Macao Statistics and Census Service. (2015b). Employment survey 2015(Q1). Retrieved

from http://www.dsec.gov.mo/getAttachment/ad99ccaf-e181-4873-869c-

0e8811c4b80f/E_IE_PUB_2015_Q1.aspx?disposition=attachment.

Macao Statistics and Census Service. (2015c). Macao in figures 2015. Retrieved

from http://www.dsec.gov.mo/getAttachment/0d4efddf-7ad1-400c-ae84-

7137d9c9df9f/E_MN_PUB_2015_Y.aspx?disposition=attachment.

Macao Statistics and Census Service. (2016). Yearbook of statistics 2015. Retrieved

from http://www.dsec.gov.mo/getAttachment/857dff76-6001-4b0e-9c5d-

50ec1ef8dec0/E_AE_PUB_2015_Y.aspx?disposition=attachment.

McCartney, G. (2008). The CAT (casino tourism) and the MICE (meetings, incentives,

conventions, exhibitions): key development considerations for the convention and

exhibition industry in Macao. Journal of Convention & Event Tourism, 9(4), 293–308.

McCartney, G., & Lei, W. I. W. (2016). House of cards—an analysis of Macao's resident support

for tourism and casino development. Tourism and Hospitality Research, 16(2), 144–157.

McCool, S.F., & Martin, S.R. (1994). Community attachment and attitudes towards tourism

development. Journal of Travel Research 32(3), 29–34.

McDowall, S., & Choi, Y. (2010). A comparative analysis of Thailand residents’ perception of

tourism’s impacts. Journal of Quality Assurance in Hospitality & Tourism, 11(1), 36–55.

Meng, F., Li, X., & Uysal, M. (2010). Tourism development and regional quality of life: the case of

China. Journal of China Tourism Research, 6(2), 164–182.

Neal, J.D. (2000). The effects of different aspects of tourism services on travelers’ quality of life:

model validation, refinement, and extension (Unpublished doctoral dissertation).

Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA.

Neal, J. D., Sirgy, M. J., & Uysal, M. (2004). Measuring the effect of tourism services on travelers’

quality of life: further validation. Social Indicators Research, 69(3), 243–277.

Perdue, R. R., Long, P. T., & Kang, Y. S. (1999). Boomtown tourism and resident quality of life:

the marketing of gaming to host community residents. Journal of Business Research,

44(3), 165–177.

ZƵĚĞǎ͕,͘E͕͘ΘVodeb, K. (2010). Perceived tourism impacts in municipalities with different

tourism concentration. Tourism, 58(2), 161–172.

Skevington, S. M., Lotfy, M., & O’Connell, K. A. (2004). The World Health Organization’s

WHOQOL-BREF quality of life assessment: psychometric properties and results of the

international field trial. A report from the WHOQOL Group. Quality of Life Research,

13(2), 299–310.

Stevens, J. (2002). Applied multivariate statistics for the social sciences (4th ed.). Mahwah, NJ:

Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Stylidis, D., Biran, A., Sit, J., & Szivas, E. M. (2014). Residents' support for tourism development:

the role of residents' place image and perceived tourism impacts. Tourism

Management, 45, 260–274.

Suhr, D. D. (2006). Proceedings from the 31st Annual SAS® Users Group International

Conference: Exploratory or Confirmatory Factor Analysis? Cary, NC: SAS Institute Inc.

Tatoglu, E., Erdal, F., Ozgur, H., & Azakli, S. (2002). Resident attitudes toward tourism impacts:

the case of Kusadasi in Turkey. International Journal of Hospitality & Tourism

Administration, 3(3), 79–100.

Vong, F. (2008). Influence of personal factors on Macao residents' gaming impact

perceptions. UNLV Gaming Research & Review Journal, 12(1), 15–28.

Vong, L. T., & Ung, A. (2012). Exploring critical factors of Macao's heritage tourism: what

heritage tourists are looking for when visiting the city's iconic heritage sites. Asia Pacific

Journal of Tourism Research, 17(3), 231–245.

Walker, J. T., & Maddan, S. (2009). Factor analysis, path analysis and structural equation

modeling. In Sean Connelly & Rebekah Linga (Eds.), Statistics in criminology and criminal

justice (pp. 269–351). Sudbury, MA: Jones and Bartlett Publishers.

Wan, Y. K. P. (2012). The social, economic and environmental impacts of casino gaming in

Macao: the community leader perspective. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 20(5), 737–

755.

Wan, Y. K. P., & Li, X. (2013). Sustainability of tourism development in Macao,

China. International Journal of Tourism Research, 15(1), 52–65.

