Stakeholders' views of enclave tourism: A grounded theory approach DOI: 10.1177/1096348013503997...

http://jht.sagepub.com/Tourism Research

Journal of Hospitality &

http://jht.sagepub.com/content/early/2013/09/29/1096348013503997The online version of this article can be found at:

DOI: 10.1177/1096348013503997

published online 30 September 2013Journal of Hospitality & Tourism ResearchRobin Nunkoo and Haywantee Ramkissoon

Stakeholders' Views of Enclave Tourism: A Grounded Theory Approach

Published by:

http://www.sagepublications.com

On behalf of:

International Council on Hotel, Restaurant, and Institutional Education

can be found at:Journal of Hospitality & Tourism ResearchAdditional services and information for

http://jht.sagepub.com/cgi/alertsEmail Alerts:

http://jht.sagepub.com/subscriptionsSubscriptions:

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navReprints:

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.navPermissions:

What is This?

- Sep 30, 2013OnlineFirst Version of Record >>

at Monash University on October 9, 2013jht.sagepub.comDownloaded from at Monash University on October 9, 2013jht.sagepub.comDownloaded from at Monash University on October 9, 2013jht.sagepub.comDownloaded from at Monash University on October 9, 2013jht.sagepub.comDownloaded from at Monash University on October 9, 2013jht.sagepub.comDownloaded from at Monash University on October 9, 2013jht.sagepub.comDownloaded from at Monash University on October 9, 2013jht.sagepub.comDownloaded from at Monash University on October 9, 2013jht.sagepub.comDownloaded from at Monash University on October 9, 2013jht.sagepub.comDownloaded from at Monash University on October 9, 2013jht.sagepub.comDownloaded from at Monash University on October 9, 2013jht.sagepub.comDownloaded from at Monash University on October 9, 2013jht.sagepub.comDownloaded from at Monash University on October 9, 2013jht.sagepub.comDownloaded from at Monash University on October 9, 2013jht.sagepub.comDownloaded from at Monash University on October 9, 2013jht.sagepub.comDownloaded from at Monash University on October 9, 2013jht.sagepub.comDownloaded from at Monash University on October 9, 2013jht.sagepub.comDownloaded from at Monash University on October 9, 2013jht.sagepub.comDownloaded from at Monash University on October 9, 2013jht.sagepub.comDownloaded from at Monash University on October 9, 2013jht.sagepub.comDownloaded from at Monash University on October 9, 2013jht.sagepub.comDownloaded from at Monash University on October 9, 2013jht.sagepub.comDownloaded from at Monash University on October 9, 2013jht.sagepub.comDownloaded from at Monash University on October 9, 2013jht.sagepub.comDownloaded from at Monash University on October 9, 2013jht.sagepub.comDownloaded from at Monash University on October 9, 2013jht.sagepub.comDownloaded from at Monash University on October 9, 2013jht.sagepub.comDownloaded from at Monash University on October 9, 2013jht.sagepub.comDownloaded from at Monash University on October 9, 2013jht.sagepub.comDownloaded from at Monash University on October 9, 2013jht.sagepub.comDownloaded from at Monash University on October 9, 2013jht.sagepub.comDownloaded from at Monash University on October 9, 2013jht.sagepub.comDownloaded from at Monash University on October 9, 2013jht.sagepub.comDownloaded from

http://jht.sagepub.com/

http://jht.sagepub.com/content/early/2013/09/29/1096348013503997

http://www.sagepublications.com

http://www.chrie.org

http://jht.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts

http://jht.sagepub.com/subscriptions

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav

http://jht.sagepub.com/content/early/2013/09/29/1096348013503997.full.pdf

http://online.sagepub.com/site/sphelp/vorhelp.xhtml


































Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, Vol. XX, No. X, Month 2013, 1 –32DOI: 10.1177/1096348013503997© 2013 International Council on Hotel, Restaurant and Institutional Education

1

StakeholderS’ viewS of enclave touriSm: a Grounded theory

approach

robin nunkoo University of Mauritius

University of Johannesburg haywantee ramkissoon

Monash University

Using a grounded theory approach, this study investigates stakeholders’ views of enclave tourism in the island of Mauritius. In-depth interviews with tourism stakeholders were conducted and data were analyzed using the principles of grounded theory. Seven subthemes emerged from the analysis and these were categorized into two main themes: enclave tourism as an agent of empowerment/improvement and enclave tourism as a force of sociocultural destruction/denial of freedom. The themes suggest that stakeholders’ views are nuanced and often contradictory. In line with the principles of grounded theory, a conceptual framework explaining stakeholders’ views of enclave tourism is developed. The findings are discussed with existing literature and similarities and contradictions are noted. Unlike what is usually claimed by researchers and scholars, enclave tourism development results in some environmental and socioeconomic benefits, particularly with respect to sustainable hotel operations, empowerment of local community and women, and entrepreneurial opportunities.

Keywords: enclave tourism; stakeholders’ views; island economies; grounded theory

introduction

Tourism has been instrumental in the economic development of many small islands. However, while the benefits of the tourism sector for such economies are well documented, its negative effects threaten their sustainable development (Lim & Cooper, 2009). Tourism development in islands is often characterized by a con-dition of dependency (Milne, 1992; Sharpley, 2001, 2003) that leads to the devel-opment of enclave tourism (Britton, 1982; Brohman, 1996). Enclave tourism is tourism that is concentrated in remote areas, and its all-inclusive nature means that the facilities, services, and physical location fail to take into account the needs of

503997 JHTXXX10.1177/1096348013503997Journal Of Hospitality & Tourism ResearchNunkoo, ramkissoon / sTAKeHoLders’research-article2013

2 JOURNAL OF HOSPITALITY & TOURISM RESEARCH

the local communities (Anderson, 2011; Ceballos-Lascurain, 1996; Enoch, 1996). Consequently, besides its adverse environmental and economic impacts, enclave tourism has been criticized for marginalizing local communities in the develop-ment process (Anderson, 2011; Freitag, 1994; Mbaiwa, 2005). As a result, a num-ber of researchers question the sustainability of enclave tourism for developing countries and small island states. Nevertheless, economic challenges and lack of opportunities in other sectors mean that it is unlikely that small island states would depart from such a model of tourism development. It is therefore important that researchers and scholars attempt to find ways to make enclave tourism more viable for small islands, taking into account the needs of the different actors.

Tourism is a complex system comprising a number of stakeholders and is often characterized by discord arising from shared use of resources and conflict-ing views on how the industry should be developed and managed (Kuvan & Akan, 2012). Sustainable tourism planning can be achieved if the views of key stakeholders in tourism development are understood and incorporated in the development process of the industry (Byrd, Bosley, & Dronberger, 2009; Hardy, 2005; Yasarata, Altinay, Burns, & Okumus, 2010). Hall (1994) supports this assertion arguing that it is only through ongoing participation and commitment from all stakeholders that the long-term integration of social, environmental, economic, cultural, and political goals can be achieved. However, limited research has investigated the views of multiple stakeholders in tourism (Byrd et al., 2009; Kuvan & Akan, 2012). Even fewer studies have examined stakehold-ers’ views toward enclave tourism in island economies. Hardy and Beeton (2001) urge for more research on stakeholders’ views in tourism development.

Shaw and Shaw (1999) suggest that it is important to consider the impacts of enclave tourism within the context of particular economies. Anderson (2011) also raises the need for more research on the socioeconomic implications of enclave tourism given its distinctiveness from other forms of tourism. In addi-tion to this knowledge gap, research on stakeholders’ views of tourism is domi-nated by experimental design and case-specific discussions, whereas little consideration has been given to the broader theoretical development. Hardy (2005) supports this assertion noting that very few theories explaining the views of stakeholders exist in the tourism literature. Inductive studies exploring the relationship between stakeholders and tourism development are needed.

To fill these literature gaps, this study uses grounded theory, a qualitative method, to understand tourism stakeholders’ views of enclave tourism in the island of Mauritius. Grounded theory has been successfully applied in similar studies (e.g., Hardy, 2005) and is based on the assumption that theories can be systematically built from an analysis of social settings (Glaser & Strauss, 1967). Although it shares the fundamental characteristics of qualitative research, grounded theory goes beyond most qualitative methods in its potential to gener-ate new theoretical insights (Connell & Lowe, 1997) because it provides distinct guidelines for developing theory (Mehmetoglu & Altinay, 2006). Analyzing data in-line with the principles of grounded theory also contributes to a more

Nunkoo, Ramkissoon / STAKEHOLDERS’ VIEWS OF ENCLAVE TOURISM 3

consistent and systematic qualitative study (Yin, 1989). The inductive nature of grounded theory makes it a suitable methodological tool for the present research, which attempts to develop a conceptual framework explaining stakeholders’ views of enclave tourism.

enclave touriSm and SuStainable development of iSland economieS

Scholars and policy makers have paid wide attention to the sustainable devel-opment of small island developing states (Campling & Rosalie, 2006). These island nations provide a special case because of the unique characteristics of their natural resources, economies, and culture (Adrianto & Matsuda, 2002). Reliance on tourism in small economies is almost universal and the crucial role of the sector as a vehicle for economic development has long been recognized (Sharpley, 2001, 2003). Tourism has been an important factor in the development of islands because they have failed to develop their industrial sector mainly because of isolation, limited natural resources, peripherality, fragility, vulnerability to external forces, and limited labor force (Conlin & Baum, 1995). Given their unique features and characteristics, McElroy and de Albuquerque (2002) attempt to provide a defini-tion of sustainability particularly suited for island tourism:

Sustainability ideally seeks to preserve a permanent and widely shared stream of income by creating an adaptive competitive destination niche market through the ongoing guidance of participatory community planning without unacceptably sacrificing the socio-cultural and natural integrity of the asset base (p. 16).

This definition makes it appropriate to define sustainable tourism in island destinations where ecological, social, and economic resources are closely con-nected and scarce (Twining-Ward & Butler, 2002). Although tourism has been instrumental to the economic and social development of islands, researchers have drawn attention to the negative consequences of the industry (Conlin & Baum, 1995; Harrison, 2001) and have questioned the industry’s contribution to their sustainable development (Buhalis, 1999).

