FINAL FINAL RESEARCH PROP 2010

Tourism Developments and the Community of Pear Tree Bottom

Research Methodologies

RES 3001

Research Proposal

Tourism Developments and the Community in Pear Tree Bottom, Saint Ann

Prepared by:

Camille Bradshaw 0601622

Romaine Suban 0705893

Shaneeke Edwards 0800965

Abbie-Gayle Johnson 0705578

Shawna Malcolm

Prepared for:

Mr. Karlene Gordon

A project submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the Bachelor of

Science Degree in Hospitality and Tourism Management with a major in Tourism

Management

University of Technology, Jamaica

School of Hospitality and Tourism Management

Saint Andrew, Jamaica

December


TABLE OF CONTENTS

CHAPTER ONE

Introduction……………………………………………………………………………..

Statement of the Problem……………………………………………………………….

Purpose of Study………………………………………………………………………..

Research Objectives…………………………………………………………………….

Research Questions……………………………………………………………………..

Assumptions…………………………………………………………………………….

Significance of the Study……………………………………………………………….

Delimitations of the Study………………………………………………………………

Limitations of the Study………………………………………………………………..

Definition of Terms……………………………………………………………………..

CHAPTER TWO

Review of Related Literature…………………………………………………………...

CHAPTER THREE

Research Design and Methodology……………………………………………………

Population and Sample………………………………………………………………..

Sampling Technique…………………………………………………………………..

Instrument Design……………………………………………………………………...

Data Collection and Treatment of Data……………………………………………….

Ethical Issues………………………………………………………………………….


APPENDIX……………………………………………………………………………

Appendix A: Questionnaire …………………………………………………………..

Appendix B: Interview Schedule and Questions……………………………………….

Appendix C: Questionnaire Cover Letter …………………………………………….

Appendix D: Informed Consent Letter……………………………………………….

REFERENCES………………………………………………………………………...


CHAPTER ONE

Introduction

In this era of globalization and technology, tourism has become one of the fastest

growing industries worldwide. According to the United Nations World Tourism

Organization, ‘tourism which encompasses the activities of persons travelling to and

staying in places outside their usual environment for less than a year for leisure or

business, has seen an increase in arrivals internationally from 25 to 806 million

travelers from 1950 to 2005’. This diverse industry has contributed to many

economies’ well-being especially that of developing countries. However, there have

been global changes and impacts on destinations resulting from numerous tourism

developments which affect the host country socially, culturally and economically.

Jamaica recognizes tourism as the leading exporting industry. The high presence of

mass tourism has placed much strain on the country’s overall development which is

quite evident in Saint Ann specifically in the small community of Pear Tree Bottom

which lies just ten minutes outside Discovery and Runaway Bay along the north coast.

Pear Tree Bottom, which runs along the Pear Tree Bottom River, is home to

the just over one hundred residents who are dependent on each other and adapt to a

simple lifestyle of pursuing a livelihood in fishing by the coast/community’s fishing

village, operating small establishments like shops or working in low to medium

paying jobs.

The undeveloped community of Pear Tree Bottom is also considered to be a ‘unique

feature that is equivalent to no other on the north coast due to its coastal ecosystem

(wetland)’, according to Bacon & Alleng (1991). This natural wonder and area of


scenic beauty, once home to indigenous and endemic wildlife, is now a prime

investment spot for many foreigners. The tourism developments emerging in this area

consist of development of a resort and infrastructure that is deemed to have caused an

imbalance socially, economically and culturally in the community especially among

residents. Esther Figueroa, producer of the documentary, ‘Jamaica for Sale’, pointed

out that these developments have done more harm than good; a point also supported

by the National Environmental Planning Agency.

Statement of the Problem

How do Tourism Developments in Jamaica impact the socio-economic livelihood of

the community of Pear Tree Bottom, St. Ann?

Purpose of Study

The goal of this study is to;

1. Contribute to the body of literature in the field of Hospitality and Tourism and

the local citizens of the Peer Tree Bottom Community.

2. To refine our understanding of Tourism Developments and the possible

impacts to society specifically Peer Tree Bottom Community.

3. To gain information on the attitude and responses from the Community as it

relates to the development of resort, infrastructure and the extent to which they

are affected either positively or negatively.

Research Questions

What are some of the challenges experienced by the community from the

development of attractions?


In what way development of resorts infringe on the livelihood of the

community?

How has the development of restaurants affect the income of the Per Tree

Bottom community?

What are the community attitudes toward the wave of Tourism developments

in St. Ann’s Bay?

How do infrastructural developments impact the community’s socio-

economical lifestyle?

Significance of the Study

The study has the potential to benefit three main groups.

The study may assist teachers and students during lectures as it

supplies reference and other valuable and meaningful data.

Researchers can be provided with a basis for further research.

Government can better formulate future development plans and laws

that will ensure sustainable tourism development.

Owners of entities within the industry may increase awareness of their

social responsibility and become better stewards and contributors to

the industry.

Assumptions

The data will be collected based on the following:

1 The respondents will answer questions honestly and accurately without fear of

intimidation or political bias;

2 The data collection process will be free of economic (monetary) and social

bribes;


3 The community will maintain a spirit of tranquillity; therefore, one will not

expect sudden social uprisings or unrest.

Limitations

The study will be limited to these four areas of investigation: construction of

hotels, waste management practices, community tourism and energy management.

Other limitations may be seen in the methods used to collect data, interview and focus

groups as they can cause difficulty in drawing conclusions generally. The sample size

selected for this research would be too small to be a valuable representative of the

population. Others include the competence of the researcher in order to retrieve

reliable and valid data and citizens’ reluctance to give information because of fear and

community culture.

DelimitationsThe study will specifically cover the impact of infrastructural development,

construction of hotels; community tourism and waste management have on the

economic life of citizens in the Peer Tree Bottom Community. Studies will not be

conducted in any other region or in no other form of tourism development.

Definition of Terms

Citizens- inhabitants of a city or town. (Oxford Dictionary-University Press

2010)

Development- The economic advancement of a region or people, esp. one

currently under-developed. (Oxford University Press 2010)

Economic life- Relating to the allocation and management of resources,

financial or otherwise during one’s existence. (J. Craven)


The Peer Tree Bottom Community- a developing community comprised of

approximately 1,500 persons mainly working class persons on the northeast

coast of Saint James, in close proximity to tourist areas such as

accommodations, attractions and food establishments.

Sustainable tourism- tourism which is economically viable but does not

destroy the resources on which the future of tourism will depend, notably the

physical environment and the social fabric of the host community. (J.

