local authorities planning for tourism in ireland
TRANSCRIPT
Local Authorities Planning for Tourism in Ireland
Emmet McLoughlin
Dr James Hanrahan
Institute of Technology
Ash Lane, Sligo
Local Authorities Planning for Tourism in Ireland
Abstract:
Since the early 1980’s Local Authorities have emerged as the principle architects of tourism
development in the UK (Charlton and Essex, 1996). In Ireland however this is a more recent
occurrence. The Planning and Development Act 2000, 2010 and 2013 require all Local
Authorities to develop a six year county development plan (CDP). This places Local
Authorities in an ideal position to plan sustainability for tourism. This paper is part of a
postgraduate research on the levels of sustainable planning for tourism by Local Authorities.
This study investigated twenty nine CDP’s, utilising a longitudinal analysis to identify any
patterns and changes in sustainable planning for tourism from 2005 to 2013.
In 2003, a European Commission Communication advised that ‘while high level strategic
policies were formed, often they did not translate into action by tourism operators or tourists
themselves’ (European Commission, 2003; citied in Fáilte Ireland, 2007:13). Results here
demonstrate that support for sustainable planning for tourism increased by 17%. Several
authors make clear that if not properly managed and planned in a sustainable manner, tourism
can destroy the very product on which it relies (Long and Mason, 2003; Reisinger and
Turner, 2003). However 45% of Local Authorities show little evidence of planning
sustainably for tourism within the CDP’s. One must question why this is. Furthermore this
study found that not one local authority had adopted global guidelines and policies in relation
to sustainable planning for tourism. In addition this research reveals that neither study had
any integration of EU guidelines. This lack of integration of guidelines and polices defend
Mowforth and Munts claim that ‘regulation for sustainability is a concept as contested as
sustainability itself’ (2003: 183) and taking into consideration that ‘regulation is likely to
involve the provision of information and instructions on what can and cannot be done’
(Mason, 2008: 136) their absence is a cause for concern.
This longitudinal study has identified fundamental changes and patterns concerning Local
Authorities sustainable planning for tourism. Increase in support for sustainable planning for
tourism among Local Authorities has risen only slightly. This however leaves a significant
number of counties not planning sustainability for tourism.
Keywords: Local Authorities; Sustainable Tourism Planning; Longitudinal Analysis
1.0 Introduction
The sustainable planning and development of tourism requires significant levels of public
sector intervention in order to succeed. In Ireland, tourist arrivals are up 7.2% for the year
2013, compared to 2012 (Fáilte Ireland, 2014). This increase emphasises the need for
effective and sustainable planning on behalf of Local Authorities. Failure to do so may result
in tourism having a negative impact on the local economy, cultural identity and the natural
environment.
In planning for tourism, Local Authorities have many direct channels at their disposal to
influence development. They are builders of economic infrastructure, regulators of economic
activity and managers of the natural environment. Charlton and Essex, (1996) summarise the
nature of Local Authorities tourism activities as the following;
‘Local Authorities involvement in tourism has become established principally through provision of local tourism infrastructure, the maintenance of an attractive environment through planning and development control, proactive policies to stimulate the private sector and the promotion and marketing of tourism’ (Charlton and Essex, 1996:176).
This places a significant emphasis on the role Local Authorities have in maintaining and
attractive environment through planning and development control which is important
considering the dynamic environment in which tourism operates (Pearce, 1992; Kerr et al,
2001). Effective policies here should aim to be long term and focus on how limited resources
can best respond to changing circumstances (Ritchie and Crouch, 2003; Cooper et al, 2008).
Charlton and Essex’s definition (1996) also underlines the valuable role Local Authorities
have in balancing the interests of the local tourism enterprise (UNEP, 2005). Both of which
are key elements in planning sustainably for tourism. Over twenty years after the adoption of
the Agenda 21 process, many Local Authorities are still focusing on the unique challenges of
planning sustainably for tourism.