Tourism in island economies is characterized by a condition of dependency (Milne, 1992; Sharpley, 2001, 2003). Dependency is defined as “a conditioning situation in which the economies of one group of countries are conditioned by the development and expansion of others” (Dos Santos, 1970, p. 231). The concept gained momentum in tourism studies in the 1970s and early 1980s when it became apparent that the contribution of tourism to the sustainable development of developing nations was not obvious (Oppermann & Chon, 1997). Researchers argue that in small islands, tourism development and the characteristics of the tourism industry reflect the center periphery dependency model of development (Oppermann, 1992). As a result of the political economy of international tourism, a parallel exists between tourism development and


dependency theory, particularly in the context of island economies (Sharpley, 2003). The dependency nature of tourism in island economies gives rise to the development of enclave types of tourism development (Mbaiwa, 2005). The physical, commercial, and sociopsychological nature of tourism development in peripheral economies such as islands is conceptualized as enclave tourism (Britton, 1982). This often refers to geographically isolated and closed-off resorts containing all tourism facilities and services required by tourists.

Enclave tourism development is generally viewed skeptically by researchers and scholars because of its adverse socioeconomic and environmental conse-quences that threaten the sustainability of the tourism sector (e.g., Anderson, 2011; Andriotis, 2008; Freitag, 1994; Mbaiwa, 2005; Sharpley, 2000). The adverse economic consequences of enclave tourism result from its all-inclusive and monopolistic nature (Enoch, 1996). Tourists prepay for food, beverages, and services as part of the holiday price, which encourages them to stay inside and spend within the compounds of the enclave. The management of an enclave resort creates and controls a cultural as well as physical environment catering to the needs and desires of the tourists (Freitag, 1994). The three most profitable components of the tourism sector (marketing and the procurement of customers, transportation, and food and accommodation) are normally handled and man-aged by vertically integrated and Western-owned organizations (Britton, 1982; Brohman, 1996; Mbaiwa, 2005; Shaw & Shaw, 1999), leading to foreign domi-nation over the organizational structure of the tourism industry (Brohman, 1996). In addition, the all-inclusive nature of enclave resorts also mean that tourists rarely visit places they travel to because they spend their days and nights in the sterilized environment of the resort (Enoch, 1996). As a result, foreign currencies generated have minimum spillover effects on the local economy (Mbaiwa, 2005) and a significant amount of tourist revenue is lost through leak-ages (Sharpley, 2000). Enclave tourism development is also criticized for not providing enough opportunities for local entrepreneurial activity (Shaw & Shaw, 1999). For these reasons, enclave tourism is known to have a weak multiplier effect (Oppermann & Chon, 1997) and poor forward and backward linkages with the informal sectors of the local economy (Mbaiwa, 2005).

Enclave tourism has also been criticized on equity grounds (Sharpley, 2000). Although some researchers consider tourism “to be an effective means of achiev-ing a more equitable social condition,” enclave tourism has been found to aggra-vate the problem of social inequality and disparity (Sharpley, 2000, p. 10). Enclave development often leads to unequal distribution of income and reduced opportunities for equitable development nationally (Britton, 1982; Jenkins, 1982; Oppermann, 1993). Enclave resorts that do not attempt to have some link-ages with the local communities symbolize foreign wealth and privilege among locally deprived communities (Freitag, 1994; Manning, 1982). Goods and ser-vices available at these facilities are very often unaffordable to the local com-munity, aggravating the problem of deprivation and inequality among local community members. Social disparities and purchasing power gaps lead to


various sociocultural impacts and social conflicts that challenge the sustainable development of tourism (Andriotis, 2003; Freitag, 1994; Mbaiwa, 2003, 2005).

Enclave development results in an economy of foreign domination where local people cannot exercise control over local resources (Buhalis, 1999; Lim & Cooper, 2009; Sharpley, 2001). Decision making rests in the hands of elitist bod-ies exogenous to the community, rendering local communities who are mostly affected by tourism development less powerful in tourism decisions (Brohman, 1996). The only linkage enclave resort may have with the community is through employment of local workers who may only benefit through wage employment, while foreign organizations and local elites remain the major beneficiaries of commercial gains (Buhalis, 1999; E. Cohen, 1984). Such a development pattern leads to local dependency rather than development (E. Cohen, 1984). Resort enclaves also increase spatial disparities (Britton, 1982). Enclave tourism in small islands has developed in a way that resembles historical patterns of colo-nialism (Lea, 1988).

The environmental impacts of enclave tourism and their resulting conse-quences for sustainable development are also well-recognized among scholars. Some researchers claim that resort enclaves are highly resource consumptive and degrade the natural environment and the economic value of natural resources (Andriotis, 2008; Lee, 1997; Selwyn, 2001; Stonich, 1998; van der Duim & Caalders, 2002). The unique characteristics of resort enclaves (24-hour opera-tion) mean that they have high electricity and water consumption that severely strains local resources (W. W. Chan & Lam, 2002). In some cases, untreated water is often discharged into drainage systems, causing environmental pollu-tion (Trung & Kumar, 2005).

Thus, enclave tourism has consistently been criticized for contributing to environmental, social, cultural, and economic problems instead of encouraging the formulation of appropriate sustainable tourism activities that are sensitive to the carrying capacity of the natural resources, the resort, and the local commu-nity. Nevertheless, some researchers (e.g., Din, 1992) note that scholars have been too critical regarding the contribution of enclave tourism to sustainable development and they argue that such a form of development does have some benefits. For example, some studies, although few in number, found enclave developments to result in a number of societal benefits, although these are mainly of an economic nature (e.g., Andriotis, 2008; Mbaiwa, 2003).

touriSm development in mauritiuS

Mauritius is a small island economy situated in the western Indian Ocean. The economy was traditionally based on sugar and textile, but the island has successfully diversified away from an agricultural-based economy to one where service sectors such as tourism play an important economic role. The objective of the government is to increase the number of tourists to 2 million by 2020 from the current 965,441 arrivals in 2012. The tourism policy of the island


emphasizes low-impact and high-spending tourism. Consequently, tourism is largely upmarket, and although such tourism is not the only type, it constitutes the major segment of tourists who stay in high-class hotels. Tourism is predomi-nantly of an enclave nature and this is the principal tourism development model currently being developed by planners. However, concerns over the adverse environmental and socioeconomic impacts of hotel resort enclaves on the desti-nation and its local communities have led government to strengthen the tourism policy and planning guidelines.

The Hotel Development Strategy (HDS), revised in 2008, recognizes the need for hotel resorts to adopt eco-friendly practices. The HDS states that hotels should make provisions for the adoption of energy-saving devices and renewable energy supply and adopt other eco-friendly practices. The HDS also recognizes the need to take into account community needs and concerns, such as residents’ access to beaches. Such initiatives are also reflected in the most recent Mauritius Sector Strategic Plan on Tourism (2008-2015) and the National Assessment Report 2010 prepared by the Ministry of Tourism and Leisure and the Ministry of Environment and Sustainable Development respectively. The Planning Policy Guidance on hotel resorts prepared by the Ministry of Housing and Lands also provides a number of environmental guidelines for coastal hotel development. However, these policies seem to have met with little success both environmentally and socially. Hotel resort enclaves place severe pressure on existing resources of the island and are criticized for excluding residents from the planning and develop-ment process. Hotels in several parts of the islands have destroyed beaches and the marine environment and have contributed to coral bleaching. Local residents have also been marginalized and alienated from the tourism development pro-cess. Tourism businesses, planning authorities, and foreign investors have a major influence on policy making while residents have very little power over decisions related to the industry’s development. These concerns are reflected in the increasing number of conflicts between local communities and hoteliers as reported by the local media on several occasions (Nunkoo & Ramkissoon, 2011).

Despite these issues, economic challenges and pressures mean that the Mauritian government is unlikely to move away from the enclave and all-inclu-sive model of tourism development. The HDS clearly states that “priority will be given to hotel projects of the highest standard providing high quality service and belonging to the 4 and 5 star categories to avoid a situation where middle-range or budget hotels would constitute the broader range base.” The HDS also states that investment strategies will be geared toward a more targeted approach in foreign direct investment, and priorities will be given to international brand names in order to benefit from their network, managerial skills, and financial resources. Thus, enclave tourism remains a reality for Mauritius. However, researchers generally view such a model of development with skepticism. It is therefore important that research is carried out to understand how enclave tour-ism could potentially be made more socially and environmentally sustainable for island economies such as Mauritius.


Grounded theory

The grounded theory approach was deemed suitable for this study which attempts to develop a conceptual framework explaining stakeholders’ views of enclave tourism. Qualitative methods such as grounded theory are based on the following characteristics: holistic view, a philosophy of naturalistic inquiry, and an inductive approach to data analysis (Patton, 1980). Grounded theory (Glaser & Strauss, 1967; Strauss & Corbin, 1990), derived from pragmatism (Mead, 1934) and symbolic interactionism (Park & Burgess, 1921), consists of a pre-scribed set of procedures for analyzing data and building theoretical frameworks (Glaser, 1978; Glaser & Strauss, 1967; Strauss, 1987). This approach sets out to discover new theoretical insights and innovations and avoids traditional logical deductive reasoning (Connell & Lowe, 1997) and is considered to be “emergent explicit” (Martin & Woodside, 2008, p. 246).

Corbin and Strauss (1990) note that sampling in grounded theory research is not drawn from samples of specific groups and units of time but in terms of their concepts, properties, dimensions, and characteristics. Thus, a purposive sam-pling technique guided the selection of participants. This type of sampling strat-egy allows a researcher to use judgment to select people who will best-answer the research questions and meet the objective of the study (Saunders, Lewis, & Thornhill, 2003). Yuksel, Bramwell, and Yuksel (1999) suggest that sampling of participants should vary between stakeholder groups. A review of existing litera-ture on tourism stakeholders suggests that the latter can be classified into three categories: (a) public sector/governmental officials (b) private sector/entrepre-neurs, and (c) nongovernmental organizations/interest groups. As a result, par-ticipants were chosen to represent these categories of stakeholders and were selected based on their knowledge, role, experiences, and influence in tourism development in the island (Table 1). Some of the participants were personally known to the researchers while others were approached through the researchers’ close friends and contacts so that research access (Okumus, Altinay, & Roper, 2007) to them could be achieved easily.