Swarbrooke)

Tourism- the activities of a person travelling outside his or her usual

environment for less than a specified period of time and whose main purpose

of travel is other than the exercise of an activity remunerated from the place

visited. (World Tourism Organisation)

Tourism Development – speaks to the infrastructural growth of hotels, resorts

attractions, transportation, roads, restaurants in an area which is geared

towards the benefit of the tourist and the host communities.

Tourism Industry- The collection of all- collaborative firms and organizations

which perform specific activities directed at satisfying the particular needs of

tourist.

Environment – external conditions which determine modifications in the

development of organic life

Extinct – extinguished, put out; no longer existing; dead

Impact – to press or drive forcibly together

Livelihood – a means of living, sustenance


JET – Jamaica Environmental Trust

EIA- Environmental Impact Assessment

JTB – Jamaica Tourist Board

“The wetland plays an important role as a nursery for fish and estuarine species and

this highlights the need to protect the integrity of the swamp.” (p. 42, EIA)

We, the undersigned, think that the coastal ecosystem at Pear Tree Bottom is of local,

national and international importance as a unique and significant example of

Jamaica’s natural heritage, as a research site for marine and coastal ecology, as

wildlife habitat, as a traditional fishing beach for a small local population, and as a

quiet place of refuge and relaxation for local residents and visitors alike.

The significance of this special natural area can not be underestimated, especially in

light of the collective impacts of the North Coast highway and other developments

planned and in progress on the north coast of Jamaica.

With its forested hillsides sloping to a freshwater marsh; the river, mangroves, and

sandy bays interspersed with rocky shoreline; seagrass beds and spectacular coral

reefs, Pear Tree Bottom provides the following ecosystem services:


CHAPTER TWO

Literature Review

In what way does the development of resorts infringe on the livelihood of the Pee

Tree Bottom Community?


Tourism in Jamaica is the leading source of economic income and over the past years,

the country has seen an influx of big hotels being constructed. Although having bigger

and better hotels increases the chances of tourists coming to the county, we at times

forget about the people of the communities in which these hotels are constructed. The

community of Pear Tree Bottom, St. Ann is a community, and there a now a string of

hotels being constructed there. In this review of Literature, several articles will be

discussed, reporting on how the development of tourism, and hotel resorts across the

world, has infringed (affected) on the livelihood of the citizens of the communities

they are located in.

In the first article titled, “Tourism, Indigenous Communities and the Environment”

by Juline R. Dulnuan and was written in 2008. Dulnuan did her research on Sagada, a

mountain province situated in the Cordillera Administrative Region (CAR) in

Northern Luzon. From her research, Dulnuan (2008) found the following:

“Tourism-related businesses like restaurant operations handcraft making, sales of

antiques and wood carvings as well as tour guiding, started. In 1994, the Department

of Tourism, recognizing the tourism potential of the place, proposed the construction

of a Sagada Youth Hostel but the people objected saying funds should be allotted to

more urgent priority concerns of the community like the building of roads and water

systems” (pg. 16). She stated, “While tourism has provided jobs, the economic gains

are not equitably distributed with the farmers who nurture what the tourists come to

see, not getting as much benefits as the entrepreneurs” (pg. 17). Essentially, the

research revealed that it is the entrepreneurs who have benefited from tourism the

most and not the locals.

This research was based on a study funded by the Philippine APEC Study Center

Network (PASCN). Segada at the time had a population of 10,930 people in 2,158


households. Interviews were done with 50 people throughout the province. A survey

was also developed, that had 200 participants. The survey used to tool “questionnaire”

to gather information. Questionnaires were randomly handed out to small business

owners and workers. Occupation of participants was not shared, but all were

employed and over the age of eighteen (18).

The second article is titled “Empowerment Of Communities For Sustainable Tourism

Development: Case Of Croatia,” and written by Lidija Petrić. In this article Petrić

speaks basically on ways in which tourism in Croatia has risen, how it affects the

people of the country, and how they plan on sustaining it. According to Petrić

(2007), “The struggle between different exogenous interest groups

and local people to control resources has often been ignored by

both local and central governments” (pg. 438). She stated, “In

Croatian tourist destinations where local population is not

empowered in a real sense, involvement is restricted to elites in the

community, resulting in their interests being considered rather than

the interests of the community itself” (pg. 439). Basically, this

article’s main point is that only select members of these

communities benefit directly from tourism.

A public census in 2001 revealed that 4,437,460 persons lived in the

Croatia. This research was conducted in the 20 countries (The counties are primary

territorial subdivisions of the Republic of Croatia) across the country in various resort

areas. These resort areas were originally small undeveloped communities that had

been overtaken by development. The primary occupations of the participants were

farmers and fishermen, and methods of data collection were strictly questionnaires.

No specific as to household size or income was revealed.


The third article is titled “The Impact Of Tourism In China On Local

Communities,” and was written in 2002 by Yiping Li from The University of Hong

Kong. This article is essentially a discussion on the social, cultural, economic and

environmental effect of tourism development on local communities in China. In the

article Li conducted a study in the Chinese community of Shenzhen. According to Li

(2002) “The inflow of outside visitors brought economic benefits, but also led to

social changes, and the rapid growth and change in Shenzhen had attracted not only

tourists but also thousands of migrant workers who dreamed of making a better living

in the special economic zone” (pg. 474). There were negative effects of this change

though. Li stated “The government was concerned that some migrant workers might

become beggars, or even turn to crime when their dreams were not realized” (pg.

475). So we therefore see that there were positive effects of tourism on Shenzhen, but

government officials are afraid that there will be negative affects for members of the

community already living there, and persons who want to come and work.

This study was as stated before conducted in Shenzhen, which is a city of sub-

provincial administrative status in southern China's Guangdong province, with a

population of 8,912,300. The sample size was 300 migrant workers from the Pearl

River Delta. The results of the study basically indicated that the migrant workers did

not believe they were being treated justly, as it relates to opportunities of financial

growth, as only big businesses made the most money ad controlled a greater share of

the market.

The fourth article is titled “Ecotourism In Kenya: The Vulnerability Of

Communities,” and written by Christopher R.J. Southgate. Southgate (2006) found the

following:


“Over the past decade, spurred by the tourism potential that had long eluded the

Maasai, and in part due to the increased control over resources bestowed by group

ranch legislation, the Maasai have become increasingly proactive in initiating tourism

development initiatives. Supporting the idea of ‘community participation’ in wildlife

conservation, the Kenya Wildlife Service (KWS) has actively supported ecotourism

initiatives around Amboseli National Park.” This article speaks on how with the aid of

government officials, members of the Maasai tribe in Kenya have benefited from

Tourism.

The Maasai Tribe has a population of approximately 453,000 persons. The study was

done using 50 persons in the tribe. Group interviews were done with the participants

as many of them were illiterate, and all of them were farmers. The researched lacked

information on the methodology.