This paper highlights and discusses some of the key findings in relation to the levels of
sustainable planning for tourism by Local Authorities in Ireland. The findings presented here
are part of a postgraduate research, which involved in-depth analysis of Local Authority
tourism plans. Primarily the analysis addresses the extent to which sustainable tourism
planning is evident within Local Authorities’ CDP’s (County Development Plans) in Ireland.
This was achieved by utilising a content analysis approach for investigating twenty nine
CDP’s. This longitudinal study will identify any patterns and changes in sustainable planning
for tourism from 2005 to 2013.
2.0 Analysis of Local Authority Tourism Plans
The principal areas that emerged from within the analysis are discussed in context of Local
Authority CDPs across Ireland. This content analysis tool is based on the original framework
used by Hanrahan (2007) and aims to provide a nationwide perspective on the changes and
patterns of sustainable planning. Table 1.0 illustrates the framework used to assess the levels
of sustainable planning for tourism at Local Authority level in Ireland. Only the principal
findings will be discussed in this paper.
Table 1.0 Sustainable tourism planning framework for assessing C.D.Ps
1 Specifics of Plan 4 Planning for Environmental Impacts of TourismWhat year (period) does the development plan cover? Impact of tourism on biodiversityIs there a specific County Tourism Development Plan? Tourists interaction with environment – land useIs there a specific tourism policy section in the Local Authority County Development Plan (CDP)
Environmental impact assessment (EIA) conducted for tourism (audit, GIS)
Number of pages dedicated to tourism planning within the development plan
Tourism carrying capacity calculations (physical, ecological, social, environmental, real, effective and permissible carrying capacity, limits of acceptable change , LAC)
Tourists arrivals to the area (Expressed in % of overall arrivals to the country)Number of specific tourism policies within CDP Eco-tourismNumber of tourism strategies to implement the tourism policies within the plan
Area protection (National parks, wildlife reserves, sensitive areas and landscape, AONB, SSSSI)
Tourism policy integrated within other areas of plan (accommodation housing/holiday home provision, water/waste/ sewage, transportation)
Green housekeeping for tourist accommodations (energy conservation, waste management, water conservation, green building designs supported)
Are tourism policies SEA compliant2 Sustainable Tourism Planning Supported 5 Planning for Economic Impacts of TourismSustainable development supported in the plan Economic impacts of tourism supportedSustainable planning for tourism mentioned in the planSustainable planning for tourism supported in the plan Econometric analysis of tourism earnings carried outSpecific Tourism land use zoning (visitor management techniques employed – visitor dispersion, channelled visitor flows, restricted entry, vehicle restriction)
Management of leakages from tourism (imports, over dependence on foreign ownership)
Sustainable resort planning guidelinesMakes maximum use of existing infrastructureDedicated transport management, especially as regards air and road transport
Provides opportunities for local entrepreneurs to establish tourism enterprises. Support local production (food, craft, materials and equipment)
Sustainable tourism development and design standards Industry regulation (professional association regulation, voluntary self-regulation, corporate social responsibility)
Sustainability indicators integrated into plan (resource use, waste, pollution, access to basic human needs, access to decision making, local satisfaction, tourist satisfaction, tourism contribution to local economy)
6 Planning for the Socio-Cultural Impacts of Tourism
Sustainable tourism policy on caravan/camping Consultation/Participation techniques utilised in planning process (meaningful levels of host community participation addressed; public meetings, public attitude surveys, stated preference surveys, round tables, collaboration)
Tourism signage policy Local satisfaction, ratio of tourists to localsDisabled provision mentioned Helps achieve archaeological, historic preservation
3 Integration of regulations/guidelines for sustainable tourism Protecting public rights of way for tourismGlobal agreements obvious from tourism policy/plan:Mohonk Agreement (2000); 12 Aims for sustainability (UNWTO, 2005)Rio +20 (2012); Global Sustainable Tourism Criteria for Destinations (GSTC, 2013)
Tourism disaster policy/plan
Reflects EU policy guidelines, the following are obvious from tourism policy/plan:Improving information on accessible tourism for disabled people (2004);Early warning system for identifying declining tourist’s destinations and preventative best practice (2004); Actions for more Sustainable European Tourism (2007); European tourism indicator system toolkit for sustainable destinations (2013);Enhancing the competitiveness of tourism in the EU (2013)
Intellectual and cultural property rights considered in provision and plan preparation
Reflects overall national/regional/local development policy, objectives, strategies, and legislation;Sustainable Development: A Strategy for Ireland (DOE, 1997); National Spatial Strategy 2002-2020 (DOELG, 2002); New Horizons for Irish Tourism – An Agenda for Action (2003); National Development Plan 2007-2013 (2007); Fáilte Ireland : Tourism and the Environment 2007-2009; Rural Development Programme 2007-2013; Eco-Tourism Handbook (Fáilte Ireland , 2009); New Horizons for Irish Tourism 2009-2013 (Fáilte Ireland , 2009); Our Sustainable Future: A Framework for Sustainable Development for Ireland (2012);
Codes of conduct best practice examplesCodes of conduct for; Tourists Industry Host Governments Communities
Source: adapted from (Inskeep, 1991; UNWTO, 1995; Dymond, 1997; UNWTO, 2001; Mowforth and Munt, 2003; Hanrahan and Boyd, 2007).