Qualitative approaches such as grounded theory make use of in-depth inter-view techniques for collecting data (Creswell, 2007; Joo, 2011), which result in think descriptions of a phenomenon from the perspectives of the participants (i.e., emic interpretations) rather than only from the researcher’s perspective (i.e., etic interpretations; Woodside, MacDonald, & Burford, 2004). Intensive interviewing allows an in-depth exploration of a topic and is considered useful for interpretive inquiry (Charmaz, 2006). Charmaz further notes that “intensive qualitative interviewing fits grounded theory methods particularly well. Both grounded theory methods and intensive interviewing are open-ended yet directed, shaped yet emergent, and paced yet unrestricted” (p. 28). Consequently, this research relied on data collected from in-depth interviews conducted with the stakeholders. As recommended by Charmaz (2006), the interview schedule consisted of open-ended questions and was semistructured in nature. Interview


table 1interview participants

Participant No. Stakeholder Group Organization

1 Public sector organizations/government officials

Ministry of Tourism and Leisure2 Board of Investment3 Ministry of Finance and Economic

Development4 Ministry of Environment and

Sustainable Development5 Tourist Village6 Ministry of Social Integration and

Economic Empowerment 7 Private sector organization/

entrepreneursAssociation of Hoteliers and

Restaurants in Mauritius (AHRIM)8 Hotel manager9 Hotel owner

10 Integrated resort company11 Hotel owner 12 Nongovernmental

organizations/residentChairperson of a resident’s group

13 Mauritius Marine Conservation Society

14 Community leader

questions explored stakeholders’ views of enclave tourism development in the island. Information on the general background of the participants and their expe-rience and involvement with the tourism industry were also sought. This was to ensure that the questions fitted the participants’ experience and as such, it allowed for an understanding of the broader social, economic, political, and cul-tural conditions of the participants (Charmaz, 2006; Strauss & Corbin, 1998). Data collection took place between the months of March and July 2010. Interviews lasted between 60 and 75 minutes.

A total of 14 in-depth interviews were conducted and analyzed because theo-retical saturation was achieved with the 14th participant. Fresh data neither pro-vided valuable additional insights nor revealed new properties of the core theoretical themes (Charmaz, 2006; Glaser & Strauss, 1967). At this stage, the categories used to code the data appeared to be established and there was suffi-cient consistency in the data that allowed us to determine that theoretical satura-tion was reached (Lincoln & Guba, 1985). The concept of theoretical sensitivity was applied to the research process as far as possible. This implies that the researchers entered the field with an awareness of the topic and area, but without any preconceived notions about what might be discovered (Charmaz, 2006; Weed, 2009). This allowed us to remain sensitive to the interpretation and


meanings given to the situation by those whose social world was being researched (Becker, 1993).

data analysis and interpretation

Data analysis was based on the main principles of the grounded theory method and was conducted in two stages (Strauss & Corbin, 1990, 1998). The first stage involved scanning over all the collected information to obtain a broad understanding of the data and noticing interesting things. Core words, sentences, and phrases were underlined. The second stage of the process involved the cod-ing of the data to isolate significant incidents, events, issues, processes, and relationships. As recommended by Strauss and Corbin (1990), three types of coding were employed: open coding, axial coding, and selective coding. Corbin and Strauss (1990) define open coding as “an interpretive process by which data are broken down analytically” (p. 12). The purpose of open coding is to break down, examine, compare, conceptualize, and categorize the data (Strauss & Corbin, 1990). Line-by-line coding, which is a method of conducting open cod-ing, was used to analyze the data. The purpose of line-by-line coding is to develop concepts, categories, and properties. The researchers reread the tran-scripts several times to understand the data and broke them down into manage-able forms.

Table 2 provides an example of how the open coding (line-by-line coding) worked in practice. The first column of the table contains the raw data, extracted from the transcripts and the second column detailed the initial codes extracted from the raw data through line-by-line coding. The transcript of each participant was read and analyzed separately to identify the emerging ideas and views that were mentioned by each individual. Each interview transcript was read several times to understand how each participant viewed enclave tourism development and why he/she perceived this phenomenon as such. This process was important because it helped identify the equivalent meanings stakeholders attributed to the phenomenon (Mehmetoglu & Altinay, 2006). Every line of each interview tran-script was analyzed carefully to extract specific information and participants’ general views toward enclave tourism. For example, a participant’s view that “hotel resort enclaves also empower the local community . . . and ensure the emancipation and development of women in society . . . Social integration is also a big advantage” was coded as “empowering local community,” “ensuring the emancipation and development of women,” “ensuring social integration.” At all times, attempts were made to stay “close to the data,” such that the interpreta-tions of the researchers did not depart from those of the participants (Charmaz, 2006). The researchers identified a total of 113 initial codes that summarized the data. This process of data analysis led to axial coding of the data.

Axial coding helps researchers to answer the “when,” “where,” “why,” “who,” “how,” and “with what consequences” questions (Strauss & Corbin, 1998). While the purpose of open coding was to divide the data into concepts,


axial coding attempts to relate a category and its subcategories (Corbin & Strauss, 1990). The data were compared and similar incidents were grouped together and given the same conceptual label. Dey (1999) conceptualizes this process of grouping concepts at a higher and more abstract level as “categoriz-ing.” For example, initial codes derived from the line-by-line coding process, such as “integrating disabled persons,” “leading to emancipation of women,” “integrating with local community,” “promoting women development,” and so on were grouped together to form a subtheme labeled as empowerment of women and local residents. Although local residents also include women, it was impor-tant to include the latter word in this subtheme so as to highlight the gendered views adopted by participants in their responses. Table 3 illustrates the connection

table 2open coding (line-by-line coding): a Sample

Participants Views (Extracted From Transcripts)

Open Coding (Line-by-Line Coding Using Gerunds)

Resort enclaves support and improve local businesses, providing food and other materials to the hotels. They make a good business out of these enclave resorts. Suppliers of materials also benefit. Hotel enclaves also create permanent employment opportunities for Mauritians. However, they also lead to increase in crime rate and other evils in society such as gambling houses. They also destroy local and marine environmental resources . . . such as lagoons, reefs, and so on

Supporting local business; improving local business; providing food and materials; making good business; benefitting suppliers of raw materials; creating permanent employment opportunities

Contributing to increasing crime rate; leading to the development of gambling houses

Destroying local and marine resources

Hotel resort enclaves also empower the local community . . . and ensure the emancipation and development of women in society . . . Social integration is also a big advantage… Through CSR (corporate social responsibility), hotel enclaves also train redundant workers and ensure the development and training of women in society

Empowering local communities; ensuring emancipation of women; leading to social integration; training workers; training of women; developing women’s skills

They have caused a lot of destruction to the wet lands, biodiversity, and ecosystem of our coastal environment . . . They have increased environmental damage, backfilling of lagoons . . . destruction of wet lands and mangroves . . . creation of ski lanes and bathing zones has also meant severe disturbance to the marine environment

Causing environment destruction; increasing environmental damage; creating ski lanes; disturbing marine environment

11

tab

le 3

the

co

din

g p

roce

ss in

pra

ctic

e

Op

en C

odin

g (L

ine-

by-

Line

Cod

ing)

Sub

them

es (A

xial

C

odin

g)M

ain

Them

es (S

elec

tive

Cod

ing)

Inte

grat

ing

dis

able

d p

erso

ns a

nd w

omen

; Lea

din

g to

em

anci

pat

ion

of w

omen

; Enh

anci

ng

skill

s; Im

pro

ving

loca

l peo

ple

’s p

erce

ptio

ns o

f tou

rism

; Int

egra

ting

with

loca

l com

mun

ity;

Inte

grat

ing

wom

en; H

elp

ing

soci

al a

ccep

tab

ility

; Enh

anci

ng w

ell-

bei

ng o

f loc

al

com

mun

ity; C

ontr

ibut

ing

to s

ocio

cultu

ral d

evel

opm

ent;

Com

pen

satin

g lo

cal p

eop

le;

Con

trib

utin

g to

cor

por

ate

soci

al r

esp

onsi

bili

ty; P

rom

otin

g w

omen

dev

elop

men

t; T

rain

ing

loca

l com

mun

ity; E

nhan

cing

wom

en’s

life

; Con

trib

utin

g to

com

mun

ity h

app

ines

s;

Mak

ing

wom

en s

tron

g; In

clud

ing

wom

en in

soc

iety

Em

pow

erm

ent

of

wom

en a

nd lo

cal

resi

den

ts

Enc

lave

tou

rism

as

an

agen

t of

em

pow

erm

ent

and

im

pro

vem

ent

Sup

por

ting

loca

l bus

ines

s/fa

rmer

s; Im

pro

ving

loca

l bus

ines

ses;

Sup

por

ting

smal

l b

usin

esse

s; E

nhan

cing

eco

nom

ic o

pp

ortu

nitie

s; Im

pro

ving

sta

ndar

d o

f liv

ing

of fa

rmer

s;

Str

engt

heni

ng li

nk w

ith s

mal

l bus

ines

ses;

Ben

efitt

ing

hand

icra

fts

selle

rs; I

mp

rovi

ng

econ

omic

con

diti

ons

of s

mal

l ent

rep

rene

ur; D

evel

opin

g in

form

al s

ecto

r; B

enef

ittin

g sm

all

bus

ines

s; F

acili

tatin

g op

por

tuni

ties

for

farm

ers

and

loca

l foo

d s

ecto

r; E

xpan

din

g sm

all

sect

ors;

Imp

rovi

ng li

ving

con

diti

ons

of p

oor

farm

ers;

Ben

efitt

ing

sup

plie

rs; S

upp

ortin

g in

form

al s

ecto

rs

Imp

rovi

ng

entr

epre

neur

ial

opp

ortu

nitie

s

Brin

ging

rev

enue

; Inc

reas

ing

natio

nal i

ncom

e; C

reat

ing

emp

loym

ent;

Imp

rovi

ng

infr

astr

uctu

re; C

ontr

ibut

ing

to G

DP

; Enh

anci

ng li

ving

sta

ndar

ds;

Enh

anci

ng t

ax r

even

ues;