Wong, I. A., & Rosenbaum, M. S. (2012). Beyond hardcore gambling: understanding why

mainland Chinese visit casinos in Macau. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism

Research, 36(1), 32–51.

Yu, X. (2008). Growth and degradation in the Orient’s ‘Las Vegas’: issue of environment in

Macau. International Journal of Environmental Studies, 65(6), 667–683.

Zeng, Z., Prentice, C., & King, B. E. (2014). To gamble or not? Perceptions of Macau among

mainland Chinese and Hong Kong visitors. International Journal of Tourism

Research, 16(2), 105–112.

Zheng, V., & Hung, E. P. W. (2012). Evaluating the economic impact of casino liberalization in

Macao. Journal of Gambling Studies, 28(3), 541–559.

Appendix

Questionnaire

Study on Macau residents' perception of tourism and quality of lite WR•MM~ ft aw a ~±••~~·· ~~jflj;QpJtl Jii .si:.~.:r.;klf: ~~jj~AtliUt~1! liil :t• fMlf ii tip.J;u-fJf ?Jf ;t , ifii Ji ff ;t fllJ fJJ:ff Ji. eJU!f.J1 !flfJJ;ujff flf .JZJ.f ::i:;t$~#f.-'#1t ~ Jf -t (JT/J3J 1#-itfoift >ft tfJ-Jff?ff;t • il ffiJ ;t. 1M f!. r.ltA-ft:t: tt.:11#-11:,f-J !!! fJUrffllilfOf;t fllJft,t. iJf ;t:I ltf&.lf!$ fllJ ft 1t ~41$ ft #1/Xl!f ,';tfu l!l#-/t tl;f!f/vf M12. t.Jt #II Jf ;ft-1f!J?ft>t it.ftiJJf tr.; A II fl: ~fPil ff!! ;t.IFfllJ l/IJ;ir. far ~~~#~-1f!J~~~~ffi1!:~fllJ/IM~ffffMM . ¥N~~~iff>tfllJ~#~~ff- . ~~~~&~#~i fiffMllJ , 'IA' fi:.'/1.90'J.869A215f.$ fU t JU'ti/tfiJf ;tf)fe<;QF;t fr)Jt.l!f1.\ :£. ~it tlf,f. 'if.ftIRB!MiJitM

,hrrp:l /wnw. rpp.rdul~ rr.

~~-~=~~~M%~M~••*1&~-~~~* ti1ltt: 15-0158 ::t:t'.tllit.ft: ~-* ~'It lfti ~fl! : (909) 963-1498 lfti [email protected]

~~li':l iVHHt:BiJ ~ , ~~,ZJ1£~ F'l.% ~t.Z~iftlltl~f~ff'li!iJ 1.~ *1( "*-~H~!f , 71-Jlhhi! l!Jl1l!l~-!IP!~. ~t : ~1* · ~~ . x~••~··~~-~~•t•~ · «••~•x;;r!. ~-~~~~M~•~fl•••a•~~ fj ~ ~ iHll~f~1l'!Jt1.1! :ir1l ~ ~tt:r~ ;tl.lttr.J !lt ~ . 1ht.ilt1'-*it.~'lf 1t:.ffi!ili (!l; ,Urn.§ ~ .

~*~Jf ~•••••~•~wR . ~ •••«••~••~•••w r a~• J ••~••~.M•~ ~~~m• fill~ . :.icl;I( FJl-*~\li? 5-IO?Hi.

JJ. Ft :fP .f1J:l1 mfi~·~~•aaR~••s•tr.i~•tt~~•~•~ · ·~~•~•t•~·••••~a«~•~~ ~~·~· tr.•Fl~ ••;;r~~ft•~·~«•••~•&•~~•« · ••••m•••~••~••••~•&a•••• *~* · UJ~~ ~ft-.~it.Jlfi)i':~ 8 lfli ~ . ti if iiJ-~:i!f~~J);,!EJ :tt;B'J fJ!.N! . ~ Pf att f.J '*ilt.ifU±l . ~J!UH6f,, "Foo tr.} i!~ . jE •~~•~m• , ,•~•~~•• , ••••e~~•tt•H•a•i . ~••«a~MM•~~-~ ti. WT ~HnH~ ?'l ~ ~'IA :t ;t •

~-•~••••• . ••• r•~•J . ~--~~•J~ , •~~•n r•~~•J, 1m~••·

a I Ag ree( ~ 15] ;{t ) a I Disagree ( ~ :f 15] ;tt)

Study on Macau residents' perception of tourism and quality of life

Questionnaire (roll ~ $J if) -~-~~~----~~~---~-

Please check the box 0 in accordance to your choice. (tt/ :{£ ,~ ff..1 ;i!1.fi P;: tr iJ 0 .