2.1 Specifics of Plan
With the adoption of Agenda 21 in 1992, Local Authorities were permitted to develop and
put into practise polices to measure their sustainability locally (Flanagan et al, 2004). These
policies need to be integrated within other areas of the economy such as transportation,
housing and utility management to help identify and resolve potential conflicts that are likely
to occur. Legislation also requires a Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) to be
conducted, thus requiring Local Authorities to make significant efforts towards sustainable
planning. This longitudinal analysis will identify the current levels of sustainable planning for
tourism by Local Authorities in Ireland.
Analysis has identified a notable increase in the number of CDP’s having specific tourism
policy sections, which seemed to increase from 79% in 2005 to 82% in 2013. Further to this,
there was also a substantial increase in the number of policies relating to tourism. All Local
Authorities had these integrated within a specific tourism section. There was also some cross
reference and integration of, for example, holiday home provision and transport policies.
However 31% of CDP’s had no strategies in place to aid in implementation. For example,
Fingal had increased their number of policies from ten in 2005 to thirty seven in 2013.
However it was noted that no tourism strategies were in place to implement the thirty seven
policies. Adequate task designations, budgets and time frames are also needed for effective
policy implementation (Murphy and Murphy, 2000; Hanrahan, 2007; Mason, 2008;
Mowforth and Munt, 2009).
Table 2.2 Specifics of Plan
Analysis of CDP Year CW
CN CE C
K DL D sD F G KE KD KYLS L
M LKLDLF MH
MO
MN O R S Ts Tn W
DWM
WX W
Specific tourism policy section
2005 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x
2013 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x
Number of tourism policies/objectives
2005 0 6 7 8 4 7 1 1025 3 1611 3 1 8 6 29 0 8 8 0 3 10 5 5 2 10 33 11
2013 4 2311 9 17 1 6 372519285919 7 2 181120 9 19118112 7 6 12 7 34 34
Number of tourism strategies
2005 0 0 0 7 23 0 4 30 0 5 0 0 5 11 6 0 14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 25 18
2013 2 1 6 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 2 2 1 2 6 1 0 0 15 2 2 1 1 3 0 7 9
Tourism policy integrated in other areas
2005 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x
2013 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x
Tourism policies SEA compliant
2005
2013 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x
The Planning and Development (Strategic Environmental Assessment) Regulations 2004
require that all CDP’s have a Strategic Environment Assessment (SEA) carried out. Local
Authorities are required to utilise this procedure to maximise the environmental sustainability
of their CDP’s. Analysis here discovered that 69% of tourism policies found in CDP’s
confirmed to this regulation. This finding illustrates the need for this to be addressed as the
environmental impacts triggered by tourism is at the core of several international assessments
(Liu, Sheldon, and Var, 1987; Green and Hunter, 1992; Warnken and Buckley, 1998; Reeves,
2002; Pickering, Harrington, and Worboys, 2003; Dogan, and Gazioglu, 2004; Raschke,
2005; Davenport and Davenport, 2006; Hiltunen, 2007; Geneletti and Dawa, 2009;
Amuquandoh, 2010; Hardiman and Burgin, 2010; Pickering, Hill, Newsome, and Leung,
2010; Buckley, 2011; Burak, Burgin and Hardiman, 2011; Griscom and Ashton, 2011; Li,
Yang, Liu and Zheng, 2014).
