Tourism Management Perspectives 16 (2015) 228–236

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Tourism Management Perspectives

j ourna l homepage: www.e lsev ie r .com/ locate / tmp

Understanding conflicts at religious-tourism sites: The Baha'i WorldCenter, Israel

Noga Collins Kreiner ⁎, Deborah F. Shmueli, Michal Ben GalDepartment of Geography and Environmental Studies, University of Haifa, Israel

⁎ Corresponding author. Department of Geography andthe Haifa and Galilee Research Institute University of Haif

E-mail address: nogack@geo.haifa.ac.il (N.C. Kreiner).

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tmp.2015.04.0012211-9736/© 2015 Published by Elsevier Ltd.

a b s t r a c t

a r t i c l e i n f o

Article history:Received 9 November 2014Received in revised form 13 March 2015Accepted 30 April 2015Available online xxxx

Keywords:Religious-tourism sitesConflictsFramingBaha'iBaha'i World CenterIsrael

This article analyzes a conflict steming from the construction of a religious-tourism site—The Baha'i World Cen-ter, inHaifa, Israel and contributes to the literature on the relationship between religion, tourism, and conflict.Wefirst propose a framing typology based on literature of conflicts, as well as analysis of empirical data, usingGrounded Theory.We then apply the typology on the conflict around the construction of the Baha'iWorld Centerin Haifa. Our main findings fall under three main themes, or super-frames: ‘Process,’ ‘Values,’ and ‘Issues’ — ofwhich the ‘Process super-frame’ was found to have the dominant role in the Baha'i case study. Beyond that, weoffer a method that may be useful in understandin th conflicts stemming from the construction of tourism atreligious-tourism sites elsewhere and, at times, shed light on possible approaches to reframing disputes overtourism sites.

© 2015 Published by Elsevier Ltd.

1. Introduction

Religious-tourism sites such as cathedrals, temples, and mosques arecurrently attracting an increasing number of tourists worldwide, notonly because of their spiritual significance but also because of the recrea-tional, educational, and cultural purposes they fulfill (Francis, Williams,Annis, & Robbins, 2008; Shackley, 2001; Woodward, 2004). Not all reli-gious sites are conceived as religious-tourism sites but many evolve astourism attractions. Religious-tourism has been defined both as tourismto sites of current and/or past religious significance (Hughes, Bond, &Ballantyne, 2013) and as the visitation of religious settings considered rel-evant to one's own faith or the faith of others (Raj & Morpeth, 2007).

The establishment of new religious-tourism sites or enlargement ofexisting onesmay cause disputes and clashes on political, cultural, and sociallevels. This article contributes to the literature on tourism in general and onreligious-tourism inparticularbyexploring the relationshipbetween tourism,politics, religion and conflict. Better understanding of such conflicts may alsoultimately contribute to conflict mitigation. The research generates atypology of conflict perceptions that provide insight into disputes stemmingfrom the construction of religious sites—many of which attract tourists.

Many studies of tourism impact are heavily contextualized in thespecific attributes of given study areas and lack comparison with otherareas and related case studies (Yang, Ryan, & Zhang, 2012). This studydemarcates a different approach by proposing a framing typology

Environmental Studies Head ofa, Haifa, Israel

based on an empirical dataset and the literature of religion, politicsand conflict. Theoretically, we propose applying frame analysis as ameans of understanding the conflict surrounding the establishment ofreligious-tourism sites, many of which serve as tourismmagnets. Fram-ing is a powerful tool for conceptualizing situations and shaping percep-tions. In recent years, framing has been the subject of growing interestin a variety of disciplines and fields, prompting Robert Goodin (2009)to include the concept in his list of candidates for “The Next Big Thing”in his Oxford Handbook of Political Science (Desrosiers, 2012). On apractical level, effectively preparing planners and decision makers forthe establishment of new religious-tourism sites in the future requiresa solid understanding of the main categories of issues involved. Fornow, however, few studies have applied this methodology in the fieldof tourism.

The significance of this study is thus threefold. First, it proposes aframe typology and analysis as a means of understanding conflicts sur-rounding religious-tourism sites, many of which become religious-tourism sites, from both a theoretical and practical standpoint. Second,it contributes to the understanding of the Baha'i case study. Thus thirdly,it contributes to the body of religion, tourism and conflicts studies. Webegin with a short literature review focusing on tourism conflicts ingeneral and conflicts surrounding religious-tourism sites specifically,followed by a presentation of the Baha'i Center in Haifa. Next,we reviewthemethodology and explain how the framing typologywas developed.The findings section applies the typology to the Baha'i Center. The papercloses with a focused discussion of the case study, as well as a broaderdiscussion and conclusion regarding the use of framing as a tool fordeepening understanding of religious-tourism site conflicts.

229N.C. Kreiner et al. / Tourism Management Perspectives 16 (2015) 228–236

2. Conflicts in tourism

The study of conflict has received a lot of attention in the tourismarena in the last two decades. The conflicts explored in the tourism lit-erature are typically social, cultural, and economic in nature and mosthave elements of all categories. Although the sources of a dispute maybe more solidly grounded in one of the categories, differentiation intoday's complex world is quite difficult (Dredge, 2010; Poria &Ashworth, 2009; Poria, Butler, & Airey, 2003; Singh, 1997; Yang, Ryan,& Zhang, 2013). In many tourism-focused communities, tourism devel-opment significantly influences social conflict. By bringing in moregroups and subgroups, tourism development alters and complicatesthe scope and nature of conflicts, thereby influencing social structureand bringing about cultural change within local communities. The dis-putes that emerge typically revolve around the conflicting interests,values, and goals espoused by different stakeholders; by ethnic commu-nities and outside developers (over the economic benefits of tourism);and by tourists and locals (over limited resources).

Cultural and economic conflicts generally imply some degree of in-compatibility between individuals and between societies and local au-thorities (Robinson & Boniface, 1999; Deery, Jago, & Fredline, 2012).Lee, Riley, and Hampton (2010), for example, analyze the political in-volvement and relationships that influenced the progress of a specifictourist site in Korea. The study explores the dynamics of collaborationand shows how initial advantages can evolve into conflict and inertiaover time. It also outlines the continuing discord among interestedgroups, investigates the relationships surrounding the developmentprocess, and demonstrates how perceptual differences come to be em-bedded. Dredge (2010) posits that place values, attachments, andmeanings are constructed from the social, cultural, economic, ecological,and physical attributes of place. Individuals and groups value combina-tions of these attributes differently, giving rise to unique meanings andattachments to place. The strength of these meanings and attachmentscan be a source of intense conflict when the unique qualities of particu-lar places are threatened. In tourist destinations, these place values andattachments are dynamic, continually being constituted andreconstituted in the memories and daily lives of local residents andtourists.