The fifth article is titled “Pathway In The Periphery: Tourism To Indigenous

Communities In Panama” and written by Steven G. Snow. According to Snow (2000),

“In this era of neoliberal economic policies, tourism offers developing nations a rare

opportunity for a source of economic growth that can substantially benefit the poorest

of the poor: indigenous peoples” (pg. 732) He stated, “While there are some

unavoidable negative effects associated with tourism, indigenous communities can

ameliorate some problems by formulating a clear plan and educating the members of

their communities to its contents. Benefits are maximized when indigenous peoples

are informed and guided by their own leaders.” (pg. 732). Essentially, Snow’s view is

that it is the government who should regulate the market share of the community, and

not let the entrepreneurs monopolize the town. Panama’s population is 3,360,474

people, and this researcher conducted the study across the country, using in depths


structured interviews with community based tourism enterprises. No more

information was given on the methodology.

The sixth article and final article is titled “Sustainable Tourism Development: A Case

Study Of North Cyprus” and written by Mehmet Altinay and Kashif Hussain. Mehmet

Altinay and Kashif Hussain (2005) state:

“The present study is primarily focused on the virgin part of North Cyprus in which

investors are most interested. The public and private sector is aware of the boom in

the construction sector and investors know very well what restrictions are imposed to

invest in North Cyprus, especially foreign investors. It is a hot issue for investors that

the state is preparing an emergency plan to preserve the environment because of too

much construction going on in the country” (pg. 279).

Basically, this article speaks on how investors want to build resorts on the land in

North Cyprus, and the citizens believe if this happens, they will monopolize the

district, and their livelihood may be threatened.

Northern Cyprus has a population of 265,100, and the researchers again used the

popular research technique of sampling, using questionnaires. A sample size of 250

persons was chosen randomly, and questionnaires were handed out & collected on

spot as to greater results. The participants were employed and all between the ages of

twenty (20) and fifty (50). The findings from the research gave a clear understanding

of the participant’s feelings towards tourism in the area, whereas they at the time had

control of their businesses, but believed that the foreign investors would soon

monopolize the area.

With these prior studies reviewed, it is evident that there of course are positive and

negative effects of tourism on small communities. For some it brings them a sense of

well being and worth, and for others, it is a monopoly, and only the investor’s people


who have created their businesses benefit. The researchers believed that it is the

government who should regulate the ownership of businesses in the town, and not let

investors get a change to own (monopolize) the area. It is evident that research on

Pear Tree Bottom, St. Ann is relevant and needs to be pursued, to find out to what

extent the livelihood of fishermen in the community and other members will be

affected, and how it can be sustained.

What is the community’s attitude towards the wave of tourism developments in

St Ann’s Bay?

The fishing community of Pear Tree Bottom can be considered as one that has had no

tourism developments prior to the ultimate construction of Gran Bahia Principe and

later other tourism entities in that region. Being a small community located on the

north coast, Pear Tree Bottom was known to host one of the few Jamaican indigenous

species. But this was seen as having little or even no importance to the primary

investors, management of Gran Bahia Principe Resort (a Spanish hotel).Esther

Figueroa and others representing the National Environment and Planning Agency

expressed the view that these tourism developments have done more harm than good.

This belief led to the production of the film, ‘Jamaica for Sale’ where the view was

publicly expressed. Mowforth (2003) endorsed Katherine Whitehorn’s statement

written in the UK Guardian that the only unspoilt village is one no outsider has ever

visited, not even you.

As reported by the World Tourism Organization, tourism is the activities of a

person travelling outside his or her usual environment for less than a specified period

of time and whose main purpose of travel is other than the exercise of an activity

remunerated from the place visited. Swarbrook (1999) defined tourism developments


as viable economic advancements that contribute to tourism in a host region. To a

specific region that knows nothing about tourism or even its developments,

acceptance by the host community like Pear Tree Bottom may be difficult. Lepp

(2008) pointed out that many problems will follow based on his report of similar

experiences in Bigodi, Uganda. Very little research has been done to assess these

developments and possible effects in this particular region of Pear Tree Bottom, St.

Ann. The purpose of this paper is to report the community’s attitude towards tourism

developments.

Lepp (2008) in his article on “Attitudes Towards Initial Tourism Development

in a Community with No Prior Tourism Experience: The Case of Bigodi, Uganda”,

observed that the community’s attitude may be negative due to unfamiliarity and what

is that to be invasion. This mature researcher acknowledged that this behaviour would

result in the community becoming more protective of its valuable assets, land and

resources; assets that were needed for development. More results showed that this

attitude illustrated by residents was also caused by previous situations and not

specifically tourism’s introduction to Bigodi. On the contrary, Lindberg and Johnson

(1997) were of the firm belief that tourism would be accepted as it addresses the need

for economic development. Despite the fact that this study was based in Uganda, in a

rural agricultural village, the situation is applicable to many other places that

experience this new idea.

In order for Lepp (2008) to examine the attitude of residents and other related

tourism bodies to these new developments in Bigodi, Uganda, he had to conduct in

depth interviews (formal and informal) and collect statistics and other relevant

information as well as develop focus groups among thirteen tourism officials and

residents within the community. Since the research was qualitative in nature, data was


collected over a two year period by this knowledgeable researcher who gained

additional experience in other parts of Uganda in previous years. Although not readily

accepted to the new environment, he had to adjust and develop relationships with the

environment which includes the residents. Lepp revealed that the attitude of the

community was more complex than it seemed as behavior had existed before and

during and even after the emergence of tourism when signs of negativity became

more apparent.

Nevertheless Jackson and Inbakaran (2006) identified the community

segments that displayed attitudes, perceptions and opinions of tourism growth and

development in the piece, “Evaluating Residents’ Attitudes and Intentions to Act

towards Tourism Development in Regional Victoria, Australia”. The article makes

clear the fact that the negative attitude towards tourism developments were clearly

exhibited by persons who resided in the area for a lengthy time and are directly

affected. However these developments were accepted by the majority due to the

economic benefits derived by the developed destination. Community segments in

relation to tourism can be categorized in the following groups: lovers, haters, neutrals,

cautious, realists, support for a reason and disagreed; realists being the highest present

in Victoria and disagreed residents being the lowest existing.

Victoria, Australia covers a wide geographical area and so Jackson and

Inbakaran (2006) had to conduct mostly quantitative research in strictly five tourist

regions of varying densities from urban to rural areas. In a quest to achieve close

balance in the research of a random sample of 429 residents, a 42:58 male to female

ratio existed. Research data was collected from persons who were educated married

and had families. Data was tabulated for further analysis and comparisons to previous

research. Though reactions may differ, a relationship has been established between


pro-tourism intentions to act (positions measures of tourism) towards tourism

developments.