2.2 Sustainable tourism planning supported within CDP’s
This section of this framework examined the level of support for sustainable tourism planning
within CDP’s. Analysis here examined the initial level of support within the CDP for
sustainable development along with their mention and support for sustainable tourism
planning. It was then assessed if any particular tourism related planning tools evident from
2005 were being utilised in 2013, such as tourism zoning, disabled provision and tourism
signage policy etc.
This longitudinal analysis has identified that support for sustainable planning for tourism
within Local Authority CDP’s has increased overall. Results show an increase in CDP’s
making reference to sustainable planning for tourism. Furthermore there was a slight increase
in support for sustainable tourism planning from 38% in 2005 to 55% in 2013. Analysis here
seems to suggest that Local Authorities are recognising that tourism development needs to be
sustainable. An important point to consider also is that the majority of CDP’ supported the
principle of sustainable development in the overall plan.
Table 2.1 Sustainable tourism planning supported within the CDP’s
Analysis of CDP Year CW
CN CE C
K DL D sD F G KE KD KYLS L
M LKLDLF MH
MO
MN O R S TsTn W
DWM
WX W
Sustainable planning for tourism mentioned
2005 x x x x x x x x x x
2013 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x
Sustainable planning for tourism supported
2005 x x x x x x x x x x x
2013 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x
Sustainable development supported
2005 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x
2013 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x
Specific tourism land use zoning
2005 x x x x
2013 x x x x x x x x
Resort planning guidelines
2005 x x
2013 x x x x x x
Tourism development & design standards
2005 x x x x x x x
2013 x x x x x x x x x
Sustainability indicators for tourism
2005
2013
Tourism signage policy2005 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x
2013 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x
Policy on caravan & camping
2005 x x x x x x x x x x x x
2013 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x
Disabled provision mentioned
2005 x
2013 x x x
However 38% of Local Authority plans would seem to be following the boosterism approach
to tourism planning by focusing entirely on the economic benefits (Getz, 1987; Hall. 1991;
Dredge, 1999; Andriotis, 2000). Perhaps a focus on sustainable planning which stimulates
development on the basis of three essential principles: the balance between economic growth,
environmental preservation and social justice (Butler, 1993; Coccossis, 1996; Hall, 2000;
Ivars, 2004) would be of greater benefit.
There has been a substantial rise in the number and methods available to planners responsible
for the movements of tourists (Lavery, 1971; Elkington and Hailes, 1992; Witt and Moutinho,
1994; Mowforth and Munt, 2003; Mowforth and Munt, 2009). Visitor management
techniques now vary in both application and complexity from restriction of motorised
vehicles to channelled visitor flows. This longitudinal analysis illustrates a slight increase in
use of visitor management techniques. For example, the use of tourism zoning was apparent
in 14% of CDP’s in 2005, and has increased to 28% in 2013. Further to this there was an
increase in the uptake of basic resort planning guidelines as part of tourism policy.