Deery et al. (2012) holds that because the success of tourism inmany regions is so dependent on the support of the local community,it is essential that tourism's impact on the host community be under-stood,monitored, andmanaged.Whenmanaging the impact of tourismon the local community, its impact must not exceed the limits that aredeemed acceptable within the community. Institutionalization of theappropriate management strategies requires an understanding of howcertain tourist behaviors and outcomes affectmembers of the local com-munity. For example, a study on tourism development in Iran (Zamani-Farahani & Ghazali, 2012) provides information on the state of Islamicreligiosity and socio-cultural impact on residents, and affords originalinsight into the interaction between Islamic religion and tourism. Thisinformation is of great value to the Iranian authorities, the tourism in-dustry, academics, and local communities.

One perspective frequently employed to explain the socio-culturalimpacts of tourism is Social Exchange Theory (Ap, 1992). This theory in-fers that local residents evaluate tourism according to the costs and ben-efits they expect to sustain in exchange for their involvement. As aresult, when residents perceive that costs are outweighed by potentialbenefits, they have a positive attitude toward development (Ap, 1992;Diedrich & García-Buades, 2009). Sirakaya, Teye, and Sonmez (2002),however, point out that Social Exchange Theory relies not only on theoccurrence of an exchange but on its perceived relative fairness.

3. Conflicts surrounding religious-tourism sites

Whereas the study of conflict is addressed in the tourism arena, theconflicts surrounding religious-tourism destinations have received less

systematic attention. Religious-tourism sites offer tourists a wide varie-ty of experiences and activities including religious services, choir perfor-mances, music recitals, and civic and religious ceremonies (Nolan &Nolan, 1992). Studies also demonstrate that people visit sites of reli-gious significance for a variety of reasons thatmay ormay not be relatedto faith or spiritual needs (Hughes et al., 2013).

Over the past decade, religious-tourism sites have been the subjectof intensive scholarly investigation. Some works examine specific sitesand seek to better understand how they were demarcated or identified,who enjoys rights of access and ownership, what they mean to individ-uals and communities, and other questions central to site management(Collins-Kreiner, 2010; Collins-Kreiner, Shmueli, & Ben-Gal, 2013; Kong,1993, 2001, 2005; Timothy & Olsen, 2006). Current religious-tourismresearch focuses on geographical, sociological, and management-related aspects of sites, and the attributes and motivations of site visi-tors. Studies also explore the relationship between the sites themselvesand conflicts on the local, national, and international level (Digance,2003; Hubert, 1994; Shackley, 2001).

In what way are religious-tourism sites distinct from other tourismsites? They have physical and symbolic dimensions and are geographi-cally demarcated and associated with places to which one or more reli-gious community attributes extraordinary religious significance ordivine consecration. In recent years, they have also received consider-able attention with regard to identity formation among minoritygroups, and scholars demonstrate how sacred venues serve as a nexusfor identity formation, collective memory, self-empowerment, and re-sistance (Brace, Bailey, & Harvey, 2006; Chidester & Linenthal, 1995;Eade & Sallnow, 1991; Friedland & Hecht, 2000; Kong, 1993, 2001,2005; Napolitano, 2009; Nolan & Nolan, 1992; Tweed, 1997).

Thus, in thisworkwe try to examine the linkages between the devel-opment of religious-tourism sites as tourist attractions and which con-cepts alter the perception of conflict. Although Israel offers a highlycharged setting for considering the conflicts of religious-tourism sites,conflicts over the religious politics of space are not limited only to thepolitically explosive locations. Indeed, religion and the expansion ofreligious-tourism sites throughout the built environment have longconflict-ridden histories around the world (Gatrell & Collins-Kreiner,2006; Naylor & Ryan, 2002). This study aims to enhance understandingthe relationship between religious-tourism sites and conflict through anin-depth examination of the Baha'i Center.

4. The Baha'i Center in Haifa

The study area is located in Israel's third largest city—Haifa, with itspopulation of roughly 250,000. Historically, the city has been regardedas “more secular” in comparison to other Israeli cities. Indeed, Haifa isoften understood by its residents as a multi-cultural city seldom associ-ated with contemporary political, religious, or military conflict. Haifa isalso home to the Baha'iWorld Centre, aWorld Heritage Site, which con-tains the administrative center for the international Baha'i community,the Shrine of the Bab, the Terrace Gardens, and other key sites.

The Baha'i Faith was founded by Baha'u'llah in 19th-century Persia.Baha'u'llah was exiled for his teachings from Persia to the Ottoman Em-pire and died while officially still a prisoner. After Baha'u'llah's death,under the leadership of his son, Abdu'l-Bahá, the religion spread fromits Persian and Ottoman roots, and gained a footing in Europe andAmerica, andwas consolidated in Iran, where it suffers intense persecu-tion. After the death of `Abdu'l-Bahá, the leadership of the Baha'i com-munity entered a new phase, evolving from a single individual to anadministrative order with both elected bodies and appointed individ-uals (Sharon, 2005). Today there are probably more than 7 millionBaha'is around the world in more than 200 countries and territories(The Baha'i World Center, 2014).

Centered on Mt. Carmel, the Baha'i's connection with Haifa began inthe late 1800s. For Baha'i around the world, this site is of singular cen-trality as the site of the world center of their faith. It assumed unique

230 N.C. Kreiner et al. / Tourism Management Perspectives 16 (2015) 228–236

significancewhen the Baha'u'llah—the Baha'i prophet and leader—stoodon its slopes in 1891 and sketched his plans for the development of thespiritual and administrative core of the new religion. At the center of theMt. Carmel complex, the Baha'u'llah selected the site for a mausoleumthat was to be constructed to hold the remains of the Bab— the founderof the faith. The original mausoleum was built in 1909 and since thenthe Baha'i have had a permanent presence on the mountain. In 1953,themausoleumwas expanded into a shrine with a garden and a goldendome. The Archiveswere completed in 1957 and theUniversal House ofJustice in 1983 (Gatrell & Collins-Kreiner, 2006; Sharon, 2005).

Beginning in the late 1980s, the Baha'i embarked upon a major de-velopment initiative including the general beautification of Mt. Carmeland the expansion of the World Center administrative complex. Theconstruction of the Gardens—in addition to the Center for the Study oftexts, the International Teaching Center, and the expansion of theArchives—continued throughout the 1990s, culminating in the grandopening of the terraced gardens in May 2001. Today, the complex oc-cupies a major portion of the mountainside — stretching upward ap-proximately 1 km in length, from the base of the gardens to the top,with a width—including the gardens—ranging from less than 100 m toas wide as 400 m (Fig. 1).

The World Center has been nominated by the local municipality(with the support of the Baha'i themselves) as a UNESCO World Heri-tage site in 2001 and become the major tourism attraction in Haifaand an important tourism site in Israel. The construction of a seamlessformal garden from the base of themountain to its upper limits requireda series of bridges and road improvements, for which the Baha'i provid-ed the funds. In addition to construction, the local economy benefitsfrom the presence of the approximately million people who arrive inHaifa to visit the center annually as pilgrims and tourists. As of January2014 there have been 7 million visitors to the gardens, according toWorld Centre staff, which were officially opened to the public on 4June 2001. In 2013, for example, 917,031 tourists visited the gardensand 8000 Baha'i Pilgrims (The Baha'i World Center, 2014).

