Sustainability and Capital Approach

Discuss about the Sustainable Tourism and Well- Being of Destination Community.

The following paper is going to illustrate the concept of sustainable tourism and the strategies pertaining to the development and growth of community tourisms.  A growing number of research works on sustainable tourism and community based tourism has provided help to the literature understand the basic criteria of such.  The growing milieu of the sustainable tourism has been assisting the entire concept of the entire frame work to be effectively understandable in terms of creating the scope of further study.  Sustainable tourism is oriented to longer term however community based tourism is somehow oriented with shorter term (Kim & Jamal, 2015).  Progress towards the achievement of sustainability has remained quite profound a path.  In this context, the concept of destination community needs to be comprehended.  Tourism plays an important role in determining the economic development of a nation.  Twenty first century has undergone several changes in terms of creating a major scope of economic development. Destination community involves the process of effective understanding of the cultural and lingual dignity of the local community pertaining to the effective understanding of   the cultural conceptualization of the entire perspective of the people Providing dignity and ensuring preservation of the local communities involves the task of destination community build-up as a matter of fact, the culture of community is considered to be a driving force to the acceptance of cultural tourism (Ruhanen, 2013). According to WTTC (The World Travel & Tourism Council), tourism can be considered to be the “driver of economic growth, inclusive development and environmental sustainability”.   According to Moscardo (2012), it has remained superficial on the specific address of the well being. For instance, whose well being is ensured by the mode of tourism is not at all cleared.  Many of the researchers walked on the socio cultural impacts however there have been certain gaps like the procedure practicing Sustainable Tourism and the development of destination communities ethnographic differences has has been the main hindrance behind the development of destination communities this is how the literature review would be looking into the fact that tourism and sustainability needs to be developed through ascertain understanding of how the communities are approached by tourism groups and the authorities economic impacts of tourism up on the communities supposed to be the followings financial capital on the other hand the environmental impacts of tourism are environmental impacts on natural capital and built capital where is social cultural impacts are cultural capital human capital and political capital since tourism and community well being is approached by many of the scholars the gap needs to be identified with effectiveness financial capital can be defined as the assets related to money various natural capital relates to the assets associated with environment and ecosystem build capital highly imperative in the case of sustainability capital can be termed as the traditions a way of life knowing an activities related to art and capital (Bramwell, 2015).

The Factors

The purpose of this paper is to provide an overall idea pertaining to the works that have already been done on the basis of community well being. The broader purpose is to provide a thesis intending to minimize the risk factors that might lead the local communities in danger.  Another objective of this literature review is to provide a profound concept pertaining to the impact of tourism within the destination communities so as to create a strong bonding between the tourism and social capital in destination in Singapore (WTTC, 2013).

The term sustainable development has remained under thorough discussion in tourism sector because this is such development with high potential that most of the business needs are fulfilled without costing much of the sectors (Jamal & Camargo, 2014).  Destination tourism does not only provide ample scope to the development of national economy, but it also opens an extended hand to the local communities. This does not only facilitate the local community to enjoy the flowing economic revenue through thorough sales of the culture, living style and art but it also provides them with ample opportunity to demonstrate their living culture to the tourists (Woolcock, 1998).  Cultural tourism has been facilitating most of the local communities with the effective revenue process. In recent time many of the empirical studies have been followed up that has been taken into certain consideration with the effective chances of the entire case.  In order to comprehend the sustainability issues of tourism in relation to destination community, the social exchange theory has been taken into consideration. With the help of this theory, it can be identified that the residents of an entire case pertaining to the effective criteria of the entire fact (Lee, 2013).  According to social exchange theory, the residents of the community decide whether they want to become dependent on or independent pertaining to the benefits and cost of tourism in their destination. Many of the residents choose to become independent and many become dependent on the tourism department (WTTC, 2013). As a matter of fact, the dependent residents have a steady flow of cost and benefit ratio that help them concretize their future consideration of the development of the place.  It is the obligation of both the tourists and the tour organizers to provide ample space for the community residents so that they can practice their best business in the locality.   Based on the theories this has to be taken into certain consideration fact in regards to basic conceptualization of the subject (Pawar, 2006).  On the basis of the theory, if the hosting residents identify the fact that they are about to be benefited from the exchange without incurring much cost for the service provision to the tourists,  the process of exchange development  can be incurred with the help of different understanding of the economic flow. Through many of the empirical studies it has been taken into certain consideration pertaining to the effective understanding of the fact that in most of the cases there has been a formulation of theories into practical implementation (Bramwell ET AL., 2015). Twenty first century has undergone several changes in terms of creating a major scope of economic development. Destination community involves the process of effective understanding of the cultural and lingual dignity of the local community pertaining to the effective understanding of   the cultural conceptualization of the entire perspective of the people Providing dignity and ensuring preservation of the local communities involves the task of destination community build-up as a matter of fact, this has to be taken into certain consideration pertaining to the effective culture of the local community. According to WTTC (The World Travel & Tourism Council), tourism can be considered to be the “driver of economic growth, inclusive development and environmental sustainability”.   According to Moscardo (2012), it has remained superficial on the specific address of the well being. For instance, whose well being is ensured by the mode of tourism is not at all cleared. The broader purpose is to provide a thesis intending to minimize the risk factors that might lead the local communities in danger (Spilanis & Vayanni, 2014).  Another objective of this literature review is to provide a profound concept pertaining to the impact of tourism within the destination communities so as to create a strong bonding between the tourism and social capital in destination in Singapore.