Sustainability indicators namely; resource use, waste, pollution, local production, access to
basic human needs, access to decision making process and diversity of natural and cultural
life are from a Local Authority perspective particularly useful in planning sustainably for
tourism. These indicators are a cost effective way of preventing irreversible tourism impacts
by acting as an early warning system to usher in improved management and planning
strategies (Manning and Dougherty, 1995; Griffin et al, 2012). Unfortunately results here
show that Local Authorities are ignoring sustainable tourism indicators, thus denying
planners the information they require to plan in a sustainable manner for tourism. It should be
noted however that analysis had found widespread use of indicators within CDP’s, but none
were used when planning for tourism. Further examination found no reference to or use of the
DIT Achieve Model (2006), UNWTO and GSTC Indicator Systems (2012) or the recently
developed European Tourism Indicator System (2013). This is worrying as their
implementation is seen by many as the responsibility of Local Authorities (Cronin, 1990;
McKercher, 1993; Hunter, 1995; Patterson and Theobald, 1995; Miller, 2001; Choi and
Sirakaya, 2006). Also indicators are often utilised in the strategic planning process together
with policy making (Rigby et al., 2000; Caddy and Seijo, 2005; Hezri, 2005; Hezri and
Dovers, 2006; Rosenström and Kyllonen, 2007; Casser, Conrad, Bell, and Morse, 2013).
Analysis has identified a notable increase in the planning process for tourism signage. This is
positive as signage helps to facilitate visitor dispersion and channel visitor flows. However it
was noted that less than half of CDP’s had policies in relation to caravan and camping. This
would seem to suggest a weakness on behalf of Local Authorities in some of the fundamental
areas to promote sustainable planning for tourism.
A key area, ignored by all but one Local Authority in 2005, and addressed by three in 2013
was the provision for the disabled visitor. Travel and tourism is a right of all citizens, but it
should be noted that research regarding this area has been limited (Burnett & Bender, 2001;
Darcy, 1998, 2002; Israeli, 2002; Ray & Ryder, 2003; Ozturk, Yayli and Yesiltas, 2008).
In order to sustainably plan and manage tourism, the integration of specific guidelines and
regulations developed by experts is essential for communities to benefit fully from tourism.
This next section will look at the infiltration of global, EU and national guidelines and
regulations in CDP’s applicable to the tourism industry.
2.3 Integration of regulations/guidelines for sustainable tourism
The framework for assessing the sustainability of Local Authority CDP’s helped to identify
what level of infiltration global, EU and national regulations or guidelines had in respect to
tourism planning and development. The rationale here was to determine if the CDP’s had
benefited from higher level tourism policy formation for example, Agenda 21 for Travel and
Tourism (WTO, 1995), 12 Aims for sustainability (UNWTO, 2005), GSTC Criteria for
Sustainable Tourism (GSTC, 2008), Rio+20 (2012) and the Global Sustainable Tourism
Criteria for Destinations (GSTC, 2013) etc.
This longitudinal analysis has found that there was no integration of global guidelines within
CDP’s. Only components of Local Agenda 21 (1992) and the Kyoto Protocol (1997) were
found in the CDP’s.
Table 2.3 Integration of guidelines and policies for sustainable tourism
CDP YearCW
CNCECKDLDsDF G
KEKDKYLSLM
LKLDLF
MH
MO
MNO R S Ts
TnWD
WM
WXW
Global agreements obvious from plan
2005
2013
Reflects EU policy guidelines
2005
2013
Reflects national, strategies, policies, legislation
2005 x x x x x x
2013 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x
BF ‘Guidelines for development of caravan & camping’ 1982
2005 x x x x x x x x x x x
2013 x x x x
FI ‘Eco-Tourism Handbook’ 2009
2005
2013 x x
On a European level, the EU has produced a range of useful guidelines and strategies when
planning sustainably for tourism. A search for the adoption of these policies and guidelines
into CDPs was integrated into the textual analysis of the CDPs. However analysis has found
that there was no integration of the following EU guidelines:
Table 2.4 EU policies/guidelines for sustainable tourism
Using Natural and Cultural Heritage for the Development of Sustainable Tourism in Non-Traditional Tourism Destinations (2002)Early Warning System for Identifying Declining Tourist Destinations and Preventative Best Practice (2004)Improving Information on Accessible Tourism for Disabled People (2004)Making Tourism More Sustainable: A Guide Policy Makers (2005)Actions for More Sustainable European Tourism (2007)
Disaster Risk Management for Coastal Tourism (2008)European Tourism Indicators System Toolkit for Sustainable Destinations (2013)Enhancing the Competitiveness of Tourism in the EU (2013)
The lack of any integration of Global or EU guidelines on sustainable tourism can support
Mowforth and Munts claim that regulation for sustainability is a concept as contested as
sustainability itself (2003: 183) and taking into consideration that regulation is likely to
involve the provision of information and instructions on what can and cannot be done
(Mason, 2008: 136), their absence is a cause for concern.
This longitudinal analysis has however found that national level strategies and guidelines had
a far higher rate of adoption than that of global or EU proposals. There was a notable increase
from 21% in 2005 to 76% in 2013 of CDP’s reflecting national guidelines and strategies. The
framework examined the integration and application of the following national development
policies, objectives, strategies, and legislation;
Table 2.4 National policies, strategies and legislation
Sustainable Development, A Strategy for Ireland (DOE, 1997)National Spatial Strategy 2002-2020 (DOELG, 2002)New Horizons for Irish Tourism – An Agenda for Action (Fáilte Ireland , 2003)National Development Plan 2007-2013 (2007)Tourism and the Environment 2007-2009 (Fáilte Ireland , 2007)Tourism Product Development Strategy 2007-2013 (Fáilte Ireland , 2007)Rural Development Programme 2007-2013 (2007)Eco-Tourism Handbook (Fáilte Ireland , 2009)New Horizons for Irish Tourism 2009-2013 (Fáilte Ireland , 2009)Our Sustainable Future: A Framework for Sustainable Development for Ireland (DECLG, 2012)
It is important to note that this list is not exhaustive and each tourism component of the CDPs
was examined for any integration of national polices strategies or laws.
Analysis has found that two CDP’s in 2013 reflected Fáilte Ireland’s Eco-tourism Handbook
(2008). While the Guidelines for the Development of Caravan and Camping Sites (BF, 1982)
are still being integrated into tourism policy. It should be noted that reflection of these
guidelines has dropped from 38% in 2005 to 14% in 2013. However it would seem that
forward planners in Local Authorities are still utilising these relatively old set of guidelines
(31 years old) when planning for tourism.
3.0 Conclusion
This longitudinal analysis has identified that the levels of sustainable planning for tourism in
Ireland have improved overall. Results show an improvement in the uptake of land use
zoning, resort planning and design standards as part of tourism policy. Furthermore there
were also a slight increase in CDP’s having policies for tourism signage, together with a
minor increase in provision for disabled tourists. Also over three quarters of CDP’s reflected
national strategies and polices.
However further examination into the levels of sustainable planning for tourism has
highlighted a number of gaps in the approach undertaken by Local Authorities. Firstly, the
absence of any sustainable tourism indicators makes it hard for Local Authorities to make
informed decisions for sustainable development, as a degree of meaningful and usable data is
required. Secondly, the lack of communication of relevant Global and EU strategies on
planning sustainably for tourism by Local Authorities needs to be addressed. These
guidelines are extremely costly and timely to produce and it would seem to warrant further
investigation as to why they have not been integrated at the local level.
In conclusion this longitudinal analysis has found that the improvement in the levels of
planning sustainably for tourism by Local Authorities is encouraging. However it has been
noted that there are still areas of the sustainable tourism planning framework that have not
been addressed by tourism policies and strategies in Local Authority CDP’s.
Bibliography
Amuquandoh, F., 2010. Residents' perceptions of the environmental impacts of tourism in the Lake Bosomtwe Basin, Ghana. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, Volume 18, pp. 223-238.
Andriotis, K., 2000. Local Community Perceptions of Tourism as a Development Tool: The Island of Crete. PhD Thesis. Bournemouth: Bournemouth University.
Burak, S., Dogan, E. & Gazioglu, C., 2004. Impact of Urbanization and Tourism on Coastal Environment. Ocean and Coastal Management, Volume 36, pp. 397-416.
Burnett, J. & Bender, B., 2001. Assessing the Travel-Related Behaviours of the Mobility-Disabled Consumer. Journal of Travel Research, Volume 40, pp. 4-11.
Butler, R., 1993. An Evolutionary Perspective. In Tourism and Sustainable Development: Monitoring, Planning, Managing. Waterloo: University of Waterloo, pp. 27-43.
Caddy, J. & Seijo, J., 2005. This is More Difficult Than We Thought! The Responsibility of Scientist’s Managers and Stakeholders to Mitigate the Unsustainability of Marine Fisheries. Bio Science, Volume 360, pp. 59-75.
Cassar, L., Conrad, E., Bell, S. & Morse, S., 2013. Assessing the Use and Influence of Sustainability Indicators at the European Periphery. Ecological Indicators, Volume 35, pp. 52-61.
Charlton, C. & Essex, S., 1996. The Involvement of District Councils in Tourism in England and Wales. Geoforum, 27(2), pp. 175-192.
Choi, H. & Sirakaya, E., 2005. Sustainability Indicators for Managing Community Tourism’. Tourism Management, 27(6), pp. 1274-1289.
Coccossis, H., 1996. Tourism and Sustainability: Perspectives and Implications. In Sustainable Tourism? European Experiences. Wallingford: CAB International.
Cooper, C. et al., 2008. Tourism Principles and Practice. U.K: Pearson Education.
Cronin, L., 1990. A Strategy for Tourism and Sustainable Developments. World Leisure and Recreation, Volume 4, pp. 9-17.
Darcy, S., 1998. Anxiety to Access: Tourism Patterns and Experiences of Disabled: New South Wales People with physical disability tourism. Sydney: New South Wales.
Davanport, J. & Davenport, J., 2006. The impact of tourism and personal leisure transport on coastal environments: A review. Estuarine, Costal and Shelf Science, Volume 27, pp. 280-292.
Dredge, D., 1999. Destination Place Planning and Design. Annals of Tourism Research, 26(4), pp. 772-791.
Elkington, J. & Hailes, J., 1992. Holidays that Don’t Cost the Earth. London: Gollanez.
Fáilte Ireland, 2007. Tourism and the Environment: 2007-2009, s.l.: s.n.
Fáilte Ireland, 2014. Overseas Visitors to Ireland: January - December 2013, s.l.: s.n.
Fitzgerald, J. et al., 2012. DIT-ACHIEV Model for Sustainable Tourism Management: Lessons Learned from Implementing a Holistic Model of Sustainable Tourism Indicators. s.l.:Emerald Group Publishing.
Geneletti, D. & Dawa, D., 2009. Environmental impact assessment of mountain tourism in developing regions: A study in Ladakh, Indian Himalaya. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, Volume 29, pp. 229-242.
Getz, D., 1987. Tourism Planning and Research: Traditions, Models and Futures Paper.. Bunbury, Australian Travel Research Workshop.
Green, H. & Hunter, C., 1992. The Environmental-Impact Assessment of Tourism Development.
Griscom, H. & Ashton, M., 2011. Restoration of dry tropical forests in Central America: A review of pattern and process. Forest Ecology and Management, Volume 261, pp. 1564-1579.
Hall, C., 1991. Tourism in Australia: Impacts, Planning and Development. Melbourne: Longman.
Hall, C., 2000. Tourism Planning: Policies, Processes and Relationships. Essex: s.n.
Hanrahan, J., 2007. Host Community Participation and Sustainable Tourism in Ireland: The Local Authority Perspective. s.l.:Greenhouse Press.
Hanrahan, J. & Boyd, S., 2007. A Key to Sucessful Tourism Development for Local Authorities in Ireland.
Hezri, A., 2005. Utilisation of Sustainability Indicators and Impact Through Policy Learning in the Malaysian Policy Process. Environmental Assessment, 7(4), pp. 575-595.
Hezri, A. & Dovers, S., 2006. Sustainability Indicators, Policy and Governance: Issues for Ecological Economics. Ecological Economics, Volume 60, pp. 86-99.
Hiltunen, M., 2007. Environmental impacts of rural second home tourism — Case Lake District in Finland. Scandinavian Journal of Hospitality and Tourism, Volume 7, pp. 243-265.
Hunter, C., 1995. On the Need to Re-conceptualise Sustainable Tourism Development. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 3(3), pp. 155-165.
Israeli, A., 2002. A Preliminary Investigation of the Importance of Site Accessibility Factors for Disabled Tourists. Journal of Travel Research, 41(1), pp. 101-104.
Ivars, J., 2004. Tourism Planning in Spain: Evolution and Perspectives. Annals of Tourism Research, 31(2), pp. 313-333.
Lavery, P., 1971. Recreation Geography. London: David and Charles.
Li, G., Yang, X., Liu, Q. & Zheng, F., 2014. Destination Island Effects: A theoretical framework for the environmental impact assessment of human tourism activities. Tourism Management Perspectives, Volume 10, pp. 11-18.
Liu, J., Sheldon, P. & Var, T., 1987. Resident Perception of the Environmental Impacts of Tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, Volume 14, pp. 17-37.
Manning, E. & Dougherty, T., 1995. Sustainable Tourism: Preserving the Golden Goose., s.l.: Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration Quarterly.
Mason, P., 2008. Tourism Impacts, Planning and Management. U.K: Elsevier.
McKercher, B., 1993. Some Fundamental Truths about Tourism: Understanding Tourism’s Social and Environmental Impacts. Journal of Sustaianble Tourism, 1(1), pp. 6-16.
Miller, G., 2001. The Development of Indicators for Sustainable Tourism: Results of a Delphi Survey of Tourism Researchers,. Tourism Management, 22(3), pp. 351-362.
Mowforth, M. & Munt, I., 2003. Tourism and Sustainability, Development and New Tourism in the Third World. 2nd ed. USA & Canada: Routledge.
Mowforth, M. & Munt, I., 2009. Tourism and Sustainablity: Development and new tourism in the third world. 3rd ed. London: Routledge.
Ozturk, Y., Yayli, A. & Yesiltas, M., 2008. Is the Turkish tourism Industry Ready for a Disabled Customer's Market? The views of hotel and travel agency managers. Tourism Management, 29(2), pp. 382-389.
Patterson, A. & Theoblad, K., 1995. Sustainable Development, Agenda 21 and the New Local Governance in Britain. Regional Studies, 29(8), pp. 773-778.
Pickering, C., Harrington, J. & Worboys, G., 2003. Environmental impacts of tourism on the Australian Alps protected areas — Judgments of protected area managers. Mountain Research and Development, Volume 23, pp. 247-254.
Pickering, C., Hill, W., Newsome, D. & Leung, Y., 2010. Comparing hiking, mountain biking and horse riding impacts on vegetation and soils in Australia and the United States of America. Journal of Environmental Management, Volume 91, pp. 551-562.
Raschke, N., 2005. Environmental impact assessment as a step to sustainable tourism development. Sustainable Development and Planning, 1 & 2(84), pp. 303-313.
Ray, N. & Ryder, M., 2003. Ebilities Tourism: An exploratory discussion of the travel needs and motivations of the mobility-disabled. Tourism Management, Volume 24, pp. 57-72.
Reeves, N., 2002. Managing the impact of tourism on the environment. Journal of the Chartered Institution of Water and Environmental Management, Volume 16, pp. 7-11.
Rigby, D., Howlett, D. & Woodhouse, P., 2000. A Review of Indicators of Agricultural and Rural Livelihood Sustainability, Manchester: Institute for Development Policy and Management.
Rosenström, U. & Kyllonen, S., 2007. Impacts of a Participatory Approach to Developing National Level Sustainable Development Indicators in Finland. Environmental Management, Volume 84, pp. 282-298.
UNEP & WTO, 2005. Making Tourism More Sustainable: A Guide for Policy Makers. [Online] Available at: http://www.unep.fr/shared/publications/pdf/DTIx0592xPA-TourismPolicyEN.pdf[Accessed 27 August 2012].
Warnken, J. & Buckley, R., 1998. Scientific quality of tourism environmental impact assessment. Journal of Applied Ecology, Volume 35, pp. 1-8.
Witt, S. & Mountinho, L., 1994. Tourism Marketing and Management. Hemel Hempstead: Prentice Hall.