Fig. 1. A view from above: the Baha'i World Center.

Despite the development of a vast infrastructure on Mount Carmel,the Baha'i have no formal community of followers in Israel. Instead,the Baha'iWorld Center is staffed andmaintained primarily by local res-idents and approximately 800 volunteers. According to the garden tournarrative, it is the official position of the Baha'i that no permanent com-munity exists in Israel because the Baha'i have no interest in deepeningthe current religious conflicts in the region.

Our discussion focuses on the construction of the Baha'i Center,which began in the 1980s and continued for over a decade, changingboth the face of Haifa and the function of the site itself.

The site's development as a religious-tourism site raised a number ofissues and sparked points of tension and dispute. The case study aim isto better understand perceptions of stakeholders regarding the projectand their influence on the emergence, or non-emergence, of conflictaround its construction.

5. Study methods and methodologies

The research methods that were selected provide insights into thestory of the Baha'i Center development and also, perhaps more signifi-cantly, generate a typology of the frames that influence perceptions ofthe establishment of religious-tourism sites as a whole.

A frame typology for analyzing disputes surrounding the develop-ment of religious-tourism sites was developed by combining an in-depth review of literature from the fields of geography of religion, poli-tics, conflict, framing, and with a dataset based on empirical findingsfrom different case studies. The typology was then applied to the analy-sis of the Baha'i Center to explore whether it rendered a significant levelof additional insights for analysis of the dispute around its constructionas a religious-tourism site.

5.1. ‘Grounded theory’

There have been numerous calls for qualitative methodological ap-proaches in studies of tourism and entrepreneurship research(Kensbock & Jennings, 2011). Within qualitative research there are amyriad of tools used by different researchers according to their interestsand disciplinary background (Hardy, 2005). Creswell (1998) addressesa variety of these, including: phenomenology; ethnography; case stud-ies; and grounded theory. In the case of tourism research, most researchapplies traditions of phenomenology case studies and ethnography.

Given the qualitative approach and desire to build theoretical prop-ositions based upon stakeholder analysis, the typology in this researchwas based on a grounded theory approach. Grounded theory is basedon the assumption that social science theory can be built from data col-lected systematically in a social setting (Glaser & Strauss, 1967)which iswell suited to a study using an inductive, qualitative approach. It hasbeen defined as a ‘theoretical rendition of reality’ (Strauss & Corbin,1990: 22). This definition is particularly useful for assessing thehuman dimension and social setting within which conflicts may occur.

Grounded theory is regarded to be particularly suited to an explor-atory and interpretive framework. It refers to both an innovative ap-proach to developing explanatory theoretical ideas, as well as aspecific set of tools for inductive and deductive analysis of empiricalma-terial to construct conceptual understandings of the studied phenome-na (Kensbock & Jennings, 2011).

5.2. Framing and frame typology

The literature on “frames” has been used to better understand howpeople perceive their socialworld and use these interpretations to affectthe beliefs and behavior of others (Desrosiers, 2012). Since its introduc-tion by sociologist Erving Goffman in 1974, the concept has evolvedfrom the idea of the individual “frame” into a useful research methodknown as “framing” that has triggered considerable work across awide range of disparate fields, such as cognitive psychology, linguistics

231N.C. Kreiner et al. / Tourism Management Perspectives 16 (2015) 228–236

and discourse analysis, communication and media studies, environ-mental disputes, as well as policy studies.

Frames can be understood as “mental lenses,” “filters,” or points ofview through which the world is perceived. They are structures usedto “sieve” themultitude of information faced by people involved in con-flicts. People tend to use frames and framing both consciously and sub-consciously to make sense of their world, to make decisions, and todecide on courses of action. Data consistent with a person's frame is ac-cepted and processed,while inconsistent data is ignored as false or irrel-evant (Shmueli, Elliott, & Kaufman, 1996).

The shared nature of frames is perhaps best captured by Curşeu(2011), who states that groups operate as individuals in informationprocessing systems in two ways: how they process information to con-struct cognitive representations that are stored and then usedduring in-teractions, and how they are led by some contextual and group dynamicfactors to evolve shared ways of processing information and collectiverepresentations.

Understanding framing can be useful for public decision making incontextswith clear physical and spatial consequences, such as planning,public administration, social impact, religious disputes and dispute res-olution. Insights gained from framing can also be used to contend withobstacles hindering negotiation, as frames providemediators and stake-holders with an understanding of situations and the parties involvedthat goes deeper than simple arguments do, andmay indicate potentialobstacles and avenues for reframing (Kaufman & Shmueli, 2011;Kaufman & Gray, 2003).

The frequent use of frame analysis in social sciences has ultimatelyresulted in its application to tourism research. Frame analysis hasbeen used by scholars of tourismworking on issues unrelated to conflictstudies, and, over the past fifteen years, researchers have been makingincreasing references to frame analysis and employing it as the mainfocus of their work. The studies that have resulted are primarily socio-logical and linguistic and have focused mainly on narratives, tourismlanguage and discourse, tourist activities, and tourismmarketing. Draw-ing on sources such as blogs, guidebooks, magazines, websites, andvideos, these studies offer primarily descriptive examinations of tour-ism through the prism of sociological, ethnographic, and discourse-centered perspectives (Buzinde, Santos, & Smith, 2006; Noy, 2008;Pearce, 2009).

Although frame analysis has been widely applied within politicaland social research and, more recently, within tourism studies, it none-theless remains surprisingly unchartered territory in the study of tour-ism policy-making (Wu, Xue, Morrison, & Leung, 2012). This studyrepresents one of the first applications of frame analysis to the subjectof conflicts affecting large groups of tourists. We hope it will provide anew and interesting perspective for conflict analysis in tourismresearch.

5.3. The interview process

An initial selection of intervieweeswas based on the individualswhoparticipated in many of the planning committee meetings in which theBaha'i constructionwas discussed according to archival protocols (local,district and national). These stakeholders were the ones involved inplanning/construction of the Centre 12 years ago (when the process ofits establishment was initiated), and agreed or were able to participatein the research project. It should be noted that the interviews were con-ducted twelve years after the Baha'i site construction, enabling inter-viewees to talk not only about the period of construction but alsoabout the following period and the current situation.

We then employed a “snowball” approach, concluding each inter-view with a request for names of additional stakeholders to interviewand following up on those individuals mentioned more than once. Inall, 29 interviews took place between 2010 and 2012. We also analyzedarchival material (19 meeting protocols and documents) surroundingthe conflicts, as well as articles (15) published in the local and national

press. No selectionwasmade in the “Secondary data”— as all data foundin national and local media and planning committee protocols wasanalyzed.