Im

pro

ving

eco

nom

ic d

evel

opm

ent

opp

ortu

nitie

s; Im

pro

ving

inve

stm

ent

opp

ortu

nitie

s;

Gen

erat

ing

fore

ign

exch

ange

; Im

pro

ving

eco

nom

ic c

ond

ition

s; S

upp

ortin

g go

vern

men

t in

vest

men

t; Im

pro

ving

rev

enue

gen

erat

ion;

Red

ucin

g p

over

ty; I

ncre

asin

g em

plo

ymen

t;

Imp

rovi

ng e

mp

loym

ent

opp

ortu

nitie

s

Imp

rovi

ng

mac

roec

onom

ic

cond

ition

s

(con

tinue

d)

12

Op

en C

odin

g (L

ine-

by-

Line

Cod

ing)

Sub

them

es (A

xial

C

odin

g)M

ain

Them

es (S

elec

tive

Cod

ing)

Up

grad

ing

the

envi

ronm

ent;

Pro

tect

ing

envi

ronm

ent;

Enh

anci

ng la

ndsc

ape;

Rec

yclin

g w

aste

and

wat

er; L

esse

r im

pac

t on

the

env

ironm

ent;

Ed

ucat

ing

gues

ts; A

dop

ting

bes

t p

ract

ices

; Inv

estin

g in

env

ironm

enta

l im

pro

vem

ent;

Pre

serv

ing

mar

ine

envi

ronm

ent;

Fo

cusi

ng o

n en

viro

nmen

tal m

anag

emen

t; R

educ

ing

carb

on fo

otp

rint;

Usi

ng g

reen

p

rod

ucts

; Enh

anci

ng e

nviro

nmen

t; E

nhan

cing

env

ironm

enta

l life

of r

esid

ents

Imp

rovi

ng s

usta

inab

le

pra

ctic

esE

ncla

ve t

ouris

m a

s a

forc

e of

des

truc

tion

or d

enia

l of f

reed

om

Des

troy

ing

gree

n ar

eas;

Des

truc

tion

mar

ine

reso

urce

s; C

onsu

min

g la

nd r

esou

rces

; S

acrif

icin

g en

viro

nmen

t; D

estr

oyin

g lo

cal r

esou

rces

; Des

troy

ing

fishi

ng z

ones

; D

estr

oyin

g w

et la

nds

and

man

grov

es; O

ccup

ying

pub

lic b

each

es; T

akin

g p

roce

ssio

n of

la

nd; D

epriv

ing

peo

ple

from

acc

ess

to b

each

es; I

nvad

ing

pub

lic d

omai

n; B

ackf

illin

g of

la

goon

s; T

rans

form

ing

land

scap

e

Des

truc

tion

of c

oast

al/

mar

ine

envi

ronm

ent

Lead

ing

to c

once

ntra

tion

of r

even

ue; H

avin

g w

eak

econ

omic

imp

act;

Lea

din

g to

pow

er

imb

alan

ces;

Fav

orin

g ho

tel o

wne

rs; O

per

atin

g un

der

olig

opol

istic

mar

ket;

Cha

lleng

ing

surv

ival

of s

mal

l bus

ines

ses;

Pre

vent

ing

tour

ists

from

sp

end

ing

outs

ide;

Des

troy

ing

smal

l bus

ines

ses;

Lea

king

out

of r

even

ue; I

mp

ortin

g of

food

; Inc

reas

ing

pric

es; H

avin

g lo

w m

ultip

lier

effe

ct; C

losi

ng s

mal

l bus

ines

ses;

Lea

din

g to

poc

kets

of d

evel

opm

ent;

C

reat

ing

dis

par

ity; F

avor

ing

dev

elop

men

t of

onl

y ho

tels

; Lay

ing

off o

f wor

kers

; Cre

atin

g fr

ustr

atio

n am

ong

smal

l hot

el o

wne

rs; L

ead

ing

to c

losu

re o

f sm

all a

nd m

ediu

m

bus

ines

ses

Des

truc

tion

of s

mal

l b

usin

esse

s

Con

trib

utin

g to

crim

e; L

ead

ing

to t

he d

evel

opm

ent

of g

amb

ling

hous

es; L

ead

ing

to

pro

stitu

tion,

dru

gs, a

nd v

and

alis

m; C

hang

ing

lifes

tyle

s an

d b

ehav

ior;

Des

troy

ing

coas

tal c

ultu

re; L

osin

g cu

ltura

l id

entit

y; D

eclin

ing

soci

al a

ccep

tab

ility

; Cre

atin

g co

nflic

t;

Hin

der

ing

soci

al a

ccep

tab

ility

; Exc

lud

ing

resi

den

ts fr

om d

evel

opm

ent;

Op

pos

ing

dev

elop

men

t; L

imiti

ng a

cces

s to

Mau

ritia

n; D

evel

opin

g ar

tific

ial a

nd m

echa

nize

d c

ultu

re;

Cre

atin

g d

isp

arity

Soc

iocu

ltura

l d

estr

uctio

n

tab

le 3

(c

ont

inue

d)


between the open coding and the axial coding process. This process reduced the database into a small set of themes or categories that characterized the process under study (Creswell, 2007).

Through axial coding, it was possible to describe stakeholders’ views of enclave tourism development more fully. As described in Table 3, seven sub-themes were identified and these were subsequently categorized into two main themes: (1) empowerment/improvement and (2) destruction/denial of freedom. The axial phase of coding was followed by selective coding. This coding process involved the integration of the categories derived from the open and axial coding process to form a conceptual framework explaining stakeholders’ views of enclave tourism. The codes and categories were explored further by rereading the coded statements. The researchers paid particular attention to understanding interrelationships.

During the process of data analysis, the concepts and relationships revealed by the coding processes were compared with ideas and concepts derived from the extant literature on the topic as recommended by Creswell (2007) and Chenitz (1986). This stage involved noting consistencies and departure from existing literature and helped to identify new research ideas/concepts not dis-cussed previously in the literature on enclave tourism development. This “enfolding literature” stage helped in building internal validity, raised theoreti-cal awareness, and sharpened construct definitions (Eisenhardt, 1989). To fur-ther ensure validity and reliability, we considered the overall process of grounded theory as a dynamic relationship between sampling and data analysis, which enabled us to modify generated categories (subthemes) so that new data were adapted into the emerging theory. Glaser (1978) refers to this process as devel-oping an “emergent fit.” To ensure credibility of findings, we allowed the par-ticipants to guide the inquiry process and use participants’ actual words during the coding process (Chiovitti & Piran, 2003).

findinGS

The presentation of findings is organized around the two emergent themes: (1) empowerment or improvement and (2) destruction/denial of freedom. Under each of the two main themes, the subthemes that emerged from the findings are presented. Interpretive codes are created using gerunds and wherever possible, verbatim quotes are used to support the arguments of the participants. The find-ings are then discussed in the light of the broader academic literature.

enclave tourism as an agent of empowerment and improvement

Empowerment of women and local residents. This theme highlights the par-ticipants’ description that enclave tourism contributes in a number of ways to the empowerment of women and local people. Interpretive codes such as “emancipa-tion of women,” “improving women’s skills,” “improving well-being,” “integrating


local community,” “empowering women,” “promoting life of women,” “improving lives of disabled people and women,” “promoting happiness,” and “empowering local people” were used by the participants to describe enclave tourism.

The manager of an integrated resort enclave noted:

Hotel resort enclaves are now strengthening their link with the local community and are trying to integrate with them disabled people, women and deprived members of the Mauritian society . . . Overall, I think that hotel resort enclaves have contributed to the happiness of many people in Mauritius . . . (Participant 10)

The manager of the Tourist Village stated:

Hotel resort enclaves also empower the local community . . . and ensure the emancipation and development of women in society . . . Social integration is also a big advantage . . . Through CSR [corporate social responsibility], hotel enclaves also train redundant workers and ensure the development and training of women in society. (Participant 5)

The representative of the Association of Hoteliers and Restaurants In Mauritius (AHRIM) further stressed on how hotel resort enclaves empower local people. He stated:

Resort enclaves also spend a lot of money in empowering the local community. For example, last year, hotel resort enclaves trained local people with low levels of education and coming from deprived area and made them skilled . . . Many were women . . . They were offered training in handicraft and were awarded a certificate at the end of it. These . . . enhance the socio-cultural well-being of the local residents . . . (Participant 7)

Improving entrepreneurial opportunities. This theme highlights the partici-pants’ description that enclave tourism improves opportunities for local busi-nesses. Interpretive codes such as “improving standard of living of farmers,” “improving quality of life of poor people,” “supporting local farmers,” “improv-ing economic situation of entrepreneurs,” “enhancing small businesses,” “providing support for local businesses,” “developing the informal sector,” “improving opportunities for local entrepreneurs,” and “improving business opportunities” defined this theme.

The representative of the Ministry of Social Integration and Economic Empowerment described hotel enclaves as enhancing business opportunities for the informal sector. He stated:

. . . It also creates prospects for small businesses outside the hotel sector . . . It benefits businesses providing different materials to the hotels. This allows the


development of other sectors and ensures that economic opportunities are enhanced. There is a supply chain attached to hotel enclaves which benefits the small sectors . . . (Participant 6)

The above views were reinforced by a hotel manager who commented:

Resort enclaves support and improve local businesses, providing food and other materials to the hotels. They make a good business out of these enclave resorts. Suppliers of materials also benefit. Hotel enclaves also create permanent employment opportunities for Mauritians and this is very important and a big advantage for us. (Participant 8)

The manager of the Tourist Village mentioned that hotel resort enclaves sup-port many families and provide several incentives for local businesses. He pro-vided some useful statistical data to justify the economic benefits of hotels. He noted:

Enclaves also support a large number of families and indirect employment. For example in the East, many onion planters have a market with the hotels . . . Hotel resort enclaves create around 22,000 direct employment, 55,000 indirect employment and around 100,000 induced employment though linkages with small businesses. (Participant 5)

Improving macroeconomic conditions. This theme highlights participants’ views that enclave tourism development improves the economy. Interpre-tive codes, such as “enhancing tax revenues for the government,” “improv-ing economic development opportunities,” “encouraging foreign investment,” “increasing national income,” “improving investment opportunities,” “gener-ating foreign exchange,” and “improving economic conditions” defined this theme.