Kaltenborn, Bierke, et al (2008) have endorsed the view shared by Jackson

and Inbakaran (2006). In their work, “Resident Attitudes Towards Mountain Second-

Home Tourism Development in Norway: The Effects of Environment Attitudes

(2008) has maintained the thought that economic dependency is directly related to

tourism developments. This research demonstrated that it is based on economic

benefits that reduction in negativity is possible. To illustrate this is the presence of

mass tourism in Jamaica on the north coast to aid in job opportunities and foreign

exchange during time of recession and more importantly aid in loan payments to

reduce the country’s deficit.

A proper examination of tourism developments and residents’ attitudes in

Southeast Norway needed a structured data collection method. In the areas of Oyer

and Vestre Slidre, structured questionnaires were mailed to a sample of 1000

registered adults. The research revealed that residents with a higher ‘ecocentric

orientation’ (Kaltenborn (2008:672) are less supportive of future plans for future

second-home tourism development in the mountains than residents with a lower

ecocentric score.

It is true that no research regarding the community’s attitude towards tourism

developments has not been conducted on a regional level before that of Ritchie and

Inkari in 2006. The research article, “ Host Community Attitudes towards Tourism

and Cultural Tourism Developments: the case of the Lewes District, Southern

England, Ritchie and Ankara (2006) presented negative attitudes towards the wave of

development as they all brought along a negative effect no matter how good the idea

was perceived to be: example: construction of hotels versus destruction of land. These


researchers have concluded that this area of study is more detailed than it seems; it is

more than a logical answer as the work of Doxey (1975) puts it. Beliefs vary for

different reasons.

Data for Ritchie’s and Inkari’s (2006) research was collected by 273 self-

completed questionnaires of fifty questions with answers to be given based on a likert

scale. The systematic sampling methods used allowed every twenty-first household to

qualify and the eighth one started the sampling procedure. These two professionals in

the area of service and tourism management stated that views vary and segmentation

is critical if one wants to understand attitude towards tourism development more in

depth. Against the findings retrieved from the quantitative research conducted, it can

be declared that benefits of tourism must be equal in order to ensure high levels of

support; a view similarly expressed by Mowforth (2003).

A more in depth analysis conducted by Sharma and Dyer implied that future

tourism growth needs to be aligned with residents’ desires. These two researchers in

their article, “Residents’ Involvement in Tourism and Their Perceptions of Tourism

Impacts”, drew comparisons between those who were thought to have gained benefits

from tourism and those who did not. The focus was primarily on the attitudes

expressed by both parties. The difference has cemented the suggestion of Allen et al

(1998:16) ‘for a tourism based economy to sustain itself in local communities, the

residents must be willing partners in the process’.

This meaningful research conducted by Sharma and Dyer was done in the

Sunshine Coast region of Australia. The 732 residents in the area, most of who where

directly working in the tourism industry, were asked to give responses to the

questionnaires that were issued in the area. Though the response rate was slow, all

managed to complete the questionnaires before the due date provided. Based on the


benefits (magnitude and type) received from tourism there is a difference in attitude

level, whether negative or positive) of residents.

This diverse industry has contributed to the many economies’ well-being

especially developing countries. In order for tourism to survive it must be in the long

term, Sisman (1994:60) suggested that there must be good environmental practice,

socially and physically, and profitability in order to ensure long term advantages. This

is a form of sustainable tourism development that values not only the conservation of

nature but also the attitude and involvement of the people of the host community.

Jayawardena (2008) and others in their study on the economic effects and sustainable

development of the travel and tourism industry in Niagara, Canada prove that the

community’s attitude (and sustainable tourism development) is of great importance.

This is one of the essential elements needed to enhance the competitiveness of

businesses in the tourism industry whilst decreasing or eliminating the need for

possible uproars and confrontations. This study with findings received from elite

discussions involving 47 experts concluded that ‘there is evidence that societal

attitudes toward the environment in the Western countries have become less

consumptive and “anthropocentric” and more environmentally benign and

“ecocentric” ((Dunlap and Van Liere, 1978; Dunlap et al., 2000; Van Liere and

Dunlap, 1980)’.

Over the years, different researchers have conducted a mixture of quantitative

and qualitative studies worldwide, analyzing closely the relationship between tourism

developments and community’s attitudes. Firstly, the relationship between the two

variables may prove to be negative due to other problems that existed or were faced

before the existence of this invisible export. On the other hand, a positive correlation

may exist between the two based on different perceptions and closeness to the


industry (direct benefits). Furthermore, it is salient to note that though these benefits

may exist and the association may be of a positive nature, there are drawbacks

existing associated with these tourism developments. It is therefore imperative that in

this era of increased dependence of tourism in developing countries that close

attention be placed on the balancing of the three elements for sustainability:

environment, economy and most importantly the host community and its attitude.

How do infrastructural developments impact the community socio-economically?

Having a good infrastructure is vital to a country’s development and image especially

one that is considered as a premier tourism destination like Jamaica. Infrastructure is

the essential facilities, services and organizational structure in a region. This includes

transportation, condition of roads, availability and access of essentials such as water

and power supply and tourism facilities and services. In Jamaica, a country that is

dependent on tourism, transportation systems and public utilities are essential for the

economic vitality of our businesses and communities. This is a fact that is applicable

to any tourism destination worldwide.

In the article, “The Social Impact of Tourism on Singapore”, Khan, Seng and Cheong

(1990) seek to assess the social impact of tourism both positive and negative to the

host region of small, developed Singapore as well as its impact on economic activities

through the improvement of various infrastructural facilities. The authors agreed that

the status of the community cannot be lifted until there is a planned, interactive

approach is taken to include these facilities. Though there may be negative social

impacts resulting such as prostitution, the benefits of tourism to individuals had

outweighed the costs and implications based on the research findings. There had been


an increase in transport and communications, medical facilities, cultural facilities and

shopping and recreational facilities. The infrastructural developments gave Singapore

the reputation of having the world’s best airport and tallest hotel and a clean and

beautiful city image which more than fifty six percent (56%) of the respondents

agreed to. Tourism gave residents a feeling of pride and consciousness as majority of

the tourists, tourism planners and tourism facility providers respected the culture and

traditional atmosphere.