The interviewees were divided by us into four stakeholder catego-ries reflecting different interests: the Baha'i (developers of the site);the local population (local groups and business proprietors near thesite); decision makers at the regional and national level (governmentministry officials and professionals); and decision makers at the locallevel (officials and professionals of the Haifa municipality). The repre-sentation of the different stakeholder groups was balanced amongthem.

A conflict assessment protocol was developed for the interviews,which lasted between one and a half and three hours in duration. Theconflict assessment process included: an introduction (identifyingstakeholders, preparing interview protocols using an open question for-mat); data collection (personal interviews andarchivalmaterials); anal-ysis (summarizing findings and mapping areas of agreement anddisagreement); and report writing, feedback, and distribution.

The structured open interview protocol was found fitting for inter-viewees representing diverse organizations and possessing differingstatuses and levels of knowledge. Overall, interviewees were heteroge-neous in their information sources,motivations, interests, project famil-iarity, and willingness to participate. The interviews were also useful inassessing attitude, looks, expressions, gestures, and verbal tone of theindividual interviewees which aided the analysis.

Interview questions focused on the conflict from the viewpoint ofstakeholders in each category, including: questions referring to the de-cisions that had been made, the process through which these decisionswere reached, and the important issues that remain to be addressed.Questions centered on the development of the conflict, including thehistorical chain of events that resulted in the conflict; key issues; basicinterests; Proposed solutions stakeholder amenability to compromise;Important issues for future discussion, perceptions and reactions tothe decision-making process; and barriers to agreement.

Interview transcripts and subsequent analyses were sent back to theinterviewees for approval or revision with the understanding that theirindividual statements would remain anonymous, but would be associ-ated with the larger stakeholder group with whom they affiliatedthemselves.

5.4. Data analysis

Using Grounded Theory, the data was read to “discover” or label dif-ferent issues, and their interrelationships. All together we had 1130quotations (quotes from interviewees, texts frommedia articles, proto-cols and minutes). A qualitative data processing software (AtlasTi) wasapplied to this database and each statement or archival entrywas codedas an individual, disaggregate frame. The 1130 stakeholders' statementsand texts from the media, were transcribed and coded, and recurringperceptions and themes that seemed to influence stakeholder percep-tion of the conflict were identified as frames.

Elicitation of the meaningful frames from the case studies yielded 34frames that recurred in the discourse and seemed to influence percep-tions of the conflict. Frames were elicited by one of the authors, whocoded texts and identified the frames themselves. In order to validatethefindings, codingwas reviewed by the other two authors, and researchteammeetings were held to discuss the frames and their meanings.

The disaggregated frameswere categorized and grouped,first into eight“frame-families” and then into three “super-frames,” according to the typesof conflict they represented. This categorizationwasmade inorder to createa framework useful for portraying the various competing “stories.”

6. Findings: analyzing the Baha'i case study

Once the Framing typology was developedwe applied the approachto the dispute surrounding the development of the Baha'i Center in

232 N.C. Kreiner et al. / Tourism Management Perspectives 16 (2015) 228–236

Haifa. Coding and analysis of the texts from the database in accordancewith the methodology described above produced three perspectives ofthe site, each consistent with one of the three super-frames thatemerged as a result: Issues, Process, and Values. Underlying this aggre-gation was the premise that religious-tourism sites are perceived asconflictual when their construction is viewed as a threat. A sense ofthreat arises when a site is regarded as constituting a deviation in oneor more of the following realms:

a) Issues (The Physical and Spatial)— A site that does not blend inwiththe landscape, that causes a planning or esthetic disturbance, or thatis perceived as a hazard;

b) Procedure or Process — A site that was not built in accordance withprocedures that are considered to be correct, proper, and fair, or asite perceived as being built at an improper time and/or as a resultof inappropriate influences;

c) Value-Influenced Function—A site that is ill-suited for the surround-ing community and its institutions, and is perceived as presenting athreat to its prevalent values, religion, culture, and dominant socialstructures of control, property ownership, or sovereignty; or, inother words, a site perceived of as constituting a meaningful changeto the status-quo.

Each super-frame (Table 1) portrays one aspect of the perception ofthe site as will be explained in the following findings.

6.1. The process super-frame

Of all three super-frames, process was found to have the greatest re-currence. Within this super-frame, administration-related aspects con-stituted the most prominent frame-family, with 23% of all data sources(interviews, archival material, and newspaper articles) casting these is-sues as the most influential factors in the case of the Baha'i Center (Fig.2). “Characteristics of the parties and the nature of the relationship be-tween them” were also mentioned frequently in 19% of all the datacollected.

Our findings indicate that, to some degree, the interviewees per-ceived the way in which the Baha'i Center was constructed as largelypolitical process. The decision-makers themselves tended to frame theprocess in bureaucratic terms. The process was also perceived as beinginfluenced by the (nonphysical) power of the Baha'i and their abilityto influence decision-makers on both the municipal and the nationallevels, in contrast to local residents. For example, one interviewee asso-ciated with local residents noted: “[The municipality] decides and doesnot take us into consideration, but they help the Baha'i.”

According to the data, the Baha'i were perceived as enjoying govern-ment andmunicipal support and financial benefits, among other things.

Table 1Frames and perceptions of deviation and threat.

Super-frames Frame-families Framing: perceived as wrong/right dto…

Issues Physical characteristics of the site;Physical planning issues

Physical and spatial issues:Incompatibility/compatibilitywith the physical environment

Process Administrative characteristics ofthe process

Administrative order: Proper procedudue process

Characterization of the partiesinvolvedNature of the relationship amongthe parties

Values Site has community/social/culturalsignificance

Functional social order:Incompatibility/compatibilitywith the functional social orderSite has religious significance

Site has economic, or touristicsignificance

Although the site was approved through the accepted statutory chan-nels, and although the members of the city council, including represen-tatives of the local residents, did in fact participate in the planningcommittees, many interviewees held that that the committees actuallyserved as a “rubber stamp.” One interviewee associated with localgroups recounted that “they (the different committees) approved theplans for the Baha'i site as requested by government ministers and themayor of Haifa,” and that “the municipality submitted to the dictatesof the Baha'i, who used the claim of the ‘place's sanctity’ to get whatthey wanted.” According to a municipality representative, “membersof the municipality group saw the construction of the site in a positivelight… there was consensus about supporting them.” Another munici-pal representative maintained that “city leaders were interested inassisting the Baha'i and most of their requests were approved, becausewe bend over backwards for tourism.”.