The manager of a hotel resort enclave explained:

They lead to a high level of investment in Mauritius . . . We also derive a lot of foreign exchange and this is a very important point . . . (Participant 8)

The manager of the Tourist Village also stated:

The advantages are mainly economic in nature . . . Foreign exchange generation, tax revenues for government. All purchasers also benefit from a residential permit to Mauritius which means that there are always business deals which bring in foreign exchange to the island. (Participant 5)

The representative of AHRIM explained:


We receive a high level of foreign exchange . . . The land has been sold off to foreigners and we get lots of foreign exchange . . . For e.g. Anahita spent more than 96 million in social improvement . . . (Participant 7)

The representative of the Ministry of Social Integration and Economic Development explained that the economic benefits of hotel enclaves are much higher than small and medium hotels:

The advantages relate to high revenue generation. Hotel resort enclaves are associated with high tourist spending per head. Thus, the economic impacts of hotel resort enclaves are much higher than small and medium hotels. (Participant 6)

Improving sustainable practices. This theme highlights the participants’ description that hotel resort enclaves contribute to environmental preserva-tion by improving their day-to-day sustainable practices. Interpretive codes, such as “using green products,” “reducing carbon footprint,” “improving sustainability of operations,” “improving waste management,” “enhancing environmental life for residents,” “educating guests,” “using sustainable products,” and “improving water management” were used by the participants.

The representative of AHRIM considered that hotel resort enclaves engage in several initiatives to improve and enhance the environmental conditions. He stated that:

. . . Hotels enclaves have engaged in environmental improvement and upgrade of environmental infrastructure . . . Hotels also make use of green products and ensure that tourists are aware of their activities . . . We often organize workshops on energy saving devices, ways of saving energy, water use etc. (Participant 7)

A hotel owner also stated:

Hotel resorts invest massively on reducing their carbon footprint . . . We are also educating our guest regarding sustainable practices in rooms, restaurants and other places. From my experience, I can say for sure that hotel guests are becoming very sensitive to environmental issues . . . (Participant 11)

The manager of the tourist village explained:

. . . Many hotels are now becoming eco-friendly, incorporating ISO 22000. This also allows recycling of waste. Organic and green waste is being dealt with in a more effective way . . . Focus has been on electricity, treatment of waste water, energy saving devices etc. Hotels are now considered to be a clean industry, cleaner than the agricultural sector. (Participant 5)


enclave tourism as a force of destruction or denial of freedom

Sociocultural destruction and denial of freedom. This theme highlights the participants’ description that enclave tourism has led to sociocultural destruction and has denied local people freedom. Interpretive codes such as “limiting access to Mauritians,” “depriving public access,” “creating disparity,” “destroying cul-tural identity,” “declining social acceptability,” “changing lifestyles and behav-ior,” “destroying coastal culture,” “creating conflicts,” “denying access to public beaches,” “invading public domain,” “destroying local culture,” “denying local freedom,” “destroying cultural life,” and “curtailing public access” were used by the participants to describe enclave tourism.

The representative of the Ministry of Tourism and Leisure explained that:

. . . They have destroyed the coastal culture and have encouraged the development of an artificial and mechanized culture in many places of the island. We no longer have a cultural identity unique to us. (Participant 1)

The representative of residents explained that:

. . . all problems associated with the artificial life related to hotel development affect the immediate environment in the local community . . . Hotel resort enclaves and the hotel word in general sell a dream and many times, people working in the hotel are not able to distinguish between the dream and their real life . . . (Participant 12)

Interestingly, the representative of the National Committee on Corporate Social Responsibility, Ministry of Finance and Economic Development took a macro view on the sociocultural consequences of enclave tourism on the local com-munity. She stated:

The setting up of integrated resort schemes means that there are more and more foreign people coming into Mauritius . . . They create disparity between local people and foreigners . . .they give the feeling of deprivation and inequality to Mauritians who then can become frustrated. It is a sort of colonization process going on for Mauritius and it seems that history is repeating itself. Mauritius was previously a British colony, but now it seems that we will be controlled by foreigners . . . development is leading to the colonization of Mauritius . . . (Participant 6)

The representative of the Mauritius Marine Conservation Society explained that hotel resorts deny Mauritians’ access to their beaches:

Many of them invade public domain depriving public access to resources to which they have a full right, right to enjoy, right to use etc . . . (Participant 13)


Destruction of small businesses. This subtheme describes stakeholders’ views of enclave tourism as a force that destroys the survival of small busi-nesses. Participants used gerunds such as “challenging survival of small businesses,” “destroying the informal sector,” “favoring development of only hotels,” “favoring hotel owners,” “destroying local entrepreneurs,” “closing of small businesses,” and “destroying local market,” to describe enclave tourism.

The representative of the Board of Investment expressed concerns regarding the impacts of resort enclave on outside businesses. He noted that the concept of resort enclaves discourages tourists to spend outside the hotel compound that challenges the survival of local businesses: He explained:

. . . The small entrepreneurs and the people of the locality, the society at large do not benefit much from this strategy. Small entrepreneurs, such as handicrafts sellers are not able to attract sufficient customers. Small businesses and restaurants also suffer from a lack of demand for their products . . . local business is destroyed . . . Tourists also spend very less in terms of shopping outside the hotel resorts. (Participant 2)

The above views were also supported by the representative of the Ministry of Tourism and Leisure, who stated:

. . . small businesses are not able to sustain their businesses . . . There is no return on investment for many small businesses. Closure of many restaurants as it is difficult to attract clients because of the hotel resort enclaves . . . (Participant 1)

The representative of residents explained:

Hotel enclaves have their own chain of support services and supply. So this does not allow other businesses to enter the hotel industry . . . Hotel resort enclaves also have their own insurance companies. As such, they are always the ones who will be investing in the Mauritian economy . . . (Participant 12)

Destruction of coastal and marine environment. This theme highlights the participants’ description that enclave tourism is a force of environmental destruc-tion. Gerunds such as “destroying green areas and marine resources,” “consum-ing land resources,” “sacrificing environment,” “destroying local resources,” “destroying fishing zones,” “destroying wet lands and mangroves,” “occupy-ing public beaches,” “transforming landscape,” “backfilling of lagoon,” and “sacrificing environment” were used by the participants to express their views about enclave tourism development.

The representative of residents considered that enclave tourism had led to destruction of the marine and coastal environment. He noted:


They have caused a lot of destruction to the wet lands, biodiversity and ecosystem of our coastal environment . . . They have increased environmental damage, backfilling of lagoons . . . destruction of wet lands and mangroves . . . creation of ski lanes and bathing zones has also meant severe disturbance to the marine environment. (Participant 12)

The representative of the Board of Investment explained:

In some places, hotels have crossed their limits and have damaged coral reefs and engaged in sea filling to create artificial beaches. In many places, the lagoon and sea beds have been destroyed by hotel activities. There are also some illegal discharges of waste water in the sea by irresponsible hoteliers. (Participant 2)

The representative of the Mauritius Marine Conservation Society interest-ingly emphasized that it is only when the hotels have already been constructed that hoteliers pay attention to the environment, but they fail to preserve the envi-ronment during the construction phase of the resort. She stated:

. . . during the site selection and construction phase, promoters never bother about environmental conservation and preservation. They do not pay much attention to the protection of local resources. It is only when the hotels are already built and well established that hoteliers pay much attention to environmental conservation. (Participant 13)

diScuSSion

Using a grounded theory approach, the findings of the study are classified under two main themes: (1) enclave tourism as an agent of empowerment and improvement and (2) enclave tourism as a force of destruction and denial of freedom. Four subthemes define Theme 1: (a) empowerment of women and local residents, (b) improving entrepreneurial opportunities, (c) improving mac-roeconomic conditions, and (d) improving sustainable practices. Three sub-themes define Theme 2: (a) sociocultural destruction and denial of freedom, (b) destruction of small businesses, and (c) destruction of coastal and marine envi-ronment. Integrating the main and subthemes led to the development of a con-ceptual framework that explains stakeholders’ views on enclave tourism development (Figure 1).

The views expressed from the 14 interviewees suggest that enclave tourism is a multifaceted phenomenon that impacts on the socioeconomic, cultural, and environmental aspects of the destination. Together, the findings suggest that while enclave tourism development results in a number of adverse consequences on local communities and the environment, confirming existing literature (e.g. Anderson, 2011; Andriotis, 2008; Akama & Kieti, 2007; Freitag, 1994; Mbaiwa, 2003, 2005), it also contributes to socioeconomic development. In particular,


participants viewed enclave tourism as an agent of empowerment. So far, the majority of studies on enclave tourism development has either neglected the idea of empowerment or has produced contradictory results. For example, Akama and Kieti’s (2007) study on Mombasa Resort, Kenya concluded that the “current forms of tourism development in Kenya have not reduced poverty or contributed to socio-economic empowerment of local people” (p. 746). In the present study, participants generally agreed that enclave tourism empowers and improves the life of the local community.

Interestingly, participants adopted a gendered perspective in their responses that demonstrated the influence of hotel resort enclaves on the life of women in

figure 1conceptual framework of Stakeholders’ views on enclave tourism

Tourism stakeholders:Public sector; Private sector;

NGOs/Residents

Enclave tourism as an agent ofempowerment/improvement

Empowermentof women

Entrepreneurialopportunities

Macroeconomicconditions

Sustainablepractices

Enclave tourism as a force ofdestruction/denial of freedom

Socio-culturaldestruction

Destruction ofsmall businesses

Destruction ofcoastal/marineenvironment


particular. The emergence of new export sectors such as hotel resort enclaves in Mauritius has brought new realities where women have access to skilled jobs at various levels of the industry and are offered several training and development opportunities. Participants’ use of statements, such as “making women strong,” “promoting women development,” “enhancing women’s life” suggest that paid employment in enclave resorts and higher skills for women has meant higher control over household income and greater respect in society, which have poten-tially increased their autonomy, empowerment, and access to resources, enabling them to increase their participation in the tourism development process. Chant (1997) rightly argued that women’s participation in tourism has enabled them “acting by themselves, for themselves, to demand fairer treatment . . . in the home and in wider society” (pp. 164-165), while Tucker (2007) concluded that tourism development has contributed to the “undoing of shame” (p. 101) for women.