1. In which category is your age? ( ~JI -}k 1!!111ll ~ft ~!Ji~?) c Under 18 ( 18~ ~ r ) o 45-54 D 18-24 D 55-64 0 25-34 o 65 and above (65 :!\H.U .) c 35-44

2. How long have you lived in Macau? (~ ;(£ ~ r, ft J ~ $- ~ ?) o Less t han 7 years (j> n!' 7~ ) o 7-10 years (7-105f-) o 11-20 years (11-12 Sf-) o 21-30 years (21-30 ~ ) o Over 30 years (,i!Il.:if130-1f. )

3. Wheredoyou live? ( ~1i:/t 1l8Hl!P l Municipality of Parish of Residence P.f{l ~Ill! : Residence: !t1i Fi : o Our Lady of Fatima Parish :It .:It"' 1t II Nossa Senhora de Fatim a Pt'l>l:ootlAMM...CAll- /1 f " ·~.. I "k~I& €; u lli. ,l!,i:J'l.i.Jl.ji;;ll'Ji .llii'J'l.f.t'JJPU \-- * 1f,'.(bt;f

c: Our lady. "'' of Carmel :i~ 11: [ir; Nossa Senhora do Carma iff>f.&1~>iui:t &it'!'•>:~ o Taipa 1"ifr 7-J!!Jl.~~ j;~" W~,11.):;f.uL!< &1tilt2l l'i'iti:: ~~ii\"M~l1. a Coloane -'*J~ a Saint Francis Xavier !ll "Ji~~ :t. ((, Sao Francisco Xavier

Study on Macau residents' perception of tourism and quality of life -~~M•l••··~~-~~ft•• Your feelings about how tourism impacts your community ~~~~~~·~M~-~~~~~~~

The following statements are about the Economic Impact of Tourism in Macau. Please tell me how much you ag ree or disagree with each statement. ( ~~~-~~~~-~····*-~·~~· ········~-~~ --~·d~~··) 1 =Strongly Disagree 2 =Disagree 3 =Neither Disagree Nor Agree 4 =Agree 5 =Strongly Agree i = ~F'it.Z-fiil ~ 2= .;ffiil;t 3= ia.:ft";fl"J~t(.fiiJ~ 4= fiil~ S= ~F'ii!'fiil~ Please circle your choice. (tf Ill tll ~ ~ Jl ~ •

I. Economical Impact of Tourism (jlll ~ft i! ~ ~ ~ e}

Employment opportunity Strongly Di sagree Neither Agree Strongly lt.l'..W.-t Disagree Disagree Agree Nor Agree 4F't;ffiiJt :ffiilt iHr;rfiiJ fiil~ ~F'f fGJ ~ :t:dfiil• Tourism creates employment opportunities for Macau residents. 1 2 3 4 5 iA! iu:~ U~/HUJlt .tt~~-t. Tourism provides desirable /obs In Macau. 1 2 3 4 s Ml i1t a 1:E !HHHJP!I! 1.!!- 9lJ :r. 'ff • One of the most Important aspects of tourism is that it creates a variety of jobs for the Macau residents . 1 2 3 4 5 ···~····"~~. ~A~na1Ma~a~••aaa Revenue*· from tourists for local business and government M~1'l'~;jl'.:11!!1E-J;ifii~g{!EJ1&A Tourism brings more investment to Macau·s economy. 1 2 3 4 5 .iAUll:a•~;j! fH!U!. f1!!:'.if, Loca l businesses benefit the most from tourists. 1 2 3 4 s ;jl:.±Jt~~ffi.:.t..Jt J:J!j>_*l-7cifU/i. Tourism generates tax revenues for local government. 1 2 3 4 5 H.tiltf<~-*:JUt~i.ittt<&. Standard of living .t 76/j(.!jl Tax revenue>s from tourism are> used to Improve roads and public services for residents. 1 2 3 4 5 •~•~tt~m~~•11~~~~~*~$. Tourism helps improve the economic situation for many Macau residents. 1 2 3 4 5 MiltSWMl*•f~"alBlJ~•Ma. Our standard of living has increased due to tourist spending in Macau. 1 2 3 4 5 •~".t•••~•s••n••w~*· Cost of living !HOU: The price of many goods and services in Macau has Increased significantly because of tourism. 1 2 3 4 5 •••«~"·f ·-~-·~-~-J:~. Real estate prices in M acau have increased because of tourism. 1 2 3 4 5 Jililt :t 11. U~ 5H1!! ~ 11 ~ J:. *. The cost of living in Macau has increased because ot tourism. 1 2 3 4 5 H.tllt;t~-U~S'J ~ 16!ilJ_j:~;Jw.