Interviewees from all groups, with the exception of site promoters,perceived the Baha'i as exerting power over the residents, in somecases with the help of the courts, to induce them to sell their apart-ments. In most instances, references were not to physical force but tothe power stemming from influence, economic resources, and informa-tion lacked by the local residents. Thus, some interviewees associatedwith local groups maintained that they “may have been” forced to sell,whereas others said so with certainty. According to one interviewee,“they purchased land by force... and they came and practically forcedpeople to sell, using temptation (money).” According to another inter-viewee also associated with local groups, “the Baha'i purchased apart-ments from the residents by exerting force and pressure on them tosell.” In their account of the events, interviewees also used words ex-pressing power and aggressiveness, such as “theft,” “stealing,” “takingover,” and “destroying.”.

The discourse on the construction of the Baha'i site appears to havereferred to different stakeholders involved in a number of different con-flicts, all on the local level. One interviewee associated with a localgroup summed up the situation as follows: “There were conflicts allalong the way. There were clashes with everyone.” The residents alsoaccused the municipality of collaborating with the Baha'i, who did notpay property taxes and were seen as taking over parts of the city.

6.2. The issues super-frame

The Issues super-frame, which encompassed perceptions of thephysical characteristics of the sites, was the second most significant ofall three super-frames. The disputes emerged primarily around ques-tions of physical planning and local nuisances. In spite of the conspicu-ous attributes of the Baha'i site, its physical image as reflected in thediscourse surrounding its construction was found to contribute onlypartly to the conflict process. Both “physical planning issues” (12%)

ue A Threat to…

Potential for perceiving the site's construction as conflict (results in conflict)Physical quality of life and well-being and/or control over these aspects bythe (relevant) community

re,

Threat to worldview;Threat to identity;Threat to hegemony, sovereignty, and territorial control

Fig. 2. The issues, process and values super frames (block letters and full bars represent frame families. Empty bars represent disaggregated frames).

233N.C. Kreiner et al. / Tourism Management Perspectives 16 (2015) 228–236

and “physical characteristics of the site” (13%)were found to play less ofa role in the development of conflict (Fig. 2) andmore than that most ofthe positive and not negative. The findings regarding the Baha'i Centerindicate that despite its vast proportions, the site's external physicalcharacteristics (size, height, visibility, form, design, and compatibilitywith the physical surroundings) were not perceived as overly problem-atic. Many of the interviewees perceived the site as contributing to thephysical image of the city and as an esthetic improvement to the sur-rounding area. Comments reflecting sense of pride that their city washome to one of the wonders of the world prevailed in interviewees dis-course: “The presence of the site is central and important,” maintainedone municipal representative. “The site is so prominent that you can'tsee Haifa without seeing the Baha'i Gardens, the golden dome, and theport. From a bird's-eye view, it's not Haifa without the golden dome.”

To somedegree, this attitude can be seen as a sort of “willing submis-sion” and legitimization or glorification of the beauty of the site, which

has come to be perceived as a symbol of the city. Nevertheless, inter-viewees also advanced criticism on professional and personal levels (al-though to a lesser extent), indicating reservations about the complex'sphysical suitability for the surrounding environment. Some of the inter-viewees perceived the site as anachronistic and incompatible with theenvironment.

Interviewees from all categories perceived the site as one that wasexcellently managed and maintained, even if they had some criticism:at the Center, the Baha'i maintained “a level of design, finish, and main-tenance at a standard unfamiliar to us (the locals)” (Gilad, 2001). Onerepresentative of the municipality went as far as to say: “They [theBaha'i] created a site that needs to be manicured. Every day there aredozens of gardeners trimming every flower: that's a manicure.”

In addition, interviewees from all groups questioned the extent towhich the Baha'i truly needed such a large area that it did not use: “Ofcourse it's large,” said a representative of the municipality. “The

234 N.C. Kreiner et al. / Tourism Management Perspectives 16 (2015) 228–236

buildings are huge and it isn't clear why. There are immense spacesthere. If a building is large and impressive in splendor, magnificence,and grandeur but isn't used, it raises questions. And here, huge spacesremain without any real use.” However, some interviewees whoexpressed reservations preferred the appearance of the Baha'i Centerto the possibility of high-rise buildings or landfill.

The discourse regarding the issue of exclusion from and access to thesite indicates that local residents felt alienated and increasingly dis-tanced from the site. Indeed, because the open areas were fenced inand annexed to the site, some residents still have not entered the siteand have only observed it from the outside. Some residents have beenfilled with a sense of alienation and inequality when they comparedthe site's esthetically impressive, well-cultivated appearance to theirown neighboring neighborhoods.

Interviewees of all categories regarded the site as inadequately ac-cessible, as entry was conditional upon preregistration and a guidedtour. This in fact amounted to the legal, municipality-sanctioned exclu-sion of local residents from local physical resources: “Wewere sure thatthe gardens would be open all the time and that there would be freeentry,” said a member of a local group. “Now, it's more like you cansee it, but you can't touch it… There are tours of the upper sectionalone; the tours of the lower section have been discontinued. If youare not a Baha'i, you cannot enter the lower section, and that's a draw-back.” “It's all fences and concrete barriers,” noted a national/regionalprofessional, in accord with this sentiment.

We could also see that the residents initially viewed the site as anobstacle and a nuisance, particularly during the time of construction.Subsequently, however, they came to recognize some of the site's ad-vantages, such as its financial contribution to the neighborhood com-munity center and to Arab students in the city, increased propertyvalues, and improved environmental quality.

6.3. The values super-frame

Overall, the values super-frame, which deals with the beliefs andmeanings surrounding the site and its functions, was only third in im-portance, after Process and Issues. The perceived values of the sitewere found to be less important than process and procedure and itsphysical attributes. However, when we examine the frame familiesmore closely, we observe that themost frequently recurring frame fam-ily was the “community/social/cultural assets of the site” (16%), whichwas actually mentioned more than the frame families found in themore salient Issues super-frame (Fig. 2). Thosewho supported the site'sestablishment regarded its contribution as related both to inter-religious tolerance and to values unrelated to religion, such as esthetics,culture, economics, tourism, and national politics (boosting the interna-tional status of Israel and the city of Haifa).

Our findings indicate that the predominant value or worldview inthe discourse surrounding the Baha'i Center was one of tolerance. Inter-viewees from all categories referred to the Baha'i as advocates of equal-ity and cooperation and claimed that the construction of religiouscenters should be allowed without prejudice against any religion. “TheBaha'u'llah laid the foundation for cooperation among all religionswith the idea that God is shared by all religions and that, therefore,the different religions don't have to emphasize their uniqueness ortheir different mythologies about God, or about the values based on it”explained a municipal representative.

Objection to religion in general was voiced by some local residentsand national/regional-level professionals. One local representative saidthe following: “I oppose the construction of any religious center: syna-gogues, churches, mosques. I'm against it! And I'm sorry to say that Iam not a believer. I prefer the construction of schools and beautifulbuildings. On the positive side, it [the Baha'i site] is the gem of Haifa. Itis also positive that no religious affairs take place within it, as 80% ofour suffering as peoples arises from religion and religious extremists.”