Khan, et al (1990) concluded that the implications of tourism developments in

Singapore were deemed to be minimal based on resident’s perceptions and optimism

for the future and not a full measure of the real social impact on this destination; a

small destination that was still relatively new to this phenomena having very few

attractions. This was concluded based on data collected from an opinion survey

conducted from April to June among 490 households of which fifty-five percent

(55%) were males and forty-five percent (45%) females and a third being between the

ages of 18 and 28. The two- stage stratified procedure was executed in areas that were

close to or considered tourist areas; seventy-percent of the sample consisted of well-

educated persons and were affected by tourism. The questionnaires and interviews

included an overview of personal background, effects of tourism on the society at the

present time and the future of tourism in that region. The data gathered was presented

in charts, tables and summary statistics such as mean and frequency distributions

charts expressed in percentage format.

There are other aspects of infrastructural developments that may arise in an area that

plans to or is pursuing tourism. Henderson (2008) in her article, “Transport and

Tourism Destination Development: an Indonesian Perspective”, endorsed the view

that transportation being an aspect of infrastructural development is a critical


consideration to facilitate progress whereas its absence acts as a barrier to a

community and those affected by it. The article also examined the implications that

the European Union ban would have on airlines going to Indonesia. Though this may

be a broad view and not directly applicable to Pear Tree Bottom as it speaks to airlift

which is not in that community, other researchers share the view of infrastructural

developments being a facilitator in similar communities like Pear Tree Bottom. These

researchers include Sharma, et al (2008) who assessed the correlation between

residents’ concerns and the actual impact of tourism.

Like Khan (1990), Sharma, et al (2008) in their article, “Exploring Residents’

Perceptions of the Social Impacts of Tourism on the Sunshine Coast, Australia”, they

identified residents’ perceptions of the social impacts and concerns that arose from

tourism in coastal areas that were high in tourist activity. It was revealed that though

tourism had helped to uplift the city, it had the highest impact on traffic congestion

especially in areas that lacked roads and transportation; response given by 92% of the

respondents to the research. This was due to improper planning. This Henderson

(2008) described as a barrier to the community especially in one that is an important

ventral business district and an urban destination. Sharma (2008) revealed in the

research findings that in addition to traffic congestion, noise, pollution and crime were

other factors that caused residents to not support the benefits from tourism.

In gathering information on the residents’ perceptions, Sharma (2008) utilized the

survey approach which used a five- point scale (strongly disagree to strongly agree)

and categories of social concern such as school, crime, recreation, culture, economic

development, transportation and surrounding environment. The respondents to the


surveys were randomly selected and resided in areas that were either coastal, semi-

coastal or hinterland areas. Out of the 732 respondents from the 5000 surveys,

majority were over 34 years old and over 50% lived on the Sunshine Coast for more

than 10 years. Eighty-nine percent (89%) of the respondents indicated their

satisfaction with the quality of life with 41% benefitting from tourism. From the

findings that were tabulated, with calculated number of respondents, mean and

percentage, over 93% were concerned about the transportation and surrounding

environment (infrastructural developments). This was mainly due to the negative

effects that infrastructural planning can have on the environment. Reviews of

academic scholarly journals were also done to assist Sharma’s research.

Recently, Dutta Roy and Maheshwari (2009) in their article, “Infrastructural

Development Basis for Sports Event-Commonwealth Games 2010-New Delhi”,

observed the link between the growth of sports tourism in Delhi, India- an emerging

but still undeveloped city, and the development of infrastructural developments that

gave the city a new appearance earlier this year. This attractive destination is focused

on sustained growth and has not received such a large-scale upgrade to the city’s

infrastructure in years. The two authors in their research stated that destinations use

this as a means of development not for its own sake, but because it is a means to a

desired end in terms of returns. This is a quite evident in Jamaica, clearly seen in Pear

Tree Bottom, as it continues to attract and accept foreign investments to the island

yearly.

For a city that has not undergone these massive developments, inclusive of street and

road developments, public transportation, water supply and services and airport

infrastructure in a while, it was seen that these developments were made to meet

international standards. These were the standards stipulated by the board in charge of


the Commonwealth Games 2010. These developments facilitated progress as shared

by Henderson (2008). According to Dutta Roy and Maheshwari (2009), in order to

capture the truly international experience, the planning process had to include the

input and the skills of those who knew the region best-its locals. Though these

developments may be beneficial to the host community, when areas like Pear Tree

Bottom and New Delhi are closely observed one may realize that these were mainly

created for the convenience of tourists and not necessarily the residents.

In order for Dutta Roy and Maheshwari (2009) to develop a holistic conclusion, they

had to base the research on secondary sources of information. Data was gathered from

various authors who had analyzed the impact of sports, sports tourism and events in

London and Canada mainly in the 21st century. The findings which were similar to his

views were also reflected in a recent empirical research conducted by Uppal (2009).

To get a clearer view, Dutta Roy (2009) had to collect statistical data based on

categories such as the number of street and road development, public transport, sports

facilities, energy resources, water supply services, airport infrastructure and health

facilities; all categories showed an increase in quality and quantity.

In the article by Catherine M. Pickering (2005), “Indirect Impact of Nature Based

Tourism and Recreation,” she looked at tourism and recreation in protected areas that

results in a range of indirect impacts on the environment, including facilitating the

spread of weeds. This research was done to examine the associations between tourism

infrastructure and the diversity and frequency of exotic plants in a large and popular

protected area in south-eastern Australia, The Kosciuszko National Park to be exact.

Based on the studies done Pickering noted that tourism and recreation in protected

areas is increasing globally and in Australia, with nature-based tourism in particular,

this is a fast growing sector of the tourism industry. In Australia, on a yearly basis


there are an estimated 84 million visits to protected areas. Tourism may provide

considerable economic benefits to communities but the growing number of visitors

inevitably causes negative environmental impacts. Some of the most severe impacts

are associated with the provision, maintenance and use of tourism infrastructure. In

the Pear Tree Bottom Community, in relation to the research done in Australia, results

have shown that the infrastructural development due to tourism has however

positively impacted and improved community’s well-being in respect to their culture

and traditional environment.

Pickering concluded in her research that weeds are an important indirect impact of

nature-based tourism and recreation. They benefit from disturbance to vegetation and

soils are associated with visitor use and infrastructure in protected areas. This was

concluded based on data found from vegetation surveys conducted in several different

sites. The data was analyzed using a Chi-Square statistics to test if there were

differences in number of species or frequency between natural vegetation and areas

affected by tourism infrastructure. Tables were used to display data retrieved from the

research on the number of exotic species from 18 vegetation surveys conducted

between 1986 and 2004 associated with different types of tourism infrastructure, in

the Kosciuszko National Park, Australia. Data was represented on summary statistics

such as mean and frequency distributions charts expressed in percentage format.