Study on Macau residents' perception of tourism and quality of life Wl~M·~····~~-~~ft••

The following statement s are about Social Impact of Tourism in Macau. Please tell me how much you agree or disagree with each statement. ( ~ T-8911,itii Jt ruJjbH~hKitt:tft **~ :t±.-t-ff!J ~ • . 1~~M~.if ft4}t~ 1*il Jt ~it f6J;@; ~:f f6J ;@;. l l =Strongly Di sagree 2 =Disagree 3 =Neither Disagree Nor Agree 4 =Agree 5 = Strongly Agree 1 = ~t~;ff.I iE 2= .;ff.I~ 3= iHi;ff.l;t~f.I~ 4= f.i~ 5= ~t11\"f.lg

Please circle your choice. (lf Ill 1fl ~ ~ Jll;( •

II. Social Impact of Tourism (;b!tltt_ .. ff .f.!: i" ~~II )

Loca l service Strongly Disagree Neither Agree Strongly *~ll!Jfl.$ Disagree Disagree Agree Nor Agree ~~'it;f.Jilli ;fl"]~ iHr;fl"l IS!~ 4~-itlil~ ~.df.I~ Increased tourism provides more recreational opportunities for local residents. 1 2 3 4 5 ···~~~~*~·~~~~~~~~~. Roads and other local services are well maintai ned because of tourism. 1 2 3 4 s

T······~ft•*~--~~~-~·····ourism is a major reason for the variety of entertainment in Macau. 1 2 3 4 s ~"•«~4&•&~•kmAa•a. Social problems ;j! t-PJJJ& During the peak tourist season, I find it harder to get tickets for the theater. movies, concerts or tourism events. 1 2 3 4 .t.i.Utlff*, ~~JJl.'lfl,ij~ i 1ltHil:- 1UHt.- ·U~i".d tt1f!l s *Bli,.,~. Tourism has resulted in unpleasantly overcrowde>d hiking trails, parks, shopping places, and other public places tor local residents. 1 2 3 4 5 •••«•*~·~-M~•~• · •OO · M•WM~ftM• *.llhrl!J.J.t. l!J.~ • .+ A;f't:Jc.• Tourism contributes social problems such as crime, drug use, prostitution, and so forth in Macau. 1 2 3 4 s ••~••~"~a•~~ . ~•• · •4 · •••·

Study on Macau residents' perception of tourism and quality of life Wl~M·~····~~-~~ft••

The following statements are about Cultural Impact of Tourism in Macau. Please tell me how much you agree or disagree with each statement. ! ~ T-8911,iti!JtruJjbH~hKittt"ft**it .X 1t ff!J ~ • . 1~~M~.ifft4}t~ ~i!Jt~ Jtfiil;@; ~:f fiil ;@;. l =Strongly Di sagree 2 =Disagree 3 =Neither Disagree Nor Agree 4 =Agree 5 = Strongly Agree 1 = ~t~;ff.I iE 2= .;ff.I~ 3= iHi;ff.l;t~f.I~ 4= f.i~ 5= ~t11\"f.lg

Please circle your choice. (lf Ill 1fl ~ ~ Jll;( •

Ill. Cultural Impact of Tourism (itll :l .ft X 1t ~ ~If)

Preservation of local culture Strongly Disagree Neither Agree Strongly *.:U:.1tB'JiMf Disagree Disagree Agree Nor Agree ~~111'.;ff.I~ ;ff.I~ iHr.:fl"l JS!~ 4~~1"!~ ~~f.I~ Tourism encourages a variety of cultural activities for local residents. 1 2 3 4 5 T···~·*··~"~·~1t-~.ourism has increased residents' pride in the local cu lture in Macau. 1 2 3 4 5 T·····-~*•*•~1t"~~··ourism helps keep loca l culture alive an d ma intain cultural identity of loca l residents. 1 2 3 4 5 •••#•••**±x1t•••~•~•~•a•x-1t•f.I C"·ult ural exchange between residents and tourists • i.t~i.n:.z:.rJJ e

Study on Macau residents' perception of tourism and quality of life Wl~M·~····~~-~~ft••