Perhaps the most interesting finding reflected in the discourse sur-rounding the site's construction was that the Baha'i site was not per-ceived of solely or even primarily as a religious place by non-Baha'is,but rather as a “sacred site for the Baha'i religion, a tourist site, and agem of the city of Haifa.” For the residents, the site was perceived pri-marily as a nuisance in that it displaced some residents, appropriatedtheir property, and excluded them by allowing only limited access tothe center after their completion.

From the perspective of the Baha'i, it was clearly a sacred site. Ac-cording to one of the Center's promoters, “this site was built for theBaha'i faithful, and for them the place provides an integrated physicaland spiritual experience. They sense all sorts of things that othersdon't get excited about, such as the nine terraces above and below,which is an important number in the Baha'i faith.” Interviewees fromall groups perceived the site as providing the Baha'i religionwith a pres-ence in the city, as did the press. But this presence, in the form of thetemple and the esthetically pleasing gardens, was not perceived as acause for conflict. As noted by another promoter of the site, “what weregard as physical beauty is there only because of its importance tothe religion.”Others regardedHaifa as “a city that became sacred as a re-sult of the slightly strange and mysterious Baha'i religion, a city that isnow dominated by huge gardens and vast temples… [and the] religiousdimension they give the Carmel landscape”.

Almost all the groups saw the site as a religious-tourism site, and thissentiment was reinforced by items in the press. Interviewees from themunicipality group noted that the site constituted a center of attractionfor both foreign and domestic tourism, or, as they put it, “a tourist at-traction” or “the main icon of Haifa.” They held that its recognition asa UNESCO World Heritage Site had a positive impact on internationaltourism and improved the city's image. Indeed, interviewees frequentlyreferred to the Center as “the symbol of Haifa.”

Municipality representatives perceived the Baha'i site as a symbol ofHaifa that contributed to the city's image, a tourist attraction, and as agreen area in themiddle of the city. They also regarded it as unique cul-tural asset and a contribution to coexistence in Haifa, particularly due tothe on-site interaction of individuals from different social groupings.Some interviewees saw the site as an economic asset to the city andits business owners, mainly the proprietors of cafés and restaurants:as succinctly pointed out by a representative of the municipality:“every tourist has a wallet.” A few interviewees asserted that as an im-portant addition to the local landscape, the site had a positive impacton the local economy by raising the value of nearby properties due tothe greatly improved view resulting from the well-kept gardens.

Overall, interviewees from all groups shared the view that the tour-ist activity that resulted from the site's construction was a positive de-velopment. Some argued that a large portion of tourists simplyobserved the Center from outside the site and did not enter because ofits limited visiting hours, or because the process of registering for atour seemed complicated. Others wanted to spare themselves explana-tions about the Baha'i religion during the tour. In the words of one localrepresentative: “I can tell you that every tourist who comes to Haifagoes to this site, but most of the city's residents don't go in — theylook at it from above. That's for sure. [The site] is here and not here.”

7. Understanding the Baha'i case study

By employingGoffman's, 1974model of frame analysis and based onour research, we suggest that sites are framed as conflictual by partieswho view their construction as constituting a threat on three differentlevels. One way in which this occurs is when the process surroundingsite construction is perceived as flawed (the Process super-frame). Asecond context in which site construction is perceived as conflictual iswhen it is regarded as posing a threat to the status quo from a value-oriented perspective (the Values super-frame). And third, a sense ofconflict may stem from a perception of site-incompatibility with theestablished physical-spatial order of things (the Issues super-frame).

235N.C. Kreiner et al. / Tourism Management Perspectives 16 (2015) 228–236

In the Baha'i case, there was no evidence to significant conflict onvalues, and the conflict on issues was shared by the local residentsonly. Conflict appears to have emerged primarily as a result of its pro-cess of establishment andwas exacerbated by some stakeholders' fram-ing of the process as misleading and/or overly aggressive and exertingundue power and political influence over decision-makers. It is interest-ing to note, however, that decision-makers themselves tended to framethe process in bureaucratic terms, thus disregarding the process-relatedaspects of the conflict. Disputes emerged not around values but primar-ily around questions of physical planning and local nuisances.

Social Exchange Theory (Ap, 1992) offers one explanation of thesocio-cultural impact of the Baha'i Center. All the groups involved ap-pear to have been evaluating the development in terms of the costsand benefits they expected to sustain. As a result of the project's presen-tation by the Baha'i themselves as a religious-tourism site, all believedthat the benefits of the site would outweigh its cost and thereforeviewed development in a positive light.

But as Sirakaya et al. (2002) point out, Social Exchange Theory reliesnot only on the occurrence of an exchange but on a perception of rela-tive fairness, which did not appear to exist in the Baha'i case study.This theory can also be applied in conjunction with Adams' equity the-ory (1963), which holds that the level of satisfaction depends on the ex-tent to which people feel they have been treated fairly. From theperspective of the local population in Haifa, fair treatment would haveafforded them free access to the Baha'i Center, which they were ulti-mately denied.

Thus the public significance attributed to the site's image appears tohave affected the perception or avoidance of conflict. We suspect thatthe more the explicit goals of the site were presented as beneficial tothe public at-large, the less intense the conflict would be. Thus, whendisagreements arose concerning the Baha'i site, it was presented as aBaha'i contribution to the city of Haifa — gardens that would attracttourism and serve the residents of the entire city. As such, the site wasperceived not as a deviation from the local landscape but as “fair” andas a positive contribution to the city as a whole.

Understanding the three super-frames yielded a comprehensive pic-ture reflecting the various stakeholders' perceptions of site-compatibility and site-deviation. The fact that a site's identity differsfrom that of the surrounding environment does not necessarily resultin the emergence or perception of conflict. Rather, the degree of conflictdepends on the extent to which a site's identity is perceived as consti-tuting a threat to the status quo or on the extent to which people feelthey have been treated fairly (Social Exchange Theory). In social envi-ronments as heterogeneous and tolerant as Haifa, a site associatedwith a relatively esoteric religion will typically not be regarded as athreat. This can be contrasted with environments characterized bystrong religious identities, in which a site associated with a different re-ligion that is regarded by the local population as proselytizing in naturewill typically be perceived as constituting a threat, as in the case of theBYU center in Jerusalem (Olsen & Guelke, 2004).

8. Conclusions

The framing typology developed enables us to provide an enhancedand systematic conceptual understanding of the conflicts surroundingthe development of religious-tourism sites, and provides a tool whichcan extend to the analysis of other cases. In this way, grounded inboth framing and the realities of religious-tourism sites, we offer aframework for studying conflict in such contexts and for discussingthe determinants of different impacts on different destinations.

