An Art-Based Inquiry into the Perception of Tourism Impacts on Their Quality of Life: The Case of Cambodian Host-Children

Abstract

While host-children are vulnerable to tourism impacts, the tourism literature has neglected how these impacts affect host-children’s quality of life (QOL). The concept of QOL is ambiguous, and the influence of a host-guest relationship on residents’ QOL has been overlooked. This paper addresses these gaps by exploring how host-children in a developing country perceive tourism impacts on their QOL, focusing on power dynamics in a host-guest relationship. Data were collected from 94 Cambodian host-children using qualitative methods, including drawings and group interviews. The findings revealed Cambodian host-children’s perceptions of tourism impacts over five life domains—material, learning opportunity, cultural pride, emotion, and child sex tourism/trafficking. Despite their perception of negative impacts, all host-children believed that tourism had improved their QOL. The paradox of QOL is explained through Bottom-up Spillover Theory incorporated with Social Exchange Theory. Practical implications for post-COVID and directions for future research are suggested.

Keywords

host-children quality of life tourism impact host-guest relationship drawing

Introduction

While tourism is often considered a poverty alleviation tool, tourism development often exacerbates social issues within host communities (Higgins-Desbiolles, 2018; UNWTO, 2020). The United Nations World Tourism Organization (UNWTO) formulated a code for responsible tourism, also known as the Global Code of Ethics for Tourism (GCET). Article 5.2 of the GCET highlights the significance of residents’ quality of life (QOL), stating that “tourism policies should be applied in such a way as to help to raise the standard of living of the populations of the region visited and meet their needs.” Many scholarly attempts have been made to measure tourism impacts on residents’ QOL (Andereck & Nyaupane, 2011; Kim et al., 2013; Uysal et al., 2016), but three research gaps remain.

Firstly, QOL is an elusive concept without a universally—accepted definition (Hikoyeda & Wallace, 2002) or consensus on what constitutes the key domains (Dolnicar et al., 2012). Ambiguity and a lack of consensus on the key life domains have impeded the development of QOL concepts. This paper will explore QOL using the bottom-up spillover theory (BST), which allows for a systematic examination of the overall life satisfaction of people whose lives are affected. Given the ambiguity and dissonance in the key domains, however, the BST will be approached in an inductive way. Secondly, QOL is the “unconscious, taken-for-granted beliefs, habits of perception, thoughts and feelings” (Deery et al., 2012, p. 70). This means that QOL is under-discussed and the term is accepted without much debate. In order to appreciate the value and weight of QOL, it is critical to understand what and how internal characteristics, such as the perception of power dynamics, influence residents’ perceptions of their own QOL. Nevertheless, the literature has lacked insight into the factors such as unequal power distribution and economic inequality in a host-guest relationship. Social exchange theory (SET), which is postulated to explain the host-guest relationship and the complexity of constructs between them, will be integrated with the BST to understand the internal characteristic. Lastly, the literature has failed to identify the impacts of tourism on children living in a tourism destination (hereafter referred to as host-children), even though they are more vulnerable to tourism impacts, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, than adults (Human Rights Watch, 2021; McLoyd, 1990). To fill the gaps, this paper explores host-children’s perception of tourism impacts on their QOL. Hence, this study on host-children’s QOL, incorporating BST and SET with an inductive approach, will advance the existing tourism knowledge about QOL, which lacks consensus on key domains and insights on host-children’s QOL and the influence of power dynamics.

This paper contributes to existing tourism knowledge in three ways. First, it maps the five themes (material, learning opportunity, cultural pride, emotion, and child sex tourism/trafficking) that constitute Cambodian host children’s perception of tourism impacts on their QOL. Second, it uncovers the QOL paradox and constructs the paradox framework. Third, it advances an innovative visual research method that can be instrumental in eliciting host-children’s perceptions. Implications for the formulation of policies and initiatives to promote ethical and sustainable tourism for host-children during and after the COVID pandemic and recommendations for future research conclude the work.

Literature Review

Tourism Impacts on Residents’ Quality of Life

QOL, which generally refers to a “conscious cognitive judgment of satisfaction with one’s life” (Rejeski & Mihalko, 2001, p. 23), was first introduced in the United States as a physical and mental health instrument in the 1960s (Hikoyeda & Wallace, 2002; Padilla & Kagawa-Singer, 1998). QOL is a broader concept consisting of the objective material elements of a standard of living (income, GDP, and the number of schools) and subjective and intangible elements (happiness and satisfaction), known as wellbeing (Puczkó & Smith, 2012). In tourism, residents’ support of tourism is a primary concern for sustainable and healthy tourism development (Uysal et al., 2016). Tourism impacts on residents’ QOL have been measured using various QOL scales to identify and consider residents’ needs (Andereck & Nyaupane, 2011; Kim et al., 2013; Uysal et al., 2016). Despite considerable attention within the literature, gaps remain in relation to ambiguous and inconsistent definitions, limited attention to the influence of host-guest relationships, and the absence of a host-children’s perspective.

QOL has been criticized as an elusive concept, with an absence of a universally accepted definition (Hikoyeda & Wallace, 2002). Studies have applied different scales to examine tourism impacts on residents’ QOL. Many QOL studies in tourism have adopted the bottom-up spillover theory (BST) (Eslami et al., 2019; Joseph Sirgy, 2019; Jun et al., 2012; Kim et al., 2013; Kruger, 2012). As illustrated in Figure 1, the BST postulates that overall life satisfaction is determined in three levels from the bottom to the top. (1) The satisfaction with objective (e.g., income, the number of facilities and GDP) and subjective components (e.g., satisfaction with income and perception of the importance of facilities) determines the (2) satisfaction in various life domains (e.g., material, emotion, community, and health/safety). The satisfaction in life domains determines the (3) overall life satisfaction (Cummins et al., 1994; Joseph Sirgy, 2019; Kruger, 2012; Puczkó & Smith, 2012). Based on this theory, studies have quantitatively measured residents’ satisfaction with the (1) elements in the various life domains (Cummins et al., 1994; Kruger, 2012; Puczkó & Smith, 2012).

The lack of a universally accepted definition creates ambiguity, and there is little consensus on what constitutes the key domains (Dolnicar et al., 2012; Moons et al., 2006). The life domains measured in some studies on residents’ QOL were compared to the comprehensive quality of life scale (ComQOL) proposed by Cummins et al. (1994). The ComQOL is by far the most holistic scale available to measure tourism-related life domains and consists of material (wealth and material elements), emotional (leisure, religion, spirituality, ethics, and recreation), community (community facilities and services, and social relations), health and safety domains (personal and physical health), and overall QOL. Despite the comprehensiveness of ComQOL, other studies have identified domains that are not clearly defined in the ComQOL. For instance, while several indicators such as feeling safe and clean air and water were categorized by Andereck and Nyaupane (2011) under community wellbeing, these may be deemed more applicable to the health and safety domain of ComQOL. Jeon et al. (2016) suggested the perceived social cost domain measured the tourism impacts on residents’ usage of recreational resources and facilities. Thus, the perceived social cost may align with the ComQOL’s emotional life domain (addressing tourism impacts on residents’ leisure and recreational activities) and the community domain (measuring the tourism impacts on community facilities and services). The inconsistencies in the approaches have generated differing results and have impeded the development of QOL concepts (Uysal et al., 2016). Consequently, the existing life domains and components may not be the best instrument to explain particular residents’ QOL.

Despite the inconsistency and dissonance of life domains, the majority of studies have captured the residents’ QOL using surveys, while only a few studies on residents’ QOL have adopted qualitative methods such as interviews (Gjerald, 2005; Matarrita-Cascante, 2010; Wheeler & Laing, 2008). In particular, Gjerald (2005) adopted an inductive approach to investigate Norwegian residents’ perception of the socio-cultural impacts of tourism. An inductive research approach is deemed appropriate to investigate the residents’ perceptions, as it allows the participants to describe their attitudes toward and perceptions of tourism impacts (Gjerald, 2005). Hence, this paper adopts an inductive approach to assess residents’ perceptions rather than adopting the existing life domains or components to measure tourism impacts, which may not be applicable to a Cambodian host-children’s case.

Power in a Host-Guest Relationship

Another limitation in QOL studies is the dearth of scholarly attention to the asymmetric power dynamics between hosts and guests. Existing QOL literature has investigated various factors influencing residents’ perception of tourism impacts, such as the level of tourism development (Kim et al., 2013; Meng et al., 2010; Perdue et al., 1999; Ridderstaat et al., 2016), economic dependence on tourism (Jurowski & Brown, 2001; Woo et al., 2018), tourism seasonality (Jeon et al., 2016), relations between people and their surrounding environment (Campón-Cerro et al., 2017; Kil et al., 2012), and sense of community, including involvement and belongingness (Jurowski & Brown, 2001).

Host-guest interaction, referring to the personal encounter between tourists and hosts in specific places (Reisinger & Turner, 2003), is another factor that may influence residents’ QOL. The interactions between residents and tourists play significant roles in shaping residents’ and tourists’ attitudes, perceptions, and lifestyles (Sharpley, 2008), and power distribution between hosts and guests is a critical component in host-guest relationships (Kayat, 2002; Nunkoo & Ramkissoon, 2012). Nevertheless, the impact of host-guest interaction on residents’ QOL has received limited attention (Carneiro & Eusébio, 2015). Within the limited attention, the existing research has mainly focused on the impacts of frequency of encounters on residents’ QOL (Andersen et al., 2011; Carneiro & Eusébio, 2015), while the role of power has received limited attention.

Social Exchange Theory (SET) is a fundamental theory explaining the host-guest relationship, residents’ perceptions of tourism, their QOL, and their support for tourism development. SET is a “sociological theory concerned with understanding the exchange of resources between individuals (in this case, the children) and groups (i.e., tourists) in an interaction situation” (Ap, 1992, p. 668). The exchange occurs when the individuals and groups perceive greater benefits over the costs derived from the exchange (Easterling, 2004; Jani, 2018). However, SET is limited, as the perception of benefits and costs are influenced by power distribution between two actors (Kayat, 2002; Nunkoo & Ramkissoon, 2012). Tourists often have more power where “local values and attitudes are demonstrated as ‘other’ by constructing them as being different, distinct, and lower, relative to non-local and new tourist value system” (Saarinen & Manwa, 2008, p. 45). Tourists from developed and wealthy Western countries tend to have more power than residents in non-Western developing countries (Proyrungroj, 2017; van Den Berghe & Keyes, 1984), so the question arises as to whether the power gap is wider when host-children are concerned.

Residents who are financially dependent on tourism may perceive that tourism improves their QOL despite the negative tourism impacts (Blau, 1964; Kayat, 2002) but it is not yet empirically ascertained if children’s opinions would be filtered through the same economic agenda. Despite the manifest role of the power dynamic in the host-guest relationship, how this power dynamic shapes their perceptions of tourism impacts on residents’ QOL has not been empirically studied, let alone on host-children’s QOL. Furthermore, power is also unequally distributed within the host community. Residents with less power tend to perceive tourism impacts negatively in relation to QOL as they have less opportunity to be involved in decision-making (Ap, 1992; Kayat, 2002). Consequently, host-children who are not included in decision-making and policy design may have a different perception of the impacts of tourism on their QOL. Hence, this paper will explore how the power dynamic in a relationship between host-children and guest-tourists influences host-children’s perception of tourism impacts on their QOL by incorporating SET with BST as the research design foundation.

Absence of Attention to Host-Children

There is also a lack of research investigating the impact of tourism on host children (Yang, Yang et al., 2020), as tourism tends to view children as having no direct or explicit commercial value (Canosa et al., 2016). However, understanding host-children’s QOL is crucial as children are more vulnerable to tourism impacts than host-adults. Tourism impacts may exacerbate social issues such as poverty and economic loss in their lives. Although tourism is often used as a poverty alleviation tool giving the underprivileged in developing countries an opportunity to break out of their poverty cycle, the children from low-income families face discrimination. They also lack education, social services and information resulting in illiteracy, informal employment, disempowerment, and personal insecurity (Croes, 2012). These negative objective impacts are beyond their control, and they are more likely to be exposed to mistreatment from distressed parents (McLoyd, 1990). Furthermore, host-children’s QOL should be explored separately from host-adults’ QOL, as children have different perceptions of their QOL than adults (Sixsmith et al., 2007). However, there is a dearth of research on how poverty-stricken residents in developing countries, especially children, perceive tourism impacts on their lives. This research, therefore, deliberately involves host-children from low-income families in a developing country.

The absence of research on host-children could be further attributed to methodological and ethical concerns. Children are regarded as vulnerable research subjects. It may also be difficult to obtain accurate and credible data or their consent to participate in research due to cognitive and language competencies (Canosa & Graham, 2016; Khoo-Lattimore, 2015; Yang, Yang et al., 2020). Su et al. (2018) attempted to include children in their study but failed to distinguish the children’s data from the adults’ and therefore failed to extrapolate the implications from the children’s perspective. In addition, their starting age was 15 because this age group was thought to be mature enough to understand the research and critically evaluate tourism impacts. Khoo-Lattimore (2015) established that children as young as 5 years old have the capacity to be active agents in their own lives, but to date, we still do not have data from host-children on how tourism impacts their wellbeing and QOL. Consequently, this paper explores tourism impacts on host-children’s QOL by listening to their voices.

A Conceptual Framework Incorporating BST and SET

Given the gaps in residents’ QOL research, this paper aims to explore the perceptions of host-children in developing countries toward the impacts of tourism on their QOL. This research especially focuses on how the power dynamic in host-guest relationships shapes host-children’s perception of tourism impacts. As elaborated in Figure 2, BST is incorporated with SET focusing on power distribution between host-children and tourists. Based on the conceptual framework, this paper seeks to answer the following research questions: (1) How do host-children in developing countries perceive tourism impacts on their QOL? (2) How do host-children in developing countries perceive power distribution between themselves and tourists? (3) How does the power dynamic in the host-guest relationship influence host-children’s perceptions of the impacts of tourism on their overall QOL?

Research Context: Cambodia

Cambodia was selected as the study context due to the nation’s high dependence on tourism (Chheang, 2008). Like many developing countries, Cambodia promotes tourism to reduce poverty, earn foreign currency, and create jobs and incomes for locals (Chheang, 2008; Dwyer & Thomas, 2012). Tourism contributed 21% to Cambodia’s GDP in 2019 (Rawlins et al., 2020) and led to the largest decline (62% points from 2000 to 2019) in the share of the working poor in the Asia and Pacific region (Asian Development Bank, 2020). Although Cambodia’s economy has improved, approximately 13% of the population still lives below the national poverty line of 1.90 USD per day (Asian Development Bank, 2020). Furthermore, the COVID pandemic hit Cambodia’s micro, small and medium-sized tourism enterprises and decreased by nearly 80% of tourism revenue (Pechet & Augustine, 2021). The COVID lock-down has laid off or suspended workers in the tourism industry, and it severely affects millions of Cambodian children from low-income families (Human Rights Watch, 2021).

Cambodia also has the highest rate of child labor in South-East Asia (Kim, 2011). According to statistics, 20% of the 4 million Cambodian children are economically active (NIS, MPC, & ILO, 2013). Economically active children often engage in long working hours, and their access to education is limited. Among economically active children aged 5 to 17 years, 17.7% worked 8 to 14 hours per week, while 13.2% worked 30 to 42 hours (NIS, 2013). Furthermore, half of the working children drop out of school or have never gone to school (NIS, 2013). More than 5% of the working children are reported as engaging in the accommodation and food-service sectors (NIS, 2013). Yet, it is estimated that more children are involved in tourism, given the nature of tourism and the invisibility of child workers (Hagedoorn, 2013). Child involvement in tourism can expose them to the risk of exploitation, trafficking, and sex tourism (Beddoe, 2003; Curley, 2014; Ireland, 1993). Nevertheless, as tourism-related work may be considered relatively light work (Hagedoorn, 2013), children involved in tourism are often excluded from policies and projects combating child labor.

Cambodia is characterized by a high power distance, which means that social relations are hierarchical and that people are likely to accept unequal power distribution (Chan & Chheang, 2008; Hofstede, 1984). Cambodia is a collectivist society that emphasizes harmony and conformity within society, which can be correlated with power distance (Chan & Chheang, 2008; Hofstede, 1984; Tan, 2008). As a collectivist society, Cambodians are more likely to tolerate unequal power distribution to maintain harmony. Cambodian daily lives are also guided by Theravada Buddhism and the doctrine of Karma (Kent, 2015; O'Leary, 2006). Karma holds that human deeds and misdeeds are merits and demerits. Accumulated Karma in this life and previous lives determines an individual’s social position in the next incarnation (Chhim, 1987; O'Leary, 2006). With their belief in Karma, Cambodians are likely to accept their social position considering it to be a consequence of their deeds and misdeeds in their previous lives (O’Leary, 2006). Finally, the genocide led by the Khmer Rouge caused massive damage to social and economic structures and resulted in severe poverty (Chan & Chheang, 2008; O’Leary, 2006). Since the early 1990s, the Cambodian government introduced market liberalization, using tourism as an economic tool to boost the economy (Beazley & Miller, 2016; Chheang, 2008). However, this resulted in extreme economic polarization that further strengthened the power distance in terms of wealth (Kent, 2015).

Within the limited host-children literature, Cambodia is one of the most investigated contexts (Yang, Yang, et al., 2020), with a focus on volunteer tourism (Carpenter, 2015; Guiney, 2018) and child sex tourism (Hughes, 2000). However, few studies have explicitly studied the impacts of tourism on Cambodian host-children (Yang, Yang, et al., 2020). Despite the focus on host-children, these studies have also mainly collected data from adult-stakeholders such as non-government organization (NGO) staff (Guiney & Mostafanezhad, 2015). Other studies have investigated contextual factors, such as the Cambodian political and legal framework. There is a paucity of studies considering children’s own voices to explore issues related to host-children. Consequently, this paper will contribute to the literature by investigating the influence of power differences between Cambodian host-children and tourists on host-children’s perceptions of tourism impacts.

Methodology

The majority of the literature on residents’ QOL has been dominated by quantitative studies, which either use statistical data such as the objective index or quantified residents’ satisfaction as indicators to test the relationships between residents’ perceptions of tourism’s impacts and other factors (Sharpley, 2014). While providing important insights into residents’ QOL, these studies are limited to the extent that they can unpack the complexities of power in a host-guest relationship. They are also limited in their capacity to elicit responses from young host-children. To address these methodological gaps, this study employed a combination of qualitative methods, including group interviews, drawings, informal chats, and observations.

Researcher Positionality

The authors believe that the world consists of multiple realities shaped by human rights, social justice, and cultural values and cherish the empowerment of disadvantaged people. With the transformative beliefs, they believe that respecting the culture and being aware of the power relations is crucial because knowledge is socially located within a complex cultural context (Mertens, 2007). These beliefs are consistent with the transformative paradigm’s ontology (believing in the socially constructed realities), axiology (respecting the marginalized communities), and epistemology (highlighting the cognizant of cultural diversity established by building the rapports) (Mertens, 2007). The first author is a Korean female PhD scholar based in Australia. Recognizing the limitation relating to her cultural background, she proactively engaged with Cambodian scholars both in Australia and Cambodia to learn about the Cambodian culture over the past 3 years, undertook two field trips to Cambodia, and recruited a local scholar specializing in women’s rights to get interpretational assist. The first author, who has experience working as a consultant for ECPAT (End Child Prostitution and Trafficking), an NGO for combatting the sexual exploitation of children, has published research using similar methods with children (Khoo-Lattimore & Jihyun Yang, 2020). The second author is an established international expert on children in tourism, visual research methods, and a master trainer in qualitative research. The third author is from Southeast Asia with expertise in marginalized groups in tourism and visual and arts-based research methods.

Data Collection

Data were collected from host-children within NGOs and those encountered on the streets in Cambodia. A convenience sampling strategy was used to approach 94 host-children: 62 from three NGOs and 32 from the streets. NGOs provide education to children from low-income families and are financed by tourist donations and operated by volunteers. The NGOs selected children within their organizations for this project. The host-children were engaged in tourism by offering various forms of tourism products, including performing traditional Khmer dances, training in restaurants, and participating in tourist homestays. Additionally, the first author randomly approached children engaged in tourism on the street. The children from the street included child souvenir-sellers, beggars, performers, and children living in slum tourism destinations. Figure 3 presents the demographics of the participants. The children ranged in age from 6 to 18. Additional data were collected from seven young adults between 19 and 21. They were asked to share their experiences and opinions of their childhood recollections. Supplementary data were used for triangulation purposes.

Data collection methods

Two field trips were conducted in Cambodia. The first field trip in October 2019 was used to build rapport with the potential child participants and become familiar with Cambodian culture. During the first field trip, three pilot studies with eight host-children within the NGOs were conducted. The primary data were collected during the second field trip, over 15 days in January 2020. The data were collected with the assistance of a local scholar to interpret Khmer into English. The first author and the interpreter had cross-checked meanings, and interpretation was made throughout the second field trip and exchanged the reflective diary to minimize the risks of mistranslation and potential bias. The reflective diary includes the first author’s reflection acknowledging the power gaps between an adult-researcher and a child-participant, and a foreign researcher and a local participant.

The 62 host-children within the NGOs were invited to 14 group activities involving semi-structured group interviews and drawings. Group activities provide a space for children to share their opinions with their friends, thereby reducing generational power gaps between an adult-researcher and child participants. The method also reduces a child’s stress from a coercive research setting (Gibson, 2012; Hoppe et al., 1995). Each group consisted of three to five children whose ages were similar. The session ran for an hour in classrooms provided by the NGOs, with the assistance of the interpreter.

The participants were asked to draw their lives interacting with tourists and explain the situations. Drawing is an efficient tool supporting an emic perspective that allows informants to freely express which elements of their experience provided valuable insight (Gamradt, 1995; Soulard et al., 2021). Hence, drawing has been adopted as a data collection technique in past tourism studies addressing emotionally-charged and complex topics, such as transformative tourism (Soulard et al., 2021) and perception of tourism and tourists (Gamradt, 1995). Furthermore, drawing has been identified as a child-friendly research technique (Literat, 2013) and was used to complement the group interviews. Drawing reduces researcher-respondent power gaps as it captivates children’s attention and provides a more holistic depiction of the participants’ perceptions, eliciting the subconscious or unrealized feelings of the participants (Literat, 2013). The conversation about descriptive and interpretive elements in their drawings was carried out during and after drawing to reduce misinterpretations of children’s drawings. A semi-structured group interview followed the drawing session. Guided by BST, the interview included questions about children’s engagement in tourism and their perceptions and satisfaction of tourism impacts from various life perspectives. Furthermore, the questions related to SET in host-guest relationships, such as how they perceive and describe their relationships and interactions with tourists, were also included. Verbal consent from both the host-children and NGOs as their guardians was obtained. The verbal consents and sessions were audio-recorded.

The data were triangulated with the data from 32 street host-children. Due to the limitations of obtaining the consent of the guardians of the street host-children, the data were collected using informal semi-structured chats on the same topics. In addition, their engagement in tourism was observed. The street children’s responses and the researcher’s observations were recorded as fieldwork notes. For ethical reasons, the informal chats were conducted in public spaces, and the street host-children did not participate in the drawing activity.

The research team was concerned that the financial compensation for participating in the study might motivate the poverty-stricken children to participate in the research without being aware of its risks and benefits. Guided by their transformative beliefs, the research team believed that giving financial compensation to poverty-stricken children might exacerbate the power gaps in various forms of relationships (i.e., research-participants, adult-children, tourist-host, first-world country-third-world country). Hence, instead of the financial incentives, the children got to keep the notebooks and coloring pencils that were used during the interviews to minimize the unethical risks and empower the disadvantaged children. The notebooks and coloring pencils were deemed to be of less risk in terms of their influence on participant recruitment and motivation.

Data Analysis

All participants were coded to ensure confidentiality. The codes provide age, gender, and whether they were engaged in NGOs or were encountered on the street. The host-children within NGOs were coded as (N), while host-children on the street were coded as (S), followed by their unique letter code, age, and gender. For instance, (N)A^{10, M} indicates that the interviewee was a 10-year-old boy within an NGO, while (S)A^{7, F} indicates that the interviewee was a 7-year-old girl encountered on the street.

From a hermeneutic perspective, children’s drawings have layers of meanings (Deguara, 2019). The drawings were analyzed using two approaches, including thematic and psychological analysis. The thematic analysis assists in obtaining an understanding of children’s knowledge of the situations in a descriptive or narrative way, focusing on what they see, hear and perceive in their drawings (Kuhn, 2003). Hence, thematic analysis was used to understand how host-children perceive tourism impacts on their lives. For the thematic analysis, this research followed Kuhn’s (2003) method of qualitative thematic analysis of children’s drawings. Kuhn’s (2003) analysis aims to interpret the different levels of meanings, focusing on: (1) descriptive elements, which are personal, natural, objective, textual, and symbolic elements; and (2) interpretative elements, which are locations, social relations, and activities. The drawings were analyzed using thematic classifications, including subjects representing real objects, persons, actions, text, and special events. The thematic classification determines the questions asking interpretive elements (see Table 1). The conversations with the participants about their drawings’ descriptive and interpretative elements were audio-recorded and transcribed. The transcripts were coded and analyzed thematically.

Table 1.

Thematic Classification of Drawings and Example Questions.

Elements	Thematic classification	Example questions
Descriptive elements	Real objects (e.g., temples, trays, and musical instruments)	“What is this?”
		“Why are you holding a tray?”
	Persons (e.g., themselves, friends, and tourists)	“Who are they?”
	Persons (e.g., themselves, friends, and tourists)	“Which one are you?”
	Text (e.g., texts in English and Khmer)	“What does it mean?”
	Text (e.g., texts in English and Khmer)	“Why did you write it?”
	Special event (e.g., performance, work, and taking a picture)	“Can you explain the situation in your drawing?”
⬇
Elements	Thematic classification	Example questions
Interpretive elements	Location	“Where is here in your drawing?”
	Activities	“What are you/they doing in your drawing?”
	Special event	“Can you explain the situation in your drawing?”
	Social relationships	“What are you doing with the tourists in your drawing?”
	Social relationships	“What do you think about relationships with the tourists in your drawing?”
	Abstract meaning	“What was your feeling when you engaged in tourism, as you drew?”

The coding on the conversations was complemented by psychological analysis, in which the psychological and symbolic elements in the drawings were analyzed. The psychological analysis of children’s drawings projecting children’s self-concept, body image, and self-identity (Hargreaves, 1978) is used to identify how host-children position themselves in host-guest relationships. The psychological elements are guided by Farokhi and Hashemi (2011) and Foley and Mullis (2008) (Table 2).

Table 2.

Psychological Interpretation of Children’s Drawings.

Psychological elements	The interpretation
Very big person	The huge drawing indicates aggression and overactivity
Very tiny person	The tiny person shows feelings of incompetence, shame, fear, and depression
Big head	A human with an exaggerated head indicates his/her inflated ego
Big eyes	Large eyes indicate that children feel watched or controlled by the person with big eyes with a skeptical view
No eyes	The deletion of the eyes of a person is evidence of an unwillingness to mix with others
No nose	Omission of the nose indicates powerlessness or shyness
Long neck	Too long neck indicates difficulties in achieving the person’s wishes and satisfying him/her
Small or no arms/hands	Small or no hands show powerless, insecure and helpless emotions
Putting legs together	Drawing the legs together shows the concern about the sexual attack

Source. Farokhi and Hashemi (2011) and Foley and Mullis (2008).

As illustrated in Figure 4, a thematic analysis was conducted for semi-structured interviews, informal chats, and observations, and both thematic and psychological analyses were conducted for drawings. The data were cross-checked by the second and third authors to ensure consistency and reliability. The transcriptions and field notes were inductively and thematically coded. Five themes related to life domains emerged from the data. Other patterns and themes were identified based on positive and negative perceptions in the identified life domains and power dynamics using MAXQDA qualitative data analysis software. Table 3 summarizes the coding process and provides a three-step demonstration of how participants’ quotes and drawing elements are first conceptualized as five life domain themes and subsequently categorized under the power dynamics in host-guest relationships.

Table 3.

Examples of Themes and Coding.

Themes: power dynamic	Themes: life domains	Examples
Host-children are inferior to tourists	Material reliance on tourism_Positive	[(N)U^{18, F}, Conversation about drawing]
		“The tourist has a lot of money, but I am a just trainee.”
		[(N)U^{18, F}, Elements in drawing]
		No hand: Powerless, insecure and helpless
	Learning opportunity_Positive	[(N)AC^{14, F}, Conversation about drawing]
	Learning opportunity_Positive	“We are dancing for tourists to help [her NGOs].”
	Interaction with tourists_Positive	[(N)AL^{15, F}, Semi-structured interview]
	Interaction with tourists_Positive	“I feel beloved by tourists”
	Interaction with tourists_Negative	[(N)A^{13, F}, Conversation about drawings]
	Interaction with tourists_Negative	“I felt hurt. When I tried to hold tourists’ hand, they shook off my hands, even without looking at me.”
	Child sex tourism and trafficking_Negative	[(N)AR^{17, F}, Conversation about drawings]
		“We do not know their (tourists) intention of taking pictures of us. Sometimes, when tourists take photos of children, they give money to the children. Then, children are not able to think. They are not aware of the risks . . . The photos can be used for pornography sites.”
		[(N)AR^{17, F}, Psychological analysis]
		Putting legs together: Concerns about sexual attacks
		[(S) AC^{11, M}, Observation]
		A boy carried a piece of onion as an antidote to anesthesia that might be used in trafficking
Host-children are superior to tourists	Cultural pride_Positive	[(N)AB^{11, F}, Conversation about drawings]
Host-children are superior to tourists		“I am happy to show Khmer traditional dance to foreigners who do not know about Cambodian culture.”
		[(N)AB^{11, F}, Psychological analysis]
		Big head: Inflated ego
	Cultural pride_Negative	[(N)AR^{17, F}, Conversation about drawings]
		“She is a bad tourist. If she visits a country with different cultures, she must obey and respect their culture by behaving nice and wearing proper clothes.”

Ethical Consideration: Research Involving Children

As children are often considered vulnerable and incompetent subjects, special permits and ethical considerations are required to involve children in research (Canosa & Graham, 2016; Khoo-Lattimore, 2015; Yang, Yang, et al., 2020). This research was conducted following the authors’ affiliated University’s ethical guideline to collect data from Cambodian host-children. As a result, we were highly aware that children have limited capacity to express their opinions and tend to be physically and psychologically intimidated when being interviewed by adult-researchers (Kirk, 2007). To address the power distance between an adult-researcher and child participants, this research adopted a child-friendly research method, such as a group interview and drawing, to address the power gap between adult-researcher and child-participants (Literat, 2013). Furthermore, special attention was given to interview questions to have negligible risk by cross-checking the items in the protocol with the research ethics committee of the authors’ affiliated University. Secondly, the research considered children’s incompetent cognitive and language capacity to provide informed consent. The verbal informed consent explained the purpose, activities and potential risks of the research in child-friendly terms. Also, consent was obtained from children’s guardians, such as NGO staff. When consent could not be obtained from children’s guardians, the semi-structured group interviews were replaced with observation and informal chats. The ethical approval process was expectedly meticulous but was granted. In addition to following the approved ethical guidelines when engaging with host-children in Cambodia, the authors continuously engaged in reflexivity on moral and ethical considerations throughout the research process.

Findings

Tourism Impacts on Host-Children’s Quality of Life

The findings revealed that host-children perceive both positive and negative impacts of tourism on various aspects of their lives. The perceptions were categorized into five themes: material, learning opportunity, cultural pride, emotion, and child sex tourism/trafficking. The first research question relating to how host-children perceive tourism impacts can be explored by host-children’s perceptions of each life domain and overall QOL.

Material reliance on tourism

The material life domain refers to the economic aspects of life. All the participants perceived positive tourism impacts on their material life as they or their families rely on income from tourism. (N)AV^{18, M} explained the tourism impacts on their material life, saying that “a group of foreigners take pictures of us. After that, they give me candies. Some people give me clothes. I am really happy.” Similarly, (N)AN^{16, M} drew images depicting his material reliance on tourism (Figure 5). He described that “rich” tourists regularly visit his village to share food and school materials with children. Many host-children stated that they engaged in tourism to support their families financially. For instance, (N)H^{12, F}, who was paid to dance for tourists within an NGO, said that “when we dance, we are paid. . . I can help my sister go to high school.” The findings imply that when host-children receive tangible and quantifiable rewards from tourists, they can articulate the positive impact of tourism on the material domain of their lives.

Tourism provides opportunities to learn

Most children perceived that tourism had increased their opportunities to learn. The opportunity to learn is positively related to the material life domain, as host-children can pay for their education fees through income and donations as a result of tourism. Figure 6 demonstrates (N)AT^{18, F} introducing other neighborhood children to tourists in order to find donors for children’s school fees. Host-children within NGOs were also aware that the NGOs relied on tourism. Hence, children were likely to encourage tourists to donate or expenses for NGOs, where they were engaged, by performing dances or working at restaurants in NGOs. For instance, (N)AC^{14, F} explained why she danced for tourists saying, “we are dancing for tourists to help [her NGO]” and acknowledged that the NGO was providing her education. Host-children also perceived positive impacts on their education in terms of language. As (S)V^{13, F} said that “I love to interact with tourists because I can speak to tourists in English. My English skill has been improved a lot since I started selling souvenirs.” Many host-children on the street also stated that they chose tourism-related jobs to learn other languages.

Tourism instills cultural pride

Host-children perceive both benefits and losses in relation to cultural pride. Those who performed Khmer traditional dances stated that their engagement in tourism made them proud to be a Khmer. (N)F^{12, F}’s drawing demonstrated that her engagement in tourism instills cultural pride (Figure 7) and said that “I am really happy to show Khmer traditional dances to foreigners.”

Negative perceptions arose when the children felt that tourists repudiated their culture. For instance, (N)AY^{18, M} expressed anger toward tourists who littered at Angkor Wat, the “pride of Cambodia” (Figure 8). Figure 9 shows an example of tourists wearing clothes deemed inappropriate in Cambodian culture. (N)AR^{17, F} described the tourist in her drawing, saying that “she is a bad tourist. If she visits a country with different cultures, she must obey and respect their culture by behaving nice and wearing proper clothes.” Furthermore, (N)AR^{17, F} expressed uncomfortable feelings when tourists approach her in English (Figure 9). Similarly, (N)AH^{11, F}, described good tourists as tourists who can speak Khmer. These statements imply that host-children feel respected and comfortable when tourists speak the Khmer language.

Interactions with tourists can affect psychological wellbeing

Several children highlighted warm, friendly, and polite interactions with tourists, as illustrated in Figure 10. Similarly, (S)E^{14, M} described good tourists as those who had a “friendly approach us and talk to us.” Thus, several host-children were keen to say hello, expecting tourists to return the greeting with a smile. Many host-children tolerated or felt happy with tourists’ taking pictures of them because they thought that the tourists took pictures of them as they loved children. Conversely, when tourists were not friendly or were expressionless, children perceived negative impacts within the emotion domain. (N)J^{12, F}, who danced for tourists, stated that “sometimes tourists refuse my invitation to dance with me. . . [when] tourists frown faces, it is not okay. It is okay to refuse to dance with me if they smile.” Moreover, (N)A^{13, F} shared her experience, saying that “I felt hurt. When I tried to hold tourists’ hand, they shook off my hands, even without looking at me.” Additionally, a few host-children felt afraid of tourists who do not act respectfully, such as being drunken, scolding, blaming, or yelling at children, or invading their houses. The previous demonstrates that host-children’s psychological wellbeing is susceptible to the quality and nature of social interaction with tourists.

Children’s awareness of child sex tourism and trafficking

Most host-children were aware of child sex tourism and trafficking risks, although they were likely to confuse genuine tourists with predators or traffickers. For instance, (S)H^{6, F}, who lives in a slum tourism destination, said that “I do not want to be raped by tourists,” and she also accurately explained what rape is. Similarly, (S)AC^{11, M} worried about being kidnaped, so he carried a piece of onion all the time as he believed that onions are an antidote to the anesthesia used in kidnappings. (N)BE^{16, M} had previously been kidnaped by a tourist. At the age of nine, he was kidnaped by a tourist seducing him with candies, and he saved himself by jumping out of the running truck. Due to concerns about child sex tourism and trafficking, some host-children were reluctant to have their pictures taken by tourists without their permission, which contrasts with the findings in the emotion domain. For instance, as Figure 11 shows, (N)AR^{17, F}, who lived near Angkor Wat, said she was uncomfortable with pictures being taken without her permission and expressed her anxiety, “we do not know their (tourists) intention of taking pictures of us. Sometimes, when tourists take photos of children, they give money to the children. Then, children are not able to think. They are not aware of the risks . . . The photos can be used for pornography sites.” Indeed, the legs putting together closely and omitted nose in the drawing show her concern about the sexual attack and powerless emotion (Foley & Mullis, 2008).

The Paradox of QOL: Host-Children’s Perceptions of Tourism Impacts on Overall QOL

Although host-children perceive both positive and negative tourism impacts across the five life domains, all participants concluded that tourism improved their overall QOL and wanted more tourists to visit their village. The reasons why host-children perceive positive QOL despite the negative tourism impacts could be explained by the power distance between host-children and tourists.

Power distance between host-children and tourists

The following section addresses the second and third research questions, how host-children perceive power dynamics in host-guest relationships and how the power dynamic influences their perception of tourism impacts on QOL. The child-participants tended to place themselves in an inferior position to tourists, as presented in the drawings (Figure 12). As a small person refers to the feeling of incompetence and depression (Farokhi & Hashemi, 2011; Foley & Mullis, 2008), the children unconsciously presented the unequal host-guest relation by drawing themselves smaller and simpler, with fewer lines than tourists. Other than the size of people, tourists’ long necks, the deletion of hands in the left drawing of Figure 12, and the big eyes in the right drawing imply the power of tourists (Farokhi & Hashemi, 2011; Foley & Mullis, 2008). Furthermore, children tend to describe strangers as tourists without telling differences between genuine tourists and locals, predators, and traffickers. It implies that children unconsciously perceive tourists as superior by presuming powerful and resourceful people.

Despite the children’s inferior position, host-children are more likely to tolerate unequal power relationships because of the wealth gap between host-children and tourists. For instance, (N)U^{18, F}, working as a trainee in a restaurant, drew a tourist scolding her when she spilled a drink by mistake (Figure 12, the left drawing). She recalled that she was silent because “the tourist has a lot of money, but I am a just trainee.” Similarly, (S)R^{8, M} said that wealthy tourists are good people, while stingy tourists are bad. (N)AA^{11, F} explained why they danced for tourists, saying they did it “to make tourists happy. . . because they help our school.” This power distance in wealth pushes host-children to continue their engagement in tourism to please tourists.

In contrast, some host-children placed themselves in a position of superiority over tourists in relation to local knowledge, as manifested in Figure 13. (N)AB^{11, F} drew herself wearing Khmer traditional costume with a tourist taking a picture of her. This drawing shows that she unconsciously recognized herself as superior to a tourist. For example, her exaggerated head may represent her inflated ego (Farokhi & Hashemi, 2011; Foley & Mullis, 2008). Indeed, she explained that she felt happy when she could teach Khmer traditions to foreigners who did not know about the Khmer culture. This power relation with regard to local knowledge explains why host-children perceive positive tourism impacts when tourists respect their culture and negative tourism impacts when tourists disrespect their culture. Several host-children expressed the desire for more tourists who respect their culture and to become tour guides to help preserve and promote their culture.

Discussion

Cambodian Host-Children’s Life Domains

The study makes three major contributions to knowledge—two theoretical and one methodological. The first major theoretical contribution lies in uncovering the five themes (material, learning opportunity, cultural pride, emotion, and child sex tourism/trafficking) that constitute Cambodian host-children’s perception of tourism impacts on their QOL. Inductively identifying Cambodian host-children’s life domains advances our understanding of Cambodian host-children’s QOL, which to date has shown little consensus on life domains. The findings suggest that host-adults and Cambodian host-children perceive tourism impacts within different life domains, while the host-children’s positive perception of material life is consistent with QOL literature of residents with an economic reliance on tourism (Woo et al., 2018).

The learning opportunity domain identified in this study is unique to host-children in developing countries. Studies of host-adults’ QOL have evaluated tourism impacts related to education by measuring the number of schools, courses, and teachers (Allen et al., 1988) and the educational expenditure and percentage of the population with high school qualifications and above (Meng et al., 2010). However, this paper identified that the host-children valued the opportunity to attend school and to learn language and life skills rather than prioritizing the number of education providers. This domain supports that children may have different perceptions and needs in comparison to adult perceptions of wellbeing (Sixsmith et al., 2007).

Cultural pride, emotion, and child sex tourism/trafficking domains emerged because of Cambodia’s characteristics. A collectivist value shapes Cambodian children’s perceptions of tourism impacts on cultural pride. This study identified that Cambodian host-children cherish Khmer culture and are sensitive to tourism impacts that may threaten or disrespect their culture. Prior research has suggested that individuals from a collectivist culture who value harmony and traditions are more likely to have a strong cultural identity (Gudykunst & Nishida, 2000).

The findings related to the emotion domain are deeply rooted in Theravada Buddhism, practiced by over 90% of Cambodians (Chan & Chheang, 2008). The emotion domain in ComQOL and past studies generally refers to tourism impacts on residents’ leisure, recreational, ethical, spiritual, and religious activities. In this study, however, the emotion domain refers to children’s emotional reliance on tourism. This emotional reliance may pertain to the teachings of Theravada Buddhism on Karma, emphasizing friendly and welcoming hospitality (Chhim, 1987; Munasinghe et al., 2017; O'Leary, 2006). In Theravada Buddhism, hospitality refers to “not only material giving but also giving time, energy, and wealth in voluntary services” and looking after a guest is considered a Karmic merit-making action for hosts (Munasinghe et al., 2017, p. 166). Consequently, Cambodian host-children tend to sacrifice their time and energy to please tourists for positive emotional impacts.

Lastly, child sex tourism and trafficking, which are prevalent in Cambodia, emerged as important factors influencing the QOL of host-children in Cambodia, where child sex tourism and trafficking are severe social issues (U.S. Department of State, 2021). This finding extends knowledge within the health and safety domain in ComQOL and other studies, which have broadly addressed security and natural preservation. This study concurs with Dolnicar et al. (2012) in its criticism of the existing QOL scales. The generic life domains may not be appropriate to fully understand residents’ QOL, as residents can be more susceptible to certain impacts depending on the social context. Future studies should consider the demographic, cultural, and contextual factors when investigating how certain life domains are more meaningful to specific groups.

The Paradox of QOL: Power Distance Between Host-Children and Tourists

A second theoretical contribution of this paper is the highlight of a QOL paradox—as the children claimed that tourism improved their QOL even when they perceived negative tourism impacts within most of the QOL domains. This could not have been explained by mere BST. This paper attempts to explain the paradox of QOL by incorporating BST with SET, focusing on the asymmetric power distribution between Cambodian host-children and tourists, as elaborated in Figure 14. This study contributes to the QOL literature by shedding light on how power dynamic in a host-guest relationship shapes their perceptions of QOL, which are unconscious or taken-for-granted beliefs (Deery et al., 2012). This study identified that the power dynamic in host-guest relations is a crucial factor shaping host-children’s perceptions of their QOL. Children’s drawings and interviews revealed that host-children unconsciously place themselves inferior to tourists due to the wealth gap. The asymmetric power relations can be attributed to the fact that residents with no other sources of economic income other than tourism are likely to emphasize positive impacts over negative impacts, as Blau (1964) claimed. Furthermore, it happens because Cambodian host-children tend to tolerate the power distribution with the high power distance of Cambodian culture.

Contrary to anecdotal assumptions, this study also identified a reverse power distance in the host-guest relationship. Cambodian host-children considered themselves superior to tourists in terms of their culture, as evidenced by the participants’ great cultural pride. This relationship explains host-children’s perceptions of the impact of tourism on the cultural pride domain. They were likely to perceive benefits from tourists who showed respect for the Cambodian culture and a loss from those who disrespect it. Cambodian host-children felt happy when their engagement in tourism contributed to the preservation and promotion of Cambodian culture. This study extends the BST and SET by identifying respect for local culture as a key factor in determining the outcomes of social interaction between tourists and hosts. Considering that the power distance exists in various forms within host-guest relationships, further investigation into the power dynamics in host-guest relationships is encouraged to gain a more comprehensive understanding of residents’ QOL.

Giving Host-Children a Voice: Visual Research Methods

Prior research has cautioned that the children participants’ responses may be influenced by the presence of their guardians. To safeguard the reliability of the data, this study used an arts-based research method triangulated with other traditional qualitative research methods. The paper makes a methodological contribution to the tourism literature, which has neglected host-children (Canosa et al., 2016; Yang, Yang, et al., 2020) by listening to their voices. The paper also advances knowledge on research techniques for children by validating drawing as a tool to elicit host-children’s subconscious thoughts and feelings about their tourism engagement. Drawings were a suitable research method for host-children as it captivates children’s attention, reduces the power distance between researchers and children, and relies less on linguistic proficiency (Literat, 2013; Punch, 2002). By asking children to draw their engagement in tourism, their drawings opened conversations about their feelings and thoughts about their engagement with tourism and tourists. Furthermore, the psychological interpretation of children’s drawings revealed unconscious power gaps in the host-guest relationship. Through this method, the study has shed light on children’s capacity as informants by introducing new ways to communicate with them. As this paper validates children’s capabilities as informants and the effectiveness of drawing as a tool to listen to children’s voices, greater use of visual research methods in tourism research with children utilizing may be beneficial.

Practical Implications and Conclusions

This paper explored how host-children in developing countries perceive the impacts of tourism on their QOL. It did this by focusing on the influence of power dynamics in the host-guest relationship. Although host-children perceived both positive and negative impacts on the five life domains, all host-children concluded that tourism had improved their QOL. Thus, it can be assumed that with the plummeted tourism due to the COVID lock-down, Cambodian host-children are facing troubles in overall their QOL despite the reduced negative tourism impacts. However, tourism is a highly resilient industry. Recently, COVID vaccination has been rolled out, and many countries declared “with COVID.” Hence, we need to quickly respond to the anxiety of host-children before reopening the gate to tourists. The findings of this study can be utilized to improve communication between tourists and residents, and more specifically, children as residents. All stakeholders, including governments, IGOs (such as UNICEF, UNCRC, and UNWTO), NGOs, businesses, and tourists, need to cooperate to protect host-children and educate tourists. For example, physical places where host-children can ask for help need to be set up near tourist destinations. Although many host-children are aware of risks to their safety and health, they are likely to tolerate or ignore the risks because they do not know how to respond.

Tourists also need to be educated to respect host-children and culture. Education initiatives might include messages for tourists to “please, be friendly to children” or “please wear modest clothes to respect the Khmer culture.” Many tourists presume a right to photograph local children, but this study revealed that some children did not want to be photographed. Hence, when tourists apply for a tourist e-visa, tourists can be required to watch a short video on the importance of asking children’s permission to take pictures. Children also had expectations of a need for tourists to respect their culture and be friendly during interactions. The video might also teach simple Khmer words, such as “hi,” “thank you,” and “can I take a picture of you?” as the power gaps between residents and tourists are reduced when tourists can communicate in the local language (Moufakkir, 2011).

This paper has three limitations. Firstly, the data from host-children within NGOs and those encountered on the street were not compared, although it was assumed that their perception of tourism impacts could be different. As different research techniques were used for the two types of host-children because of procedural ethical constraints, the data were supplemented rather than compared. Hence, future research might compare the QOL of host-children within NGOs and those on the street. Secondly, the research was conducted with children nominated by NGOs because of the ethical issues in approaching children. Although drawing was adopted to elicit children’s unconsciousness, children’s responses might be influenced by their guardians. Hence, further research is required to address the complex ethical issues around access to participants and reliability when researching children. Lastly, this paper could not comprehensively review other factors, such as a sense of community or demographic profile, despite their presumed influential power on residents’ perception of tourism impacts. For example, this research did not consider the influence of gender in host-children’s perceptions of tourism impacts. Statistically, boys tend to engage more in manual child labor than girls, while girls tend to be exposed to the risks of trafficking or sex tourism (ILO, 2017). Assuming the different situations are influenced by gender, it would be helpful to explore if host-children’s perceptions differ based on gender.

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

We thank all child participants and NGOs (Organisation for Basic Training; The Global Child; and New Hope Cambodia). We also thank Griffith Institute for Tourism (GIFT) for supporting the development of this paper.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

This work was financially supported by the Griffith Institute for Tourism for data collection and copy-editing service.

ORCID iDs

Mona Ji Hyun Yang

Catheryn Khoo

Elaine Chiao Ling Yang

Author Biographies

Mona Yang is a lecturer in Blue Mountain International Hotel Management School at Torrens University and a doctoral candidate in Tourism, Hotel and Sports Management at Griffith University. Mona’s goal is to work on projects empowering children and protecting their rights. Her expertise lies in the areas of social impacts of tourism, sustainable tourism, children in tourism and qualitative visual research. For her doctoral thesis, she is working on tourism impacts on host-children in developing countries. Mona also has researched Asian tourism, family holiday and solo travel. Her works have been published in Tourism Management, Tourism Recreation Research, Tourism Review, Journal of China Tourism Research, and Young Consumers.

References

Allen

L. R.

Long

P. T.

Perdue

R. R.

Kieselbach

(1988). The impact of tourism development on residents’ perceptions of community life. Journal of Travel Research, 27(1), 16–21.

Andereck

K. L.

Nyaupane

G. P.

(2011). Exploring the nature of tourism and quality of life perceptions among residents. Journal of Travel Research, 50(3), 248–260.

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

Asian Development Bank. (2020). Key indicators for Asia and the Pacific 2020. Asian Development Bank. Retrieved September 3, 2021, from https://www.adb.org/countries/cambodia/poverty#:~:text=Poverty%20Data%3A%20Cambodia…text=In%20Cambodia%2C%2012.9%25%20of%20the,die%20before%20their%205th%20birthday

Beazley

Miller

(2016). The art of not been governed: Street children and youth in Siem Reap, Cambodia. In Kallio

K. P.

Mills

Skelton

(Eds.), Politics, citizenship and rights (pp. 263–289). Springer.

Beddoe

(2003). Ending child sex tourism: A vision for the future. In Bauer

T. G.

McKercher

(Eds.), Sex and tourism: Journeys of romance, love, and lust (pp. 196–208). Haworth Hospitality Press.

Blau

(1964). Exchange and power in social life. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Campón-Cerro

Folgado-Fernández

Hernández-Mogollón

(2017). Rural destination development based on olive oil tourism: The impact of residents’ community attachment and quality of life on their support for tourism development. Sustainability, 9(9), 1624–1716.

Canosa

Graham

(2016). Ethical tourism research involving children. Annals of Tourism Research, 61, 219–221.

10.

Canosa

Moyle

B. D.

Wray

(2016). Can anybody hear me? A critical analysis of young residents’ voices in tourism studies. Tourism Analysis, 21, 325–337.

11.

Carneiro

M. J.

Eusébio

(2015). Host-tourist interaction and impact of tourism on residents’ quality of life. Tourism and Management Studies, 11(1), 25–34.

12.

Carpenter

(2015). Childhood studies and orphanage tourism in Cambodia. Annals of Tourism Research, 55, 15–27.

13.

Chan

Chheang

(2008). Cultural challenges to the decentralization process in Cambodia. The Ritsumeikan Journal of Asia Pacific Studies, 24, 1–16.

14.

Chheang

(2008). The political economy of tourism in Cambodia. Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, 13(3), 281–297.

15.

Chhim

S. H.

(1987). Introduction to Cambodian culture Multifunctional Resource Center. San Diego State University.

16.

Croes

(2012). Tourism, poverty relief and the quality of life in developing countries. In Uysal

Perdu

R. R.

Sirgy

M. J.

(Eds.), Handbook of tourism and quality of life research: Enhancing the lives of tourists and residents of host communities (pp. 85–104). Springer.

17.

Cummins

R. A.

Mccabe

M. P.

Romeo

Gullone

(1994). Validity studies the Comprehensive Quality of Life Scale (Comqol): Instrument development and psychometric evaluation on college staff and students. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 54(2), 372–382.

18.

Curley

(2014). Combating child sex tourism in south-east Asia: Law enforcement cooperation and civil society partnerships. Journal of Law and Society, 41(2), 283–314.

19.

Deery

Jago

Fredline

(2012). Rethinking social impacts of tourism research: A new research agenda. Tourism Management, 33(1), 64–73.

20.

Deguara

(2019). Young children’s drawings: A methodological tool for data analysis. Journal of Early Childhood Research, 17(2), 157–174.

21.

Dolnicar

Yanamandram

Cliff

(2012). The contribution of vacations to quality of life. Annals of Tourism Research, 39(1), 59–83.

22.

Dwyer

Thomas

(2012). Tourism yield measures for Cambodia. Current Issues in Tourism, 15(4), 303–328.

23.

Easterling

D. S.

(2004). The residents' perspective in tourism research: A review and synthesis. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 17(4), 45–62.

24.

Eslami

Khalifah

Mardani

Streimikiene

Han

(2019). Community attachment, tourism impacts, quality of life and residents’ support for sustainable tourism development. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 36(9), 1061–1079.

25.

Farokhi

Hashemi

(2011). The analysis of children’s drawings: Social, emotional, physical, and psychological aspects. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 30, 2219–2224.

26.

Foley

Y. C.

Mullis

(2008). Interpreting children’s human figure drawings: Basic guidelines for school counselors. Georgia School Counselor Association Journal, 1(1), 29–37.

27.

Gamradt

(1995). Jamaican children’s representations of tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 22(4), 735–762.

28.

Gibson

J. E.

(2012). Interviews and focus groups with children: Methods that match children’s developing competencies. Journal of Family Theory & Review, 4(2), 148–159.

29.

Gjerald

(2005). Sociocultural impacts of tourism: A case study from Norway. Journal of Tourism and Cultural Change, 3(1), 36–58.

30.

Gudykunst

W. B.

Nishida

(2000). The influence of culture and strength of cultural identity on individual values in Japan and the United States. Intercultural Communication Studies, 9(1), 1–18.

31.

Guiney

(2018). “Hug-an-orphan vacations”: ‘Love’ and emotion in orphanage tourism. Geographical Journal, 184(2), 125–137.

32.

Guiney

Mostafanezhad

(2015). The political economy of orphanage tourism in Cambodia. Tourist Studies, 15(2), 132–155.

33.

Hagedoorn

(2013). Child labour and tourism: How travel companies can reduce child labour in tourism destinations. http://www.fairtrade.travel/source/websites/fairtrade/documents/Child_Labour_and_Tourism_OP_25_May_2013.pdf

34.

Hargreaves

D. J.

(1978). Psychological studies of children’s drawing. Educational Review, 30(3), 247–254.

35.

Higgins-Desbiolles

(2018). Sustainable tourism: Sustaining tourism or something more? Tourism Management Perspectives, 25, 157–160.

36.

Hikoyeda

Wallace

S. P.

(2002). Do ethnic-specific long term care facilities improve resident quality of life? Findings from the Japanese American community. Journal of Gerontological Social Work, 36(1–2), 83–106.

37.

Hofstede

(1984). The cultural relativity of the quality of life concept. Academy of Management Review, 9(3), 389–398.

38.

Hoppe

M. J.

Wells

E. A.

Morrison

D. M.

Gillmore

M. R.

Wilsdon

(1995). Using focus groups to discuss sensitive topics with children. Evaluation Review, 19(1), 102–114.

39.

Hughes

D. M.

(2000). ‘Welcome to the rape camp’: Sexual exploitation and the internet in Cambodia. Journal of Sexual Aggression, 6(1–2), 29–51.

40.

Human Rights Watch. (2021). Cambodia: Lock-downs hit low-income families hard. Retrieved November 8, 2021, from https://www.hrw.org/news/2021/06/08/cambodia-lockdowns-hit-low-income-families-hard#

41.

ILO. (2017). Global estimates of child labour: Results and trends, 2012–2016. International Labour Organization. https://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/@dgreports/@dcomm/documents/publication/wcms_575499.pdf

42.

Ireland

(1993). Sexual exploitation of children and international travel and tourism. Child Abuse Review, 2(4), 263–270. https://doi.org/10.1002/car.2380020408

43.

Jani

(2018). Residents’ perception of tourism impacts in Kilimanjaro: An integration of the social exchange theory. Tourism: An International Interdisciplinary Journal, 66(2), 148–160.

44.

Jeon

M. M.

Kang

Desmarais

(2016). Residents’ perceived quality of life in a cultural-heritage tourism destination. Applied Research in Quality of Life, 11(1), 105–123.

45.

Joseph Sirgy

. (2019). Promoting quality-of-life and wellbeing research in hospitality and tourism. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 36(1), 1–13.

46.

Jun

S. H.

Hartwell

H. J.

Buhalis

(2012). Impacts of internet on travel satisfaction and overall life satisfaction. In Uysal

Perdue

Sirgy

(Eds.), Handbook of tourism and quality-of-life research (pp. 321–337). Springer.

47.

Jurowski

Brown

D. O.

(2001). A comparison of the views of involved versus non-involved citizens on quality of life and tourism development issues. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, 25(4), 355–370.

48.

Kayat

(2002). Power, social exchanges and tourism in Langkawi: Rethinking resident perceptions. International Journal of Tourism Research, 4(3), 171–191.

49.

Kent

(2015). A shifting universe-religion and moral order in Cambodia. In Brickell

(Ed.), The handbook of contemporary Cambodia (pp. 326–335). Routledge.

50.

Khoo-Lattimore

(2015). Kids on board: Methodological challenges, concerns and clarifications when including young children’s voices in tourism research. Current Issues in Tourism, 18(9), 845–858.

51.

Khoo-Lattimore

Jihyun Yang

(2020). The constructions of family holidays in young middle-class Malaysian Chinese children. Journal of China Tourism Research, 16(1), 62–77.

52.

Kil

Holland

S. M.

Stein

T. V.

Y. J.

(2012). Place attachment as a mediator of the relationship between nature-based recreation benefits and future visit intentions. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 20(4), 603–626.

53.

Kim

C. Y.

(2011). Child labour, education policy and governance in Cambodia. International Journal of Educational Development, 31(5), 496–504.

54.

Kim

Uysal

Sirgy

M. J.

(2013). How does tourism in a community impact the quality of life of community residents? Tourism Management, 36, 527–540.

55.

Kirk

(2007). Methodological and ethical issues in conducting qualitative research with children and young people: A literature review. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 44(7), 1250–1260.

56.

Kruger

P. S. S.

(2012). Perceptions of tourism impacts and satisfaction with particular life domains. In Uysal

Perdue

Sirgy

M. J.

(Eds.), Handbook of tourism and quality-of-life research: Enhancing the lives of tourists and residents of host communities (pp. 279–292). Springer Science & Business Media.

57.

Kuhn

(2003). Thematic drawing and focused, episodic interview upon the drawing—A method in order to approach to the children's point of view on movement, play and sports at school [Paper presentation]. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung/Forum: Qualitative Social Research.

58.

Literat

(2013). “A pencil for your thoughts”: Participatory drawing as a visual research method with children and youth. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 12(1), 84–98.

59.

Matarrita-Cascante

(2010). Changing communities, community satisfaction, and quality of life: A view of multiple perceived indicators. Social Indicators Research, 98(1), 105–127.

60.

McLoyd

V. C.

(1990). The impact of economic hardship on black families and children: Psychological distress, parenting, and socioemotional development. Child Development, 61(2), 311–346.

61.

Meng

Uysal

(2010). Tourism development and regional quality of life: The case of China. Journal of China Tourism Research, 6(2), 164–182.

62.

Mertens

D. M.

(2007). Transformative considerations: Inclusion and social justice. American Journal of Evaluation, 28(1), 86–90.

63.

Moons

Budts

De Geest

(2006). Critique on the conceptualisation of quality of life: A review and evaluation of different conceptual approaches. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 43(7), 891–901.

64.

Moufakkir

(2011). The role of cultural distance in mediating the host gaze. Tourist Studies, 11(1), 73–89.

65.

Munasinghe

Hemmington

Schänzel

Poulston

Fernando

(2017). Hospitality: Ideologies, characteristics and conditionality in Theravada Buddhism and western philosophy. Hospitality & Society, 7(2), 157–180.

66.

National Institute of Statistics (NIS), Ministry of Planning of Cambodian (MPC), & International Labour Organization (ILO). (2013). Cambodia labour force and child labour survey 2012: Child labour report. https://www.ilo.org/asia/WCMS_230721/lang–en/index.htm

67.

Nunkoo

Ramkissoon

(2012). Power, trust, social exchange and community support. Annals of Tourism Research, 39(2), 997–1023.

68.

O'Leary

. (2006). The influence of values on development practice: A study of Cambodian development practitioners in non-government organizations in Cambodia [Doctoral dissertation, La Trobe University, Victoria, Australia]. http://arrow.latrobe.edu.au:8080/vital/access/manager/Repository/latrobe:19647

69.

Padilla

G. V.

Kagawa-Singer

(1998). Quality of life and culture. Jones & Bartlett Publishers.

70.

Pechet

Augustine

(2021). Navigating uncertainty: Cambodian tourism business and the pandemic. Retrieved September 20, 2021, from https://devpolicy.org/navigating-uncertainty-cambodian-tourism-businesses-and-pandemic-20210920/

71.

Perdue

R. R.

Long

P. T.

Kang

Y. S.

(1999). Boomtown tourism and resident quality of life: The marketing of gaming to host community residents. Journal of Business Research, 44(3), 165–177.

72.

Proyrungroj