These are important observations because tourism development is often criti-cized for perpetuating traditional notions about female gender roles and gen-dered aspects of inequality (Ferguson, 2011a, 2011b; Sinclair, 1997). This happens because women tend to miss out on employment opportunities and other tourism-related benefits because of normative notions of gender identity, roles, and relations (Scheyvens, 2000; Tucker, 2007). Contradicting these argu-ments, our study joins other research that suggests tourism and commercial hos-pitality are effective strategies for women’s empowerment (McMillan, O’Gorman & MacLaren, 2011; Tucker & Boonabaana, 2012), although we note that empowerment of women has been mainly studied in the context of alterna-tive forms of tourism development, such as ecotourism (Scheyvens, 1999, 2000), cultural tourism (Swain, 1993), and mountain tourism (Lama, 2000; Nyaupane, Morais, & Dowler, 2006). However, the literature on enclave tourism is devoid of the idea of women’s empowerment, an aspect on which the present research sheds some lights. Our research suggests that enclave tourism develop-ment has the potential of promoting welfare and empowerment of women.

Participants had mixed views regarding the impact of hotel resort enclaves on local businesses. Private sector stakeholders generally considered that hotel resort enclaves have improved opportunities for local entrepreneurial opportuni-ties while nongovernment actors and residents viewed hotel enclaves as causing destruction to local businesses. Such nuances reflect the disagreement among researchers and scholars regarding the impact of resort enclaves on entrepre-neurship opportunities. Participants’ views that enclave tourism development challenges survival of small businesses, prevents tourists from spending outside, and destroys small businesses lend support to Shaw and Shaw’s (1999) study on Bali who reported that enclave tourism resulted in the marginalization of the informal businesses whose role has been restricted to the selling of goods at vacant plots between hotels. Freitag’s (1994) research in the Dominican Republic also concluded that enclavity minimized economic exchanges between tourists and local businesses. Some researchers suggest that resort enclaves are not designed to promote economic linkages at the community level (Freitag, 1994).


Enclave tourism in island economies is usually characterized by foreign domi-nation (Anderson, 2011; Oppermann & Chon, 1997) where its development relies on foreign capital, investment, and human resources. Mbaiwa (2005) argues that transport, accommodation, and other services associated with enclave tourism are provided by major enterprises with the implications that small busi-nesses strive to sustain. Furthermore, the all-inclusive nature of enclave tourism also means that the majority of services are provided within the resorts, chal-lenging the sustainability of outside businesses and the informal sectors of the industry (Freitag, 1994). Freitag further notes that enclave tourism provides minimal entrepreneurial opportunity, and in cases where locals do manage to get involved in tourism development, they tend to be only the elite members of the community. Integrated resort enclaves that attempt to internalize tourist expen-diture have limited impact on the local economy. There have been cases reported where local people are denied significant opportunities to participate in tourism development and those wishing to sell to tourists are able to do so only at the enclave entry and exit points only (Akama & Kieti, 2007).

Contradicting these arguments, Din (1992) notes that researchers adopt a too pessimistic view of enclave tourism, arguing that existing studies consider that dominance of the industry by multinational corporations means that there are no opportunities for local entrepreneurship. Din (1992) argues that local people and small businesses do have reasonable prospects of becoming entrepreneurs. In support of his argument, an important theme that emerged from the findings is the enhancement of opportunities for small businesses through enclave tourism development. Stakeholders used statement, such as “supporting local business/farmers, “improving local businesses,” “supporting small businesses,” “enhanc-ing economic opportunities,” “strengthening link with small businesses,” and “benefitting handicrafts sellers” to describe the positive impacts of enclave tour-ism on local entrepreneurship. These views lend support to some researchers who note that enclave resort developers do attempt to integrate the resort within the local community through fostering economic linkages with the community. This often takes place through the purchase of food from the local community and through the creation of investment opportunities (Telfer & Wall, 1996; Wall, 1997). In return, hotel resorts derive a number of benefits by engaging in link-ages with local businesses, such as reduction of costs, greater security over raw materials, improved quality of supply, closer relationships with government, and branding benefits. The sourcing of goods locally is a key benefit for the tourism sector (Meyer, 2008; Rogerson, 2012). A common practice by hotel enclaves in Mauritius is that they combine corporate social responsibility activities with their commercial interests to support local businesses.

Participants’ views seem to corroborate with the argument that reliance on tourism as a growth strategy in any destination is driven by the economic bene-fits associated with it (Cooper, Fletcher, Fyall, Gilbert, & Wanhill, 2008; Page & Connell, 2009), and in the particular context of enclave tourism, stakeholders generally perceive its economic impact as positive (Andriotis, 2008). An


underlying justification for the Mauritian government to develop and promote integrated resort development lies in the nonnegligible foreign currency inflow and their positive impacts on balance of payment, particularly in the context of large current account deficits. Transactions related to integrated resorts have provided the Mauritian government an appreciable source of revenue, support-ing public finance and national growth-enhancing initiatives (Mauritius Commercial Bank, 2007). These arguments remain true for many developing and less-developed economies (Hall, 1995). The Mauritian government’s emphasis on the development of resort enclaves has been reinforced in the con-text of a declining export market for sugar and textile, forcing the state to relook at its economic priorities, with an increasing focus on the development of enclave resorts. Consequently, as is the case in other developing economies, stakeholders’ views in tourism are often secondary to economic considerations.

Tourism is an agent of environmental change and if the industry is managed properly, it has the capacity of maintaining the integrity of resources and preserving the environment (Mbaiwa, 2003). Stakeholders’ views that resort enclaves recycle waste and water, adopt best practices, reduce carbon footprint, and use green prod-ucts suggest that enclave hotels invest considerably in improving their sustainabil-ity practices. Hotel resorts are under increasing pressure to pay appropriate attention to environmental issues because they consume substantial quantities of energy, water, and nondurable products (E. S. W. Chan & Hawkins, 2012). The increasing attention paid to environmental issues by hotel enclaves is borne out by the propa-gation and the popularization of concepts such as sustainable development and eco-efficiency (Bohdanowicz, Zientara, & Novotna, 2011). Such environmental initiatives in Mauritius have also been driven by the Tourism Environment Charter and the Environmental Commission of AHRIM that encourage hotel to adopt eco-friendly practices in their day-to-day operations. In addition, hotel resorts have additional stakes for preserving the environment and adopting environmental friendly practices because the hotel business depends on providing an attractive and safe environment (E. S. W. Chan & Wong, 2006). Customers have also become more environmentally demanding as they look for hotels that adopt environmental friendly practices in their operations (Manaktola & Jauhari, 2007).

Hotel resort enclaves often combine their corporate social responsibility with their environmental initiatives. They have a higher capacity to invest in environ-mental management systems and adopt eco-friendly practices than small and medium-sized hotels because of higher profitability and revenue. Results from this study seem to corroborate the idea that large hotels have developed compre-hensive environmental management plans compared to small independent hotels because of availability of financial and technical resources (Bohdanowicz, 2006; Bohdanowicz et al., 2011; Rahman, Reynolds, & Svaren, 2012). Stakeholders were also of the opinion that hotel enclaves spend considerable resources in educating their guests, a view that lends support to Rahman et al.’s (2012) con-clusion that large hotels are more likely to provide energy-saving suggestions to their customers than independent hotels.


However, although resort enclaves were considered as sustainable in their day-to-day operations, there was a feeling among interviewees that hotel enclave development leads to the destruction of coastal and marine resources. Participants were mainly concerned with the impacts that arise during the construction phase of resorts. Large-scale development such as enclave resorts has been found to consume the natural environment and destroy the economic value of resources, particularly in sensitive environments (Andriotis, 2008; Lee, 1997). This is because they demand large stretches of land for developing facilities and ser-vices (Selwyn, 2001). This is probably why although such development is often justified on the basis of economic benefits, it is challenged on grounds of envi-ronmental destruction. Carter (1991) warns that destruction of tourism resources brings about only short-term gains and denies destinations and stakeholders from long-term benefits.

Participants described enclave tourism as a force of sociocultural destruction. Interviewees often referred to resort enclaves as “ghettos” or “fortresses.” The development of enclave tourism in Mauritius reflects what Mbaiwa (2005, p. 159) calls “internal colonialism.” Development of enclave tourism in Mauritius has resulted in the presence of stronger Western ideas and practices in a weaker host culture. Participants also considered enclave tourism development as con-tributing to social disparity between local people and foreigners. Enclave tour-ism symbolizes foreign wealth and privilege among the local population (Manning, 1982). The goods and services provided by hotel enclaves are often unaffordable to the local economy, leading to a feeling of deprivation and inequality among local residents (Mbaiwa, 2005). Akama and Kieti (2007) dem-onstrate through a case study of Mombasa Resort in Kenya the material and socioeconomic differences between tourists staying in high-class hotel resorts and local residents. Sociocultural differences in purchasing power gaps between local residents and tourists often lead to social conflicts (Tosun, 2002). Brohman (1996) argues that “tourism enclaves reinforce longstanding (neo) colonial pat-terns of socio-economic and spatial polarization” (p. 57). Interview participants’ descriptions of enclave tourism support the political economy view that suggests that tourism is an exploitative force that emanates from the desire of affluent middle classes in societies (Lea, 1988). Using this approach, Britton’s (1982, 1991) research confirms the existence of unequal economic relations between peripheral tourist destinations and metropolitan economies.

concluSion

The purpose of this study was to understand stakeholders’ views of enclave tourism development in the island economy of Mauritius. Data were collected from in-depth interviews carried out with 14 participants representing the vari-ous stakeholders of the Mauritian tourism industry. Grounded theory was used as the data-analytic strategy. Seven subthemes, categorized into two main themes emerged logically from the data. The themes suggest a number of


complexities that may exist when researching stakeholders’ views of enclave tourism development. These complexities are demonstrated by themes that are often contradictory, but yet relevant to enclave tourism development in Mauritius. Contradictory themes reflect the discord among tourism actors in the development process. The grounded theory approach used in this study proved valuable as some insights not previously discussed in the existing literature on enclave tourism and useful for future theoretical developments emerged. Results of the study are useful for tourism planners and managers of enclave resorts who have increasing responsibilities of balancing economic priorities with sociocul-tural and environmental responsibilities in the context of sustainable tourism development.