A conflict surrounding a development of religious-tourism sites isnot a binary phenomenon that simply does or does not exist: it is a com-plex multifaceted phenomenon that, can best be understood on a scaleranging from a “compatible/acceptable change to the status quo” (a sitethat is welcomed) to an “incompatible change” (a site that is forciblyrejected). Perceptions vary from site to site and from time to time, and

sites which are welcome in one location at a given point in time maybe unacceptable in other places and at other times. High intensity con-flict involves deviation within all three super-frames: Process, Values,and Issues. Lower intensity conflict typically involves deviation in onlyone or two super-frames, or possibly low intensity deviation in allthree. In the case of the Baha'i Center, disputes emerged not aroundvalues but primarily around process, and around questions of physicalplanning.

The typology suggests a model for analyzing and understanding thedifferent stories told by people and groups involved in public decision-makingprocesses, inwhich the decisions adoptedmight be perceived asendangering the identity of some members of the community. Thestudy also suggests the utility of frame analysis for describing, analyzing,and explaining tourism processes with both theoretical and practicalsignificance. Theoretically, it represents one of the first applications offrame analysis to tourism research. This approach focuses on the frames,or themes, themselves in order to identify the categories, importance,and allocation of different frames, as well as the manner in which theyare used by different interest groups to construct their own understand-ing of conflicts.

Practically, the underlying premise of this study is that perceptions,or framing, play a formative role in shaping the behavior of individualsand groups. This approach is meant to assist in finding common groundand to facilitate efforts to resolve disputes by generating a better under-standing of their dynamics. By communicating their value-based fram-ing, stakeholders are able to couch their interests and arguments inlanguage (or frames) that is understandable to other stakeholders, ad-dressing them on their own terms in order to improve communicationand increase the likelihood of a mutually beneficial outcome(Kaufman& Shmueli, 2011).More than that the study enabled us to bet-ter understandwhy a sitewith an identity differing from that of the hostcommunity does, or does not, spark conflict, as much depends on theprocess itself as was seen in the Baha'i case.

The construction of religious-tourism sites has interconnected phys-ical, social, value-laden, and politicalmeaning. The proposed typology offrames, frame-families, and super-frames enable us to discern these var-iousmeanings and to understand the relationships between them in aneffective and organizedmanner. The result is amappingof different per-ceptions of and insights regarding the factors influencing conflict (or thelack thereof).

This article constitutes a preliminary study on a religious-tourismsite in Israel. For this reason, an important direction of future workwill be to research conflict as manifested in other religious destinationsand to compare and contrast findings in different countries. Frame anal-ysis may be applicable not only to conflicts surrounding religious-tourism sites but to public open space planning and new tourism devel-opment sites as well, andmay change depending on the places in ques-tion. Applying the proposed model in other countries willunquestionably facilitate its further development and increase both itsscope and accuracy.

Nonetheless, we are still left with a dearth of more comprehensiveanalysis of conflict management and resolution in the tourism arena(Yang et al., 2013), constituting both another limitation of this studyand a direction for future research. The literature is in need of a system-atic theory of conflict in tourism that addresses factors such as the na-ture of the conflict, conflict management, conflict resolution, andconflict mitigation. We hope this study will attract additional scholarlyinterest in different types of conflicts in tourism.

Acknowledgment

We are grateful to the Israel Science Foundation for supporting thisresearch. Special thanks are also due to Prof. Nurit Kliot for her astutecomments and encouragement and to the Journal editor and reviewersfor their insights.

236 N.C. Kreiner et al. / Tourism Management Perspectives 16 (2015) 228–236

References

Ap, J. (1992). Residents' perceptions on tourism impacts. Annals of Tourism Research,19(4), 665–690.

Brace, C., Bailey, A. R., & Harvey, D. C. (2006). Religion, place and space: A framework forinvestigating historical geographies of religious identities and communities. Progressin Human Geography, 30, 211–233.

Buzinde, C. N., Santos, C. A., & Smith, S. L. J. (2006). Ethnic representations: Destinationimagery. Annals of Tourism Research, 33(3), 707–728.

Chidester, D., & Linenthal, E. (1995). Introduction. In D. Chidester, & E. Linenthal (Eds.),American sacred space (pp. 1–42). Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

Collins-Kreiner, N. (2010). Researching pilgrimage: Continuity and transformations.Annals of Tourism Research, 37, 440–456.

Collins-Kreiner, N., Shmueli, D., & Ben-Gal, M. (2013). Spatial transgression of new reli-gious-tourism sites in Israel. Applied Geography, 40, 103–114.

Creswell, John W. (1998). Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design. Choosing among fivetraditions. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Curşeu, P. L. (2011). Framing effects in small-group and intergroup negotiation: A cogni-tive perspective. InW. A. Donohue, R. G. Rogan, & S. Kaufman (Eds.), Framing matters,perspectives on negotiation research and practice in communication (pp. 71–94). NY:Peter Lang.

Deery, M., Jago, L., & Fredline, L. (2012). Rethinking social impacts of tourism research: Anew research agenda. Tourism Management, 33, 64–73.

Desrosiers, M.E. (2012). Reframing frame analysis: Key contributions to conflict studies.Ethnopolitics, 11(1), 1–23.

Diedrich, A., & García-Buades, E. (2009). Local perceptions of tourism and indicators ofdestination decline. Tourism Management, 30(4), 512–521.

Digance, J. (2003). Pilgrimage at contested sites. Annals of Tourism Research, 30(1),143–159.

Dredge, D. (2010). Place change and tourism development conflict: Evaluating public in-terest. Tourism Management, 31(1), 104–112.

Eade, J., & Sallnow, M. J. (1991). Contesting the sacred: The anthropology of Christian pil-grimage. London: Routledge.

Francis, L. J., Williams, E., Annis, J., & Robbins, M. (2008). Understanding cathedral visitors:Psychological type and individual differences in experience and appreciation. TourismAnalysis, 13(1), 71–80.

Friedland, R., & Hecht, R. (2000). To rule Jerusalem. Santa Barbara, CA: University of Cali-fornia Press.

Gatrell, J. D., & Collins-Kreiner, N. (2006). Negotiated space: Tourists, pilgrims and theBahá'í Terraced Gardens in Haifa. Geoforum, 37, 765–778.

Gilad, M. (2001). The Green Gardens (and not the neighbor's') Yediot Aharonot, 21 May.Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for quali-

tative research. New Brunswick, NJ: Aldine Transaction.Goffman, E. (1974). Frame analysis: An essay on the organization of experience. New York,

N.Y.: Harper & Row.Goodin, R. E. (2009). The Oxford handbook of political science.N.Y.: Oxford University Press.Hardy, A. (2005). Using grounded theory to explore stakeholder perceptions of tourism.

Journal of Tourism and Cultural Change, 3(2), 108–133.Hubert, J. (1994). Sacred Beliefs and Beliefs of Sacredness. In D. L. Carmichael, J. Hubert, B.

Reeves, & A. Schanche (Eds.), Sacred sites, sacred places (pp. 9–31). London:Routledge.

