Chapter One Introduction 1.0 Introduction The concept of sustainable development has had a considerable impact on the study of tourism development, planning and management. As a subset of sustainable development theory, sustainable tourism planning has been seen by many as a means of maximising the positive and minimising the negative impacts of tourism activity on destination communities. Although the concept has received in-principle support from academia, government and industry, more critical viewpoints have emerged questioning the extent to which sustainability doctrine is actually put into tourism planning practice. Therefore this study investigated the transference of sustainable tourism theory to practice by examining the extent to which the sustainable tourism planning philosophy is utilised in the planning practices of local tourism destinations in Queensland. Additionally the study sought to develop a theoretical framework to facilitate the application of sustainability principles to local tourism destination planning. To provide a background to the research issue and objectives, this chapter begins with an overview of the recognised need for tourism destination planning, the subsequent emergence of sustainable tourism planning and the more recent arguments for utilising the strategic visioning approach to tourism destination planning. The research issue and gaps in the body of knowledge are addressed before the three research objectives of the study are articulated. Also provided is a brief overview of the research methodology and the key methods employed to address the research issue. The study context is then outlined detailing the significance of tourism to Australia and Queensland. Also examined is tourism within the Australian governmental system and more specifically local government planning for tourism in Queensland. The final section of the chapter outlines the structure of the thesis, providing a brief overview of the purpose and contents of each of the chapters. 1 1.1 Background Tourism has had a profound impact upon destinations worldwide, and the 808 million international arrivals in 2005 indicate the magnitude and economic significance of global tourist activity (World Tourism Organization [WTO], 2006). Tourism can undoubtedly create positive economic returns for destination countries; foreign exchange earnings, employment growth, tax revenues, and can substantially stimulate the economy overall (Inskeep, 1991). In the years following World War II, with the recognised beginning of mass tourism, nations, states, cities and regional areas began actively promoting themselves as tourism destinations, committing considerable funds towards tourism development (Ritchie & Crouch, 2000). However by the mid 1960s other, more cautionary and critical viewpoints about tourism were being aired (Jafari, 1990). It had become evident that along with its positive returns, tourism activity also brought many negative influences to a destination, often adversely impacting upon the natural environment and social fabric of the destination community. Concerns over ecological impacts and a wish to preserve cultural identities arose as the somewhat uncontrolled growth of tourist facilities and movements threatened natural environments, burdened the limited resources of some destinations and the economic benefits were realised to be seasonal and somewhat uncertain. As Coccossis (1996, p.1) states, “The expansion of tourism has had a profound impact on many destinations. In some areas it has revitalised local economies whilst in others it has destroyed them; in some areas it has reinforced local identity whilst in others it has destroyed customs, traditions and social relations; in some areas it has helped protect environmentally sensitive areas whilst in others it has wrought havoc with local ecosystems and local resources”. The negative impacts of tourism have primarily been attributed to inadequate or non- existent planning frameworks for tourism development. As Murphy (1985) noted, tourism was seized upon with little forethought concerning a viable tourism product, the social and environmental consequences of development, or the spill over effects into surrounding areas. The failure to proactively plan for tourism development has left many 2 destinations with a legacy of social and environmental consequences. The experience of such destinations has shown that it is often too late to reverse or redirect unwanted development once it has become established in a destination and these destinations will always suffer from environmental and social problems that are both detrimental to tourists and residents (Gunn, 1994; Hall, 1998). Therefore it has been widely advocated that tourism development should not be permitted to progress in an ad hoc manner without an overall guiding framework and predetermined strategies toward development objectives (Hall, 2000; WTO, 1994). Various tourism planning approaches have evolved over the years including the economic, physical, environmental and community approaches, and as their names indicate, have tended to focus on specific aspects of destination planning and management. However the sustainable tourism planning approach has emerged as one of the most comprehensive and accepted approaches, and can generally be viewed as encompassing the key ideals of each of the previously mentioned planning methods. The sustainable concept arose in response to broader international concerns over ecological issues. It has been advocated for the tourism sector as a possible solution to the environmental and social degradation of the industry’s resources and due to the fact that tourism is a resource dependent industry (Cooper, 1995; Murphy, 1998). The sustainable approach to tourism planning is based on the achievement of two prerequisites: a strategic and long-term orientation in tourism planning and multiple stakeholder participation in the planning process (Simpson, 2001). The first of these prerequisites requires strategic planning to supersede conventional planning approaches (Dutton & Hall, 1989). Strategy as it applies to sustainable tourism planning and development seeks to achieve three basic strategic objectives: conservation of tourism resource values; enhanced experiences of the visitors who interact with tourism resources; and the maximization of the economic, social and environmental returns to stakeholders in the host community (Hall, 2000). The second identified prerequisite is the engagement and participation of multiple stakeholder groups in the planning and decision-making process. This is considered a pivotal issue in a sustainable approach as 3 in typical planning processes stakeholders are consulted minimally near the end of the process, which leaves little chance for meaningful input into the process. Therefore authors such as Faulkner (2003) have claimed that the achievement of sustainable development objectives hinges on the adoption of a participatory model, involving the meaningful engagement of the community, along with industry stakeholders and relevant government agencies, with the objective of generating agreement on planning directions and goals. Based on these two identified prerequisites, under the sustainable approach tourism planning is strategic, that is it is proactive and adopts a long-term planning horizon, while also seeking out and being responsive to stakeholder needs (Hall, 2000; Ritchie, 1999). While the theoretical concepts of sustainable tourism development have been well addressed in the academic literature, authors have recently begun to investigate practical processes, models and frameworks so that the sustainable tourism philosophy, encompassing the previously mentioned caveats, can be implemented at the destination level. One model which is beginning to receive attention for its underpinning sustainability philosophy is the concept of strategic visioning (Faulkner, 2003; Ritchie, 1999). Strategic visioning for tourism destinations has been described as a new but important extension of the more common process of strategic planning in tourism (Ritchie, 1999). Even though the direction for tourism development is implicit in a traditional strategic planning process, strategic visioning has a stronger emphasis on bringing together the views of the many and varied stakeholders of the destination community through collaborative and participative processes with the objective of establishing directions for tourism development in the longer term so the principles of sustainable tourism development are adopted as a fundamental philosophical foundation for the planning process (Ritchie, 1999). The process is founded on destination stakeholders being actively involved in decision making and planning for future development, through a publicly driven process based on stakeholder values and consensus. This consensus is expressed through the ‘sharing of a common vision’ which provides an agreed benchmark towards which both the general community and the tourism sector can more effectively direct their efforts (Faulkner, 2003; Ritchie, 1999). 4 While the ideal vision may not always be realized, the process does provide a means for ensuring that a longer-term perspective informs day-to-day decision-making, as opposed to ad hoc and centralised decision-making, which is an often-cited problem in tourism planning. Although the concept of strategic visioning as a tourism destination planning process is relatively new, its theoretical underpinnings and empirical evidence from