Contrary to existing studies that often criticize enclave tourism because of its adverse socioeconomic and environmental consequences (Din, 1992), our research suggests that such a form of tourism has some benefits with respect to environmental management, local entrepreneurship, and local empowerment, which could be the basis for sustainable tourism development. In particular, our research provides useful theoretical insights on women empowerment through enclave tourism development. So far, there has been limited research on the relationship between commercial hospitality and empowerment of women (McMillan et al., 2011). The majority of existing research in this area has inves-tigated women’s empowerment in the context of alternative tourism. Although the traditional view is that tourism exploits traditional beliefs particularly when it comes to gender-based segregation and perpetuates gender inequality that challenge the sustainability of the sector (C. B. Cohen, 1995; Kinnaird & Hall, 1996; Kinnaird, Kothari, & Hall, 1994; Pritchard & Morgan, 2000), our findings suggest that hotel resort enclaves can be credited for providing a number of benefits through employment opportunities and training and development that empower women who may have otherwise been marginalized in tourism devel-opment. It is likely that there are further opportunities for women to be involved in tourism development. There may be potential for empowering women further through small-scale commercial hospitality enterprises in Mauritius. Given that all inclusive resort is the primary tourism model being used by the government to promote economic and social development, it is important that their links with the informal and small-scale tourism businesses are strengthened. In order to support small tourism and hospitality businesses, demand, supply, marketing, quality, finance, human resource issues, and intermediary factors as well as gov-ernment policy need to be taken into account (Meyer, 2008). Government may also encourage local ownership and management of tourism resources. It is important that government takes into account gender issues in tourism, such as women’s empowerment. Such strategies could lead to a more socioeconomi-cally sustainable tourism development.

The data of this research suggest that hotel resort enclaves invest a lot in environmentally friendly and sustainable practices, an often overlooked dimen-sion in the literature on the impacts of resort enclaves. Hotel enclaves have


higher financial and technical capacities to invest in environmental management systems compared to small and medium hotels that often pay little attention to their environmental responsibilities (Radwan, Jones, & Minoli, 2012). However, there was also recognition that hotel enclaves have a number of adverse conse-quences on the wider natural environment. At the theoretical level, the emerging themes and findings of other studies (e.g., Rahman et al., 2012) suggest the need to consider the environmental consequences of hotel enclaves at two levels: hotel operations and wider environment. This may probably lead to a more accu-rate assessment of stakeholders’ views on the environmental consequences of hotel resort enclaves in the planning process.

The results of the study show that dealing with stakeholders’ views in tourism is a complex issue. Their views are often nuanced and their goals in tourism development are contradictory (Kuvan & Akan, 2012; Yasarata et al., 2010). The public sector tends to focus on a supply-oriented approach (resource-based) while the private sector adopts a marketing-oriented approach (Altinay, Altinay, & Bicak, 2002). At the same time, residents often feel that they have little voice in tourism and gain marginally from the industry’s development. There is a need for greater communication among the different stakeholder groups to resolve such conflicting goals and views. Government officials and the private sector may not be fully aware of the concerns of residents while the local community may not be aware of the positive economic, sociocultural, and environmental performance of the industry. Communication will enable the sharing and discus-sion of ideas, concerns, and suggestions and may strengthen partnership and collaboration among the stakeholders. The results suggest that it is too simplistic to consider enclave tourism as positive or negative for island destinations and the local communities. A “one size fits all” strategy is not recommended to sum-marize the views and concerns of all actors in tourism development (Tkaczynski, Rundle-Thiele, & Beaumont, 2009). Any analysis of the positive and negative consequences of enclave tourism must be sufficiently nuanced to show the dif-ferent views of stakeholders which are reflections of the reality. Such nuances are also important for broader theoretical development.

referenceS

Adrianto, L., & Matsuda, Y. (2002). Developing economic vulnerability indices of environmental disasters in small island regions. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 22, 393-414.

Akama, J. S., & Kieti, D. (2007). Tourism and socio-economic development in devel-oping countries: A case study of Mombasa Resort in Kenya. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 15, 735-748.

Altinay, L., Altinay, M., & Bicak, H. A. (2002). Political scenarios: The future of North Cyprus tourism industry. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 14, 176-182.

Anderson, W. (2011). Enclave tourism and its socio-economic impact in emerging des-tinations. Anatolia: An International Journal of Tourism and Hospitality Research, 22, 361-377.


Andriotis, K. (2003). Tourism in Crete. A form of modernization. Current Issues in Tourism, 6, 23-53.

Andriotis, K. (2008). Integrated resort development: The case of Cavo Sidero, Crete. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 16, 428-444.

Becker, P. H. (1993). Common pitfalls in published grounded theory. Qualitative Health Research, 3, 254-256.

Bohdanowicz, P. (2006). Environmental awareness and initiatives in the Swedish and Polish hotel industries—survey results. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 25, 662-682.

Bohdanowicz, P., Zientara, P., & Novotna, E. (2011). International hotel chains and envi-ronmental protections: An analysis of Hilton’s We Care! Program (Europe, 2006-2008). Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 19, 797-816.

Britton, S. (1982). The political economy of tourism in the third world. Annals of Tourism Research, 9, 331-358.

Britton, S. (1991). Tourism, dependency and place: Towards a critical geography of tour-ism development. Environment and Planning D: Society and Place, 9, 451-478.

Brohman, J. (1996). New directions in tourism for third world development. Annals of Tourism Research, 23, 48-70.

Buhalis, D. (1999). Tourism on the Greek islands: Issues of peripherality, competitive-ness and development. International Journal of Tourism Research, 1, 341-358.

Byrd, E. T., Bosley, H. E., & Dronberger, M. G. (2009). Comparisons of stakeholder perceptions of tourism impacts in rural eastern North Carolina. Tourism Management, 30, 693-703.

Campling, L., & Rosalie, M. (2006). Sustaining social development in small island state? The case of Seychelles. Sustainable Development, 14, 115-125.

Carter, E. (1991). Sustainable tourism in the third world: Problems and prospects (Discussion Paper No. 3). London, England: University of Reading.

Ceballos-Lascurain, H. (1996). Tourism, ecotourism and protected areas. Gland, Switzerland: Island Press.

Chan, E. S. W., & Hawkins, R. (2012). Application of EMS in a hotel context: A case study. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 31, 405-418.

Chan, E. S. W., & Wong, S. C. K. (2006). Motivation for ISO 14001 in the hotel industry. Tourism Management, 44, 580-601.

Chan, W. W., & Lam, J. C. (2002). A study on pollutant emission through gas consump-tion in the Hong Kong hotel industry. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 10, 70-81.

Chant, S. (1997). Gender and tourism employment in Mexico and the Philippines. In M. T. Sinclair (Ed.), Gender, work and tourism (pp. 120-180). London, England: Routledge.

Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualita-tive analysis. London, England: Sage.

Chenitz, C. W. (1986). Getting started: the research proposal for a grounded theory study. In C. W. Chenitz & J. M. Swanson (Eds.), From practice to grounded theory: Qualitative research in nursing (pp. 39-47). Wokingham, England: Addison-Wesley.

Chiovitti, R. F., & Piran, N. (2003). Rigour and grounded theory research. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 44, 427-435.

Cohen, C. B. (1995). Marketing paradise, making nation. Annals of Tourism Research, 22, 404-421.

Cohen, E. (1984). The sociology of tourism: Approaches, issues, and findings. Annals of Tourism Research, 19, 337-392.


Conlin, M., & Baum, T. (1995). Island tourism: Management principles and practice. Chichester, England: Wiley.

Connell, J., & Lowe, A. (1997). Generating grounded theory from qualitative data: The application of inductive methods in tourism and hospitality research. Progress in Tourism and Hospitality Research, 3, 165-173.

Cooper, C., Fletcher, J., Fyall, A., Gilbert, D., & Wanhill, S. (2008). Tourism: Principles and practice (4th ed.). Harlow, England: Pearson.

Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (1990). Grounded theory research: Procedures, canons, and evaluative criteria. Qualitative Sociology, 13, 3-21.

Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. London, England: Sage.

Dey, I. (1999). Grounding grounded theory: Guidelines for qualitative inquiry. London, England: Academic Press.

Din, K. M. (1992). The involvement stage in the evolution of a tourist destination. Tourism Recreational Research, 17, 10-20.

Dos Santos, T. (1970). The structure of dependency. American Economic Review, 60, 231-236

Eisenhardt, E. M. (1989). Building theories from case study research. Academy of Management Review, 14, 532-550.

Enoch, Y. (1996). Contents of tour packages: A cross-cultural comparison. Annals of Tourism Research, 23, 599-616.

Ferguson, L. (2011a). Promoting gender equality and empowering women? Tourism and the third millennium development goal. Current Issues in Tourism, 14, 235-249.

Ferguson, L. (2011b). Tourism, consumption and inequality in Central America. New Political Economy, 16, 347-371.

Freitag, T. G. (1994). Enclave tourism development: For whom the benefits roll? Annals of Tourism Research, 21, 538-554.

Glaser, B. (1978). Theoretical sensitivity. Advances in the methodology of grounded theory. Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press.

Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for quali-tative research. Chicago, IL: Aldine.

Hall, C. M. (1994). Tourism and politics: Policy, power and place. Chichester, England: Wiley.

Hall, C. M. (1995). Introduction to tourism in Australia: Impacts, planning and develop-ment. London, England: Longman.

Hardy, A. (2005). Using a grounded theory to explore stakeholder perceptions of tour-ism. Journal of Tourism and Cultural Change, 3, 108-133.

Hardy, A., & Beeton, S. (2001). Sustainable tourism or maintainable tourism: Managing resources for more than average outcomes. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 9, 168-192.

Harrison, D. (2001). Tourism in small islands and microstates. Tourism Recreation Research, 26(3), 3-8.

Jenkins, C. (1982). The effects of scale in tourism projects in developing countries. Annals of Tourism Research, 9, 229-249.

Joo, J. (2011). Adoption of semantic web from the perspective of technology innovation: A grounded theory approach. International Journal of Human-Computer studies, 69, 139-154.