Hughes, K., Bond, N., & Ballantyne, R. (2013). Designing and managing interpretive expe-riences at religious-tourism sites: Visitors' perceptions of Canterbury Cathedral.Tourism Management, 36, 210–220.

Kaufman, S., & Gray, B. (2003). Using retrospective and prospective frame elicitation toevaluate environmental disputes. In L. Bingham, & R. O'Leary (Eds.), The promiseand performance of environmental conflict resolution (pp. 1–15). Washington: Re-sources For the Future Press.

Kaufman, S., & Shmueli, D. (2011). Framing in public decision interactions: Transferringtheory to practice. In W. Donohue, R. Rogan, & S. Kaufman (Eds.), Framing matters:Perspectives on negotiation research and practice in communication (pp. 167–190).Cresskill, NY: Peter Lang Publishing.

Kensbock, S., & Jennings, G. (2011). Pursuing a grounded theory of tourism entrepreneurs'understanding and praxis of sustainable tourism. Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Re-search, 16(5), 489–504.

Kong, L. (1993). Ideological hegemony and the political symbolism of religious buildingsin Singapore. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 11(1), 23–45.

Kong, L. (2001). Mapping ‘new’ geographies of religion: Politics and poetics in modernity.Progress in Human Geography, 25, 211–233.

Kong, L. (2005). Religious processions: Urban politics and poetics. Temenos: FinnishJournal of Religion, 41(2), 225–249.

Lee, T. J., Riley, M., & Hampton, M. P. (2010). Conflict and progress: Tourism developmentin Korea. Annals of Tourism Research, 37(2), 355–376.

Napolitano, V. (2009). Virgin of Guadalupe, a nexus of affect. Journal of the RoyalAnthropology Institute, 15, 96–112.

Naylor, S., & Ryan,M. (2002). Themosque in the suburbs: Negotiating religion and ethnic-ity in South London. Social and Cultural Geography, 3, 39–59.

Nolan, M. L., & Nolan, S. (1992). Religious-tourism sites as tourism attractions in Europe.Annals of Tourism Research, 19, 68–78.

Noy, C. (2008). Pages as stages: A performance approach to visitor books. Annals ofTourism Research, 35(2), 509–528.

Olsen, D., & Guelke, J. (2004). Spatial transgression and the BYU Jerusalem Center contro-versy. Professional Geographer, 56, 503–515.

Pearce, P. L. (2009). Now that is funny. Annals of Tourism Research, 5(3), 1–18.

Poria, Y., & Ashworth, G. (2009). Heritage tourism-current resource for conflict. Annals ofTourism Research, 36(3), 522–525.

Poria, Y., Butler, R., & Airey, D. (2003). Tourism, religion and religiosity: A holy mess.Current Issues in Tourism, 6(4), 340–363.

Raj, R., & Morpeth, N. D. (2007). Religious-tourism and pilgrimage festivals management: Aninternational perspective. Wallingford, Oxfordshire: CABI Publishing.

Robinson, M., & Boniface, P. (Eds.). (1999). Tourism and cultural conflict. New York: CabiPublishing.

Shackley, M. (2001). Managing sacred sites: Service provision and visitor experience.London: Continuum Press.

Sharon, M. (2005). The Baha'i religion and its holy scripts. Jerusalem: Carmel Publications.Shmueli, D., Elliott, M., & Kaufman, S. (1996). Frame changes and the management of in-

tractable conflicts. Conflict Resolution Quarterly, 24(2), 207–218.Sirakaya, E., Teye, V., & Sonmez, S. (2002). Understanding residents' support for tourism

development in the central region of Ghana. Journal of Travel Research, 41(1), 57–67.Singh, R. P. B. (1997). Sacred space and urban heritage in India: Contestation and perspec-

tive. In B. J. Shaw, & R. Jones (Eds.), Contested Urban Heritage (pp. 101–131). Brook-field, VT: Ashgate Publishing Company.

Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory proceduresand techniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

The Baha'i World Center (2014). Personal communication.Timothy, D. J., & Olsen, D. H. (2006). Tourism, religion and spiritual journeys. London and

New York: Routledge.Tweed, T. A. (1997). Our lady of the exile: Diasporic religion at a Cuban catholic shrine in

Miami. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Woodward, S. C. (2004). Faith and tourism: Planning tourism in relation to places of wor-

ship. Tourism and Hospitality Planning & Development, 1(2), 173–186.Wu, B., Xue, L., Morrison, A. M., & Leung, X. Y. (2012). Frame analysis on golden week pol-

icy reform in China. Annals of Tourism Research, 39(2), 842–862.Yang, J., Ryan, C., & Zhang, L. (2012). The use of questionnaires in Chinese tourism re-

search. Annals of Tourism Research, 39(3), 1690–1693.Yang, J., Ryan, C., & Zhang, L. (2013). Social conflict in communities impacted by tourism.

Tour Manage, 35, 82–93.Zamani-Farahani, H., & Ghazali, M. (2012). The relationship between Islamic religiosity

and residents' perceptions of socio-cultural impacts of tourism in Iran: Case studiesof Sare'in and Masooleh. Tour Manage, 33, 802–814.

Noga Collins Kreiner is a Senior lecturer (PhD), at the De-partment of Geography and Environmental Studies at theUniversity of Haifa, Israel. (, http://sites.hevra.haifa.ac.il/nogack/) and the Head of the Haifa and Galilee Research In-stitute. Her main research interests are: Tourism, Pilgrimage,Tourism Development and Management. She is also a re-source editor of the “Annals of Tourism Research” and pub-lished many papers on the topic of tourism including abook named: Christian Tourism to the Holy Land: Pilgrimageduring Security Crisis (2006) Hampshire: Ashgate Publica-tions.

Deborah F. Shmueli is an Associate Professor at the Univer-sity of Haifa. She holds a BS andMCP from theMassachusettsInstitute of Technology and a DS from the Technion in UrbanPlanning. A former chair of the Geography and Environmen-tal Studies Department, she is currently a PI of a newMinervaCenter for the Study of Law and Extreme Conditions. She hasdone extensive work in environmental policy and planningand published widely in such areas including environmentaland public policy negotiations and conflict management,community capacity building, framing, water (includingtransboundary) policy and land use planning issues.

Michal Ben Gal (Dr.) is the Academic coordinator of the Mi-nerva Center for the Rule of Law under Extreme Conditions,at the University of Haifa. Michal received her PhD from theUniversity of Haifa. She is a planner (Master of City and Re-gional Planning, Technion, Faculty of Architecture and Plan-ning), as well as a lawyer (LL.B., University of Haifa, Facultyof Law, Admitted to the Israel bar on December 2010). HerPhD thesis was about the Potential of Framing Analysis forEnvironmental Conflict Resolution. Her main interests aremitigation and facilitation of conflicts around environmentaland planning issues. She teaches Environmental Planningand Environmental Law at the University of Haifa, and Ma-

rine Environmental Management at the Academic Center ofRuppin.