Edna Mrnjavac and Robert Marsanic in their article on “Intelligent Transportation

Systems in Improving Traffic Flow in Tourism Destinations,” discussed the impact

that the rapid growth and development of motorization combined with relatively small

investments made to improving transportation infrastructure in cities, as well as in


tourism destinations, has led to serious problems in the unobstructed movement of

vehicles in public traffic areas. In the article Marsanic and Mrnjavac also discussed

the constraining effect that transportation development of tourism has on tourism

regions. They addressed the care that should be taken to ensure that transportation

infrastructure and equipment do not degrade tourism attractions and nature and that

the emission of harmful gases, substances and noise is monitored to prevent

compromising the quality level of tourism. Mobility in the Pear Tree Bottom

community is a challenge and is in need of proper development, however, it is also a

major concern as it may cause damage to flora and fauna seeing that this area is a

fragile area. Marsanic and Mrnjavac studies imply that transportation is to be

organized so it will make tourism facilities and services accessible and will contribute

to achieving the fundamental goals of tourism development. They implied that

establishing an Intelligent Transportation System in the urban and tourism centers to

ensure greater efficiency in mobility of people and goods.

In their closing remarks, Marsanic and Mrnjavac concluded that the implementation of

the Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) is an effective and efficient application

and the use of IT technologies can improve the performance of transportation systems

and enhance the overall quality of life. . The ITS concept represents a

comprehensively developed system that will provide traveller/motorist information,

managing transportation demands and flows, managing fleets and city logistics,

ensuring the safety and security of motorists and travellers. This conclusion was

derived from data collected from surveys and interviews conducted. Data has been

represented on charts and tables that show percentage figures based on traffic flow

and parking management before and after the implementation of the Intelligent

Transportation System.


Gabriela Prelipcean and Mircea Boscoianu in their article on “Public-Private

Partnership Financing in Tourism Infrastructure in the Aftermath of the Global

Crisis,” in comparison to the article by Catherine Pickering, discussed that the

understanding of the new role of the Public-Private Partnership (PPP) in sustainable

tourism financing is based on the government strategy of re-launched of tourism

sector and is related on a new philosophy of employment in tourism enterprise and a

good management of human resource, an adequate marketing strategy in this sector,

the tax policy on tourism income or profits, investment in infrastructure, directly or

through support to other sector. Boscoianu and Prelipcean implied that the use of PPP

in the tourism sector could overcome “infrastructure bottlenecks and hasten

infrastructure development.” Infrastructural development should be a planned process

as it can result in harm to environment, e.g. developments being made in the Pear

Tree Bottom Community needs to be planned in order to protect the environment and

residents living there. In this case, government provides the administrative backup to

infrastructure projects and the private sector partners provides finances and manages

these projects.

Boscoianu and Prelipcean concluded their review by implying that the main

benefits of PPPs are related to the development of new destinations,

to provide/augment necessary amenities, to preservation of

heritage sites, and to promotion and marketing of destinations. It

was noted that tourism infrastructure is one of the most critical

components that can be financed jointly, public private involvement

can help development and beautification of tourism projects, guides

private enterprises into areas and programs in which it would be

more successful. Surveys and Interviews were conducted in order to


gather these data. The data were represented tables and graphs

showing the state of research of the impact of the global downturn

on PPPs.

CHAPTER THREE

Methodology and Procedures

The purpose of the study will determine the impact Tourism Developments in Jamaica

have on the soci-economical livelihood of the Community of Peer Tree Bottom, St.

Ann’s. The study more specifically is attempted to determine the impact of hotels,

infrastructure and the attitudes of residents.

Research Design and Methodology

This paper examines and reviews some articles addressing the challenges faced by the

community. The research will take a case study (qualitative) and a descriptive

(quantitative) approach. The reason for this is that the researcher’s interest lies within

a particular phenomenon which speaks to the community of Peer Tree Bottom.

Therefore, in order to collectively capture the data in this form structured questions

will be designed to guide an interview process and then tabulated by means of tables,

charts, graphs. A time period of (15 to 30 minutes) interviews for six weeks will be

conducted in and around the surrounding area of the community randomly, visiting

ever other house. A broad distribution will be administered obtained in age categories

with the top two being ages 36 to 45 and ages 46 to 55 including male and female.

A list of all the residents’ occupation will be captured in the study thus covering a

number of different positions such as hotel workers, fishermen, fish vendors, street


vendors and farmers. In addition to the structured questions, residents will also be

asked to give general comments and opinions.

Other methodology of collecting data will be derived from official publication from

relevant organizations and articles in the press. The information will then be analysed

and represented on tables that will illustrate; the developmental benefits of tourism

and the factors influencing resident attitude; community involvement and the potential

benefits if any.

Population and Sample

Population

The population used in the study was selected from the Saint, Ann area. More

specifically, Peer Tree Bottom Community.

Sample

The sample size consists of one hundred residents in the community of Peer Tree

Bottom. A random sample will be taken that involves visiting every other house

within the community and asking them structured questions so as to guide the

interview process.

Procedures

A consent form explaining the nature and purpose of the study will be given to each

resident in the community. The researchers will meet with the respective members of

the community in a thirty minute meeting to further explain and verify the nature and

purpose of the research. The necessary arrangements will be made for the researchers


to visit the area in order carefully categorise the studies by means of demographic

profile, age, education and occupation.

Data Collection and Analysis

Twelve (12) structured questions will be designed to collect the data. The researchers

will then administer the data collected from the responses given by the residents in an

interview session. Opinions and ideas will also be used to stimulate the conversation.

The residents will be informed one week prior to the administration of the interviews.

The reason for the study and issues of confidentiality will be clearly explained to the

selected sample orally and written.

The information acquired will be tabulated and entered in charts, tables and graphs.

Pilot Testing

Pilot testing involves conducting a preliminary test of data collection tools and

procedures to identify and eliminate problems, allowing programs to make corrective

changes or adjustments before actually collecting data from the target population. The

most effective design chosen is a mixed design; this allows the researcher the

advantages of conducting the pilot testing by providing relevant and accurate data by

means of a questionnaire and interview session. The procedure to pilot the test

instrument involves the structured questions that will be asked in an interview session

to the citizens of Peer Tree Bottom Community. This involves speaking with

members of the community in order to capture the data through various forms. By

using this procedure it will allow the researcher to simulate the actual data collection


from the testing to get the feedback on whether or not the instruments used are likely

to work as expected. Also to make revisions to instruments and data collection

procedures to ensure that appropriate questions are being asked, the right data

collected and the data collection methods will work.

Ethical Considerations

The data obtained from this research will be treated with outmost confidence. The

researcher will be unable to tell which questionnaire was completed by whom, as

respondents will not be asked to write personal information on the forms.

When conducting the research their will be no intention of harm to the respondents.

The purpose of the study will be clearly explained to each of the respondent. Each

respondent answer will be treated with strict confidentiality and this is done by

ensuring that they do not give any personal information about themselves on the

questionnaire.