According to Murphy and Price, tourism and sustainable development has direct impact upon destination community.  The impacts can be categorized into three sections- economic, environmental and socio cultural understandings. It has often been observed that insufficient attention has been paid to the economic category and development of the destination communities (Kim & Jamal, 2015).  A certain gap has been found which actually forced into the effective consideration of the entire issue. There have been two main reasons behind the identification of such gap-.

Many of the researchers walked on the socio cultural impacts however there have been certain gaps like the procedure practicing Sustainable Tourism and the development of destination communities ethnographic differences has has been the main hindrance behind the development of destination communities this is how the literature review would be looking into the fact that tourism and sustainability needs to be developed through ascertain understanding of how the communities are approached by tourism groups and the authorities economic impacts of tourism up on the communities supposed to be the followings financial capital on the other hand the environmental impacts of tourism r environmental impacts on natural capital and built capital where is social cultural impacts are cultural capital human capital and political capital since tourism and community well being is approached by many of the scholars the gap needs to be identified with effectiveness financial capital can be defined as the assets related to money various natural capital can be defined as the assets associated with environment and ecosystem build capital highly imperative in the case of sustainability capital can be defined as the traditions a way of life knowing an activities related to art and capital (Pawar, 2016).

The particular discussion related to the impact of tourism literature so slight Upon A few challenges towards developing structural frameworks in order to understand how different tourism development processes contribute towards particular social culture impact (Pawar, 2016). An option which has independently emerged in both service of resident perception related to tourism impact and ethnographic approaches for the purpose of addressing the challenge is related to the examination of ways in which different capital identified as affected by tourism (Bramwell 2015). Flores framework have been applied by number of papers related to tourism impact of community well being and the Hemant related to the community of destination’s well being rests upon different forms of capital. The work of dash has been expanded by the community well being single so that various different forms of capital can be identified and defined. It has been proposed by the Framework that well being of the community is consisted of seven related and overlapping forms of capital including:

Natural capital including amenities, resources and assets available and the ecosystem and natural environment for the support of the community.

Financial capital including resources available for investment and monetary assets in the community.

Built capital, this kind of capital includes physical infrastructure through which various community activities are allowed.

Cultural capital which includes way of life traditions rituals arts and languages this provide support to community identities and values.

Human capital which includes assets, skills, capabilities, knowledge, experiences and connections of the community members.

Political capital which includes ability of the community influence and access, decisions and powers.

Social capital which includes relationship and networks built on reciprocity and trust connecting the community with people and places and connecting the people to the community.

The focus of the paper is onthe study which has been guided along with tourism and social capital. Resulting out of a significant number of literature available across multiple disciplines having the objective to explain and define organization of social capital A considerable debate about its definition still exist. The definition as provided by Pawar’s (2016) included description from Woolcock (2015) identified the most common elements of the definition include cooperation, relationship, networks, collective action, social interaction, trust and shared norms. These elements apparently provide the working definition of social capital to significant criticism has been provided against elements. There is serious confusion over what social capital is and what its actual use as provided by Dash is. Secondly the structure and mechanism which allows the development of social capital is often confused with what actually social capital is (WTTC 2013). Thus it is necessary to identify the difference between the dimension of social capital and the structure that allows social capital to be created along with the outcomes which can be derived from its uses. In relation to the current study at community level social capital was defined as reciprocity trust shared values obligation cohesiveness of social relationship between community and social identity. Access to support and resources is provided by social capital to the members of the community to pursue different goals deriving it from networks both informal and formal and both outside and within the community

References:

Bramwell, B. (2015). Theoretical activity in sustainable tourism research. Annals of Tourism Research, 54, 204-218.

Bramwell, B., Higham, J., Lane, B., & Miller, G. (2016). Advocacy or neutrality? Disseminating research findings and driving change toward sustainable tourism in a fast changing world.

Cohen, S. A., Higham, J. E., Peeters, P., & Gössling, S. (2014). Why tourism mobility behaviours must change. Understanding and governing sustainable tourism mobility: Psychological and behavioural approaches, 1-12.

Cohen, S. A., Higham, J. E., Stefan, G., & Peeters, P. (Eds.). (2014). Understanding and governing sustainable tourism mobility: Psychological and behavioural approaches (Vol. 43). Routledge.

Jamal, T., & Camargo, B. A. (2014). Sustainable tourism, justice and an ethic of care: Toward the just destination. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 22(1), 11-30.

Kim, S., & Jamal, T. (2015). The co-evolution of rural tourism and sustainable rural development in Hongdong, Korea: complexity, conflict and local response. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 23(8-9), 1363-1385.

Lee, T. H. (2013). Influence analysis of community resident support for sustainable tourism development. Tourism management, 34, 37-46.

Lee, T. H. (2013). Influence analysis of community resident support for sustainable tourism development. Tourism management, 34, 37-46.

Melissen, F., & Koens, K. (2016). Adding researchers’ behaviour to the research agenda: bridging the science–policy gap in sustainable tourism mobility. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 24(3), 335-349.

Pawar, M. (2016). “Social” ”capital”? Social Science Journal, 43(2), 211-226.

Ruhanen, L. (2013). Local government: facilitator or inhibitor of sustainable tourism development?. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 21(1), 80-98.

Spilanis, I., & Vayanni, H. (2014). Sustainable tourism: utopia or necessity? The role of new forms of tourism in the Aegean Islands.

Urry, J. (2009). Sociology and climate change. The Sociological Review, 57(s2), 84-100.               

Woolcock, M. (1998). Social capital and economic development: Toward a theoretical synthesis and policy framework. Theory and Society, 27, 151-208.

WTTC (2013). Our mission. Retrieved March 17th, 2013 from https://www.wttc.org/ourmission