Kinnaird, V., & Hall, D. (1996). Understanding tourism processes: a gender-aware framework. Tourism Management, 17, 95-102.


Kinnaird, V., Kothari, U., & Hall, D. (1994). Tourism: gender perspectives. In V. Kinnaird & D. Hall (Eds.), Tourism: a gender analysis (pp. 1-34). Chichester, England: Wiley.

Kuvan, Y., & Akan, P. (2012). Conflict and agreement in stakeholder attitudes: Residents’ and hotel managers’ views of tourism impacts and forest-related tourism develop-ment. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 20, 571-584.

Lama, W. B. (2000). Community-based tourism for conservation and women’s develop-ment. In P. M. Godde, M. F. Price, & F. M. Zimmerman (Eds.), Tourism and develop-ment in mountain regions (pp. 221-238). New York, NY: CABI.

Lea, J. (1988). Tourism and development in the third world. London, England: Routledge.

Lee, C. K. (1997). Valuation of nature-based tourism resources using dichotomous choice contingent valuation method. Tourism Management, 18, 587-591.

Lim, C. C., & Cooper, C. (2009). Beyond sustainability: Optimizing island tourism development. International Journal of Tourism Research, 11, 89-103.

Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.Manaktola, K., & Jauhari, V. (2007). Exploring customer attitude and behavior toward

green practices in the lodging industry in India. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 19, 364-377.

Manning, F. E. (1982). The Caribbean experience. Cultural Survival Quarterly, 6(3), 13-14.

Martin, D., & Woodside, A. G. (2008). Grounded theory of international tourism behav-ior. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 24, 245-258.

Mauritius Commercial Bank. (2007). IRS: Contribution to socio-economic development. Retrieved from http://www.mcb.mu/Documents/MCB_Focus/MCB_Focus_36.pdf

Mbaiwa, J. E. (2003). The socio-economic and environmental impacts of tourism development on the Okavango Delta, north-western Botswana. Journal of Arid Environment, 54, 447-467.

Mbaiwa, J. E. (2005). Enclave tourism and its socio-economic impacts in the Okavango Delta, Botswana. Tourism Management, 26, 157-172.

McElroy, J. L., & de Albuquerque, K. (2002) Problems for managing sustainable tour-ism in small islands. In Y. Apostolopoulos & D. J. Gayle (Eds.), Island tourism and sustainable development: Caribbean, Pacific, and Mediterranean experiences (pp. 15-31). Westport, CT: Praeger.

McMillan, C. L., O’Gorman, K. D., & MacLaren, A. C. (2011). Commercial hospitality: A vehicle for the sustainable empowerment of Nepali women. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 23, 189-208.

Mead, G. H. (1934). Mind, self, and society. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago.Mehmetoglu, M., & Altinay, L. (2006). Examination of grounded theory analysis with an

application to hospitality research. Hospitality Management, 25, 12-33.Meyer, D. (2008). Pro-poor tourism: From leakages to linkages: A conceptual framework

for creating linkages between the accommodation sector and poor neighbouring com-munities. Current Issues in Tourism, 10, 558-583.

Milne, S. (1992). Tourism and development in South Pacific microstates. Annals of Tourism Research, 19, 191-212.

Nunkoo, R., & Ramkissoon, H. (2011). Developing a community support model for tour-ism. Annals of Tourism Research, 38, 964-988.

http://www.mcb.mu/Documents/MCB_Focus/MCB_Focus_36.pdf


Nyaupane, G. P., Morais, D. B., & Dowler, L. (2006). The role of community involvement and number/type of visitors on tourism impacts: A controlled comparison of Annapurna, Nepal and Northwest Yunnan, China. Tourism Management, 27, 1373-1385.

Okumus, F., Altinay, L., & Roper, A. (2007). Gaining access for research. Reflections from experience. Annals of Tourism Research, 34, 7-26.

Oppermann, M. (1992). International tourism and regional development in Malaysia. Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geograhie, 83, 226-233.

Oppermann, M. (1993). Tourism space in developing countries. Annals of Tourism Research, 20, 535-556.

Oppermann, M., & Chon, K. S. (1997). Tourism in developing countries. London, England: International Thomson Business Press.

Page, S., & Connell, J. (2009). Tourism: A modern synthesis (3rd ed.). London, England: Cengage Learning.

Park, R., & Burgess, E. (1921). An introduction to the science of sociology. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

Patton, M. Q. (1980). Qualitative evaluation methods. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.Pritchard, A., & Morgan, N. J. (2000). Privileging the male gaze: Gendered tourism land-

scapes. Annals of Tourism Research, 27, 884-905.Radwan, H. R., Jones, E., & Minoli, D. (2012). Solid waste management in small hotels:

A comparison of green and non-green small hotels in Wales. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 20, 533-550.

Rahman, I., Reynolds, D., & Svaren, S. (2012). How “green” are North American hotels? An exploration of low-cost adoption practices. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 31, 720-727.

Rogerson, C. M. (2012). Tourism–agriculture linkages in rural South Africa: Evidence from the accommodation sector. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 20, 477-495.

Saunders, M., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2003). Research methods for business students (3rd ed.). Harlow, England: Prentice Hall.

Scheyvens, R. (1999). Ecotourism and the empowerment of local communities. Tourism Management, 20, 245-249.

Scheyvens, R. (2000). Promoting women’s empowerment though involvement in ecotour-ism: Experiences from the third world. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 8, 232-249.

Selwyn, T. (2001). Tourism development and society in the insular Mediterranean. In D. Ioannides, Y. Apostolopoulos, & S. Sonmez (Eds.), Mediterranean islands and sustainable tourism development (pp. 23-44). London, England: Continuum.

Sharpley, R (2000). Tourism and sustainable development: Exploring the theoretical divide. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 8, 1-19.

Sharpley, R. (2001). Tourism in Cyprus: Challenges and opportunities. Tourism Geographies, 3, 64-86.

Sharpley, R. (2003). Tourism, modernization and development on the island of Cyprus: Challenges and policy responses. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 11(2&3), 246-265.

Shaw, B. J., & Shaw, G. (1999). Sun, sand and sales: Enclave tourism and local entrepre-neurship in Indonesia. Current Issues in Tourism, 2, 68-81.

Sinclair, T. (1997). Gendered work in tourism. In M. T. Sinclair (Ed.), Gender, work and tourism (pp. 1-15). London, England: Routledge.

Stonich, S. C. (1998). Political ecology of tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 25, 25-54.


Strauss, A. (1987). Qualitative analysis for social scientists. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basic qualitative research: Grounded theory proce-dures and techniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and proce-dures for developing grounded theory. London, England: Sage.

Swain, M. B. (1993). Women producers of ethnic arts. Annals of Tourism Research, 20, 32-51.

Telfer, D., & Wall, G. (1996). Linkages between tourism and food production. Annals of Tourism Research, 23, 635-633.

Tkaczynski, A., Rundle-Thiele, S. R., & Beaumont, N. (2009). Segmentation: A tourism stakeholder view. Tourism Management, 22, 289-303.

Tosun, C. (2002). Host perceptions of impacts: A comparative tourism study. Annals of Tourism Research, 29, 231-253.

Trung, D. N., & Kumar, S. (2005). Resource use and waste management in Vietnam hotel industry. Journal of Cleaner Production, 13, 109-116.

Tucker, H. (2007). Undoing shame: Tourism and women’s work in Turkey. Journal of Tourism and Cultural Change, 5, 87-105.

Tucker, H., & Boonabaana, B. (2012). A critical analysis of tourism, gender and poverty reduction. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 20, 437-455.

Twining-Ward, L., & Butler, R. (2002). Implementing STD on a small island: Development and use of sustainable tourism development indicators in Samoa. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 10, 363-387.

van der Duim, R., & Caalders, J. (2002). Biodiversity and tourism: Impacts and interven-tions. Annals of Tourism Research, 29, 743-761.

Wall, G. (1997). Integrating integrated resorts. Annals of Tourism Research, 23, 713-716.Weed, M. (2009). Research quality considerations for grounded theory research in sport

and exercise psychology. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 19, 502-510.Woodside, A. G., MacDonald, R., & Burford, M. (2004). Grounded theory of leisure

travel. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 17, 7-39.Yasarata, M., Altinay, L., Burns, P., & Okumus, F. (2010). Politics and sustainable tour-

ism development—Can they co-exist? Tourism Management, 31, 345-356.Yin, R. K. (1989). Case study research: Design and method. London, England: Sage.Yuksel, F., Bramwell, B., & Yuksel, A. (1999). Stakeholder interviews and tourism plan-

ning at Pamukkale, Turkey. Tourism Management, 20, 351-360.

submitted october 20, 2012Accepted August 8, 2013refereed Anonymously

robin Nunkoo, PhD (email: [email protected]) is a Senior Lecturer in the Department of Management at the University of Mauritius; a visiting Senior Research Fellow in the Faculty of Management, University of Johannesburg, South Africa; and a Visiting Fellow in the Faculty of Business, Economics, and Law, University of Surrey, UK. His research interests are in sustainable tourism. He has published articles in jour-nals such as Annals of Tourism Research, Tourism Management, Journal of Sustainable

mailto:[email protected]


Tourism and Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Research, and Journal of Travel Research.

Haywantee ramkissoon, PhD (email: [email protected]) is a senior lecturer and a postdoctoral research fellow at BehaviourWorks Australia (BWA), Monash University, Australia. She holds two doctoral degrees in Tourism and in Environmental Psychology. Her most recent PhD was awarded by the Faculty of Business and Economics, Monash University. She publishes in leading hospitality and tourism journals such as Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Research, Annals of Tourism Research, Tourism Management, Journal of Travel Research, Journal of Sustainable Tourism among others. She is a reviewer for several high quality tourism, hospitality and natural resource man-agement journals. She is an executive member of the Australia & International Tourism Research Unit and serves on the editorial boards of a few tourism and hospitality journals.

mailto:[email protected]

Stakeholders' views of enclave tourism: A grounded theory approach DOI: 10.1177/1096348013503997...

Documents

Transcript of Stakeholders' views of enclave tourism: A grounded theory approach DOI: 10.1177/1096348013503997...