The following statements are about Environmental Impact of Tourism in Macau. Please tell me how much you agree or disagree with each statement. ( ~~~-~~~-•M•••fl*- «~~~· ·••Mft~fi···~~ --~·d~~· · l l =Strongly Di sagree 2 =Disagree 3 =Neither Disagree Nor Agree 4 =Agree 5 = Strongly Agree 1 = ~t~;ff.I iE 2= .;ff.I~ 3= iHi;ff.l;t~f.I~ 4= f.i~ 5= ~t11\"f.lg

Please circle your choice. (lf Ill 1fl ~ ~ Jll;( •

IV. Environmental Impact of Tourism (~:il ;f ftlf:!t ~ ~ Wl

Pollution Strongly Disagree Neither Agree Strongly ~~ Disagree Disagree Agree Nor Agree ~~-;;ff.I~ ;fl'!~ iHr.:fl"l IS!~ 4~~1"l~ ~~f.I~ Tourism brings environmental pollution. 1 2 3 4 5 Mtill:;l:~~:\t~~. Tourism produces noise, littering, and congestion. 1 2 3 4 5 -~~~!£~~' ~-~~;fu~~~~. Tourism produces water pollution in the ocean. l 2 3 4 5 •• ;({1:/!Jlk ~ ~. Solid waste lllf!:l.Ul Tourism (e.g. restaurants, hotels) produces large quantities of waste products. 1 2 3 4 5 MlU'.Cfl:iili : 4.Q, ~/6 ) ~~.*~li*1"· Hotels, airlines, attractions, and other related tourism businesses that serve tourists throw away tons of garbage a year. l 2 3 4 5 ~~•~"~m . ~~~~ - •~*~;fu~~~~•ilt~~* ~~:f.*:Ut:!!l. Tourists' littering destroys the beauty of the landscape. 1 2 3 4 5 if< -i MHi ~ "lt :!! 1 .!Ur. :rt .ft. Preservation of wildlife and ecology lff !i f/Jtll3;fuH~ ti

Study on Macau residents' perception of tourism and quality of life -~ ~ M • l ••· ·~ ~-~~ft•• Your feelings about your quality of life IHl :M-~ft~ ~ ~ w'.if~ '1o ~

The following questions are about your satisfaction with your Quality Of Life. Please tell me how satisfied you are with each condition. C~T~~-~~~·-~~--~--~ . ff~~·~IW•d~·· · ) 1 =Very Dissatisfied 2 = Dissatisfied 3 = Neither Dissatisfied Nor Satisfied 4 =Satisfied 5 =Very Satisfied i = ~F°it.Z-it~ 2= .;flt;t 3= ~-«NU:~·~ 4= ~~ s= ~ F 'ii!"·~

Please circle you r choice. (~ I tli ~ f3l:J Ji l:J{ • How satisfied are you with the economic, social, cultural, Very Dissatisfied Neither Satisfied Very and environmental factors on your quality of life? Dissatisfied Dissatisfied Satisfied .tt•~!t'l6Xt.!lt~ . llJ:Jlfj!~ . :tt-t. j:1t;fl!'!U.t Nor Satisfied " ~ ~ ;#f i i/U[:? ~~ .:r•~ iHr.:r•• •t ~~ '*'. :t '*':f •• ~ilU Economic Factor 1 2 3 4 5 $J.1'i l1il fi Social Factor 1 2 3 4 5

Ctt*llil*u itural Facto r X1Ul:f; 1 2 3 4 5 Environmental Factor l;IU.tllil:I.' 1 2 3 4 5 Quality of life in genera I ~tt!t 761Jitit How satisfied are you with your life as a whole? 1 2 3 4 5 ilt\IHHltt1. 168'Jit •• )t!1f.I? How satisfied are you with the way you are spending your life in general? 1 2 3 4 5 ~tt••·····~•ft.t•~···)rp f.I ?

Which of the following statements best fits how you feel? ~ ~ ~~~~~~~~*~-~~~ ? a. My life is much worse than most other people's. ~ft !:UUl'..:k~.:AJ!~~. b. My life is somewhat worse than most other people's. ~ 1i<11: 71Hl'.. :k H'Od!:. c. My life is about the same as most other people's. ~li<1.t'l'6.!!!;k~~A~.:fi. d. My life is somewhat better than most otl1cr people's. ~. lil] it mtl'..:k ~ ~A~:1!1. e. My l ife is much bener lhan most other people ·s. ~~!tm tl'..*~~.AfeHH 7.