Each individual will also be given an informed consent form to sign which will

indicate their willing participation in the research and their withdrawal from the

process at anytime will be permitted if they are uncomfortable or have reason to think

that their privacy is being invaded.


APPENDICES

Appendix A

Questionnaire

Instructions: Place a tick in the appropriate box.

1. Gender

Male [ ] Female [ ]

2. Age

18-29 [ ] 30-50 [ ] 50 and over [ ]

3. What is your nationality?

Jamaica [ ] Caribbean [ ] America [ ]

Europe [ ] Other [ ]

4. Are you a citizen of Peer Tree Bottom?


Yes [ ] No [ ]

5. What is your job status?

Employed [ ] Unemployed [ ]

6. What is your profession?

Fisherman [ ] Vendor [ ] Craft Vendor [ ]

Small business Operator [ ] Restaurant Owner [ ]

Other, please specify _______________________________

7. As a citizen of Peer Tree Bottom fishing village, has the surrounding development

affected your livelihood and how?

To a large extent [ ] lesser extent [ ] Limited extent [ ] some extent [ ]

If yes how? ________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________

8. What effect if any does the development in your surrounding communities had on your

earning power or income?

9. Has the development charged any part of your livelihood?

If so, how_________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________________

10. Do you think there are other avenues of earning power that these developments can

offer you as a community?

Yes [ ] No [ ]

If yes, what are some of these

_________________________________________________________________________

11. What is your means of income or trade?

12. Are there any programmes that have been developed to incorporate your skills into the

framework of development in your area?

Yes [ ] No [ ] If yes, specify______________________________________________


_________________________________________________________________________

13. Are there any environmental changes or even damage that has come about due to the

many development around and what are they?

Yes [ ] No [ ]

___________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________

14. In seeing these environmental changes, are you more environmentally aware?

To large extent [ ] lesser extent [ ] limited extent [ ] some extent [ ] not at all [ ]

If yes, please specify ________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________

Appendix B

Interview Schedule

The research is scheduled to be conducted between March 2010 and April 2010 and

will last for approximately four weeks.

Interview Questions

1. As a citizen of Peer Tree Bottom fishing village, has the surrounding development

affected your livelihood and how?

2. What effect if any does the development in your surrounding communities had on your

earning power or income?

3. Has the development charged any part of your livelihood?


4. Are there any environmental changes or even damage that has come about due to the

many development around and what are they?

5. In seeing these environmental changes, are you more environmentally aware?

6. What are the other areas of skills that other citizens from your community used to adapt

to new development?

7. Has the relevant authorities in your estimate, associated in theses permanent soci-

economical changes affect you and your family directly?

8. Has the relevant authorities accounted you in the overall development of the area?

9. Approximately how many working age citizens do you think lives in Pear Tree

Bottom?

10. About what percentage are in the fishing industry as opposed to related industries such

as craft, marketing and restaurant enterprise.

11. Are there any aspects these developments that have been of new or increased income to

the community?

12. Finally, what is your attitude towards these developments?

Appendix C

Questionnaire Cover Letter

University of Technology, Jamaica

237 Old Hope Rd.

Kingston 6

To Whom It May Concern

Dear Sir/ Madam,

We are conducting a research on the contribution tourism developments have on

fishing community in of Pear Tree Bottom and the surrounding environment. We aim


to capture the relevant data by means of conducting a questionnaire and an interview

session. We hereby request an interview within the community.

Please indicate your willingness to participate and your best available time. All

information will be treated with high confidentiality. You will be required to fill out a

consent form provided to you prior to the completion of the questionnaire and

interview session.

Yours truly,

______________

(Researcher’s Name)

Appendix D

Informed Consent Form

SAMPLE CONSENT FORM FOR RESEARCH STUDY

Title of Project: How does the development of Tourism in Jamaica impact the socio-economic livelihood of the fishing community of Pear Tree Bottom, St Ann?

Name of Researcher(s):

Please tick in the space provided to confirm to the statements below.


I confirm that I have read and understand the information sheet dated .............. for the above study. ______

I have had the opportunity to consider the information, ask questions and have had these answered satisfactorily. _______

I understand that my participation is voluntary and that I am free to withdraw at any time, without giving any reason, without my medical care or legal rights being affected. ______

I understand that relevant sections of any of my medical notes and data collected during the study, may be looked at by responsible individuals from [company name], or from regulatory authorities, where it is relevant to my taking part in this research. I give permission for these individuals to have access to my records. ________

I agree to take part in the above research study. _____

Consent Letter

University of Technology237 Old Hope Road Kingston JamaicaMay 6, 2010

Member of Parliament Pear Tree BottomSaint Ann

Dear Sir:As undergraduate third year students pursuing studies in the field of

Hospitality and Tourism Management it is vital that we conduct research studies that will aid in partial fulfilment of the course that we are pursuing. The research study assesses the impact of tourism developments on the fishing community of Pear Tree


Bottom in Saint Ann. The study at hand will capture all the problems and effects that tourism development has on the fishing community.

We are here by asking you to grant us permission to conduct an interview session and distribute questionnaires in your community. This will enable us to collect valid and factual data and information for our research.

Kindly sign the space provided below confirming your willingness to permit and participate in this research study.

_________________________

Signature

_________________________

Date

REFERENCES

Altinay, M. and Hussain, K. (2005). Sustainable tourism development: a case

study of north cyprus, International Journal of Contemporary

Hospitality Management, Vol. 17 No. 3, 279

Ap, J. (1992). Residents’ perceptions on tourism impacts.

Annals of Tourism Research, 19(4), 665–690.

Andereck, K. L., Valentine, K. M., Knopf, R. C. & Vogt. A. (2005). Residents’


perceptions of community tourism impacts. Annals of Tourism Research,

32(4), 1056–1076.

Bastias-Pe´rez, P. & Var, T. (1995). Perceived impacts of tourism by residents.

Annals of Tourism Research, 22(1), 208–210.

Bleasdale, S. & Tapsell, S. (1999). Social and cultural impacts of tourism policy in

Tunisia. In M. Robinson & P. Boniface (eds), Tourism and Cultural Conflicts

181–203. London: CBI.

Bramwell, B., & Lane, B. (1993). Sustainable tourism: An evolving global approach.

Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 1(1 Black, T. (1999). Doing Quantitative

Research in the Social Sciences: An Integrated Approach to Research Design,

Measurement and Statistics. London: Sage Publications.

Cooper, C., Fletcher, J., Gilbert, D. & Wanhill, S. (1998). Tourism: Principles and

Practice (2nd edn). Harlow: Longman.

Dahles, H. (1997) ‘Tourism, petty entrepreneurs and sustainable tourism’ in H.

Dahles (ed.) Tourism, Small Entrepreneurs, and Sustainable Tourism. Cases

from Developing Countries, Tilburg: ATLAS.

Department of Hospitality Management, Faculty of Management Science, Ubon


Rajathanee University, Thailand Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research,

Vol. 13, No. 2, June 2008

Dulnuan, J. R. (December 2008). Tourism: indigenous communities and the

environment. Contours, Vol. 18 No. 4, 16-17.

Jackson, M. & Inbakaran, R. (2006). Evaluating Residents’ Attitudes and Intentions to

Act towards Tourism Development in Regional Victoria, Australia. John

Wiley & Sons, Ltd

Jayawardena, C., Patterson, D., et al.(2008). Sustainable Tourism Development in

Niagara:Discussions, Theories, Projects and Insights. Emerald Group

Publishing Limited

Kaltenborn, B., Bjerke T., et al. (2008). Resident Attitudes Towards Mountain

Second-Home Tourism Development in Norway: The Effects of

Environmental Attitudes. Taylor and Francis Ltd.

Lepp, A. (2008). Attitudes Towards Initial Tourism Development in a Community

With No Prior Tourism Experience: The Case of Bigodi, Uganda. Channel

View Publications.

Li, Y. (December 2002). The impact of tourism in china on local communities,

Asian Studies Review, Vol. 26 No. 3, 473-475.

Lindberg, K. and Johnson, R.L. (1997) Modeling resident attitudes towards

tourism.


Annals of Tourism Research 24, 402–424

Mowforth, M. and Munt, I. (2003) Tourism and Sustainability. New Tourism in the

Third World, Second Edition. London: Routledge.

Petrić, L. (2007). Empowerment of communities for sustainable tourism

development: Case of Croatia, Review, Vol. 55 No. 4, 438-440

Ritchie, B. & Inkari, M. (2006). Host Community Attitudes toward Tourism and

Cultural Tourism Development: the Case of the Lewes District, Southern

England. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd

Sisman, D. (1994) ‘Tourism: Environmental relevance’, Ecotourism: A Sustainable

Option? Chicester: John Wiley and Sons.

Sharma B. & Dyer, P. (2009). Residents' Involvement in Tourism and Their

Perceptions of Tourism Impacts. Emerald Group Publishing Limited.

Southgate, C. R.J. (2006). Ecotourism in kenya: the vulnerability of

communities, Journal Of Ecotourism, Vol. 5 Nos. 1&2, 86-88.

Snow, S. G. (September 2000). Pathway in the periphery: tourism to indigenous

communities in panama, Social Science Quarterly, Vol. 81 No.3, 732.

Swarbrooke, J. (1999) Sustainable Tourism Management. Wallingford, Oxon: CAB

International.


World Tourism Organisation (WTO), (1991) Resolutions of International Conference

on Travel and Tourism, Ottawa, Canada. Madrid: World Tourism

Organization.

David VM. Ashley, Georgiana Gordon-Strachan, Mary Helen Reece, and Deanna

E.C.Ashley, (2001) Challenges for Health and Tourism in Jamaica.

Mabbeth, H. (1987) In Praise of Kuta. From slave port to fishing village to the most

popular resort in Bali. Wellington: January Books.

Theo Kamsma and Karin Bras (1995) Local participation, small-scale entrepreneurs

and outside investors in an Indonesian tourist destination.

Brohman, John (1996) ‘New Directions in Tourism for Third World Development’,

Annals of Tourism Research 23, 1:48–70.

Adams, W.M., & Hutton, J. (2007). People, parks and poverty: Political Ecology and

Biodiversity Conservation. Conservation and Society, 5(2), 147–183.

Agrawal, A. (1995). Dismantling the divide between indigenous and scientific

knowledge. Development and Change, 26, 413–439.

Riikka Puhakkaa, (2008). Local discourses and international initiatives: Sociocultural

Sustainability of tourism in Oulanka National Park, Finland. Vol. 17, No. 5,

September 2009, 529–549


Sarah McIntosh, (2010). Placing the commons at the heart of community

development: three case studies of community enterprise in Caribbean Islands,

Linking common property and sustainable development. Caribbean Natural

Resources Institute (CANARI).

Richard Sharpley, (2007). Flagship Attractions and Sustainable Rural Tourism

Development, the Case of the Alnwick Garden, England. Vol. 15, No. 2,

2007.

Bjorn P. Kaltenborn, (2008). Resident Attitudes towards Mountain Second-Home

Tourism Development in Norway: The Effects of Environmental Attitudes.

Vol. 16, No. 6, 2008

Bruce Prideaux, (2002). Building Visitor Attractions in peripheral areas, Can

uniqueness overcome isolation to produce viability?

Annals of Tourism Research (2000) Vol. 27 No. 2pp. 391 – 411

Auntley, E. (2005) . Community Tourism in Guyana: An examination of the potential

impacts of Tourism Development

Geomatrix, Inc., (1999). Environmental impact assessment of the proposed

subdivision of the Pear Tree Bottom Property. Report prepared for T.W.

Development Ltd.


Harvey, G., (1993) . Pear Tree Bay, an environmental impact assessment for T.W.

Development Ltd. Report prepared for T.W. Development Ltd.

Harvey, G. and Sub-Sea Environs Ltd., (1998) . Environmental impact statement for

proposed sewage treatment works at Pear Tree Bay development, St. Ann,

Jamaica. Report prepared for T.W. Development Ltd.

Journal of Environments Jun (2003) Vol. 54 Issue 2, pg, 447, 21p

McColly, D. A. (2008). Jamaica for Sale. Tourism Development in Pear Tree Bottom

Retrievedhttp://www.jamentrust.org/en/index.php?

option=com_content&view=article&id=98:large-scale-hotel-development-at-

pear-tree-bottom&catid=67&Itemid=119

References

Dutta Roy, A. & Maheshwari, A. (2009). Infrastructural Development Basis for Sports Event-

Commonwealth Games 2010- New Delhi. Journal of Tourism Challenges and Trends.

Henderson, J. (2008). Transport and Tourism Destination Development: An Indonesian

Perspective. Palgrave Macmillan Journals, Tourism and Hospitality Research.

Khan, H., Seng, CF., & Cheong, W.K. ( 1990). The Social Impact of Tourism on Singapore.


The Service Industries Journal

Sharma, B., Dyer, P., Carter, J.& Gursoy, D. (2008). Exploring Residents’ Perceptions of the

Social Impacts of Tourism on the Sunshine Coast, Australia. International Journal of

Hospitality and Tourism Administration, The Haworth Press.

Documents

FINAL FINAL RESEARCH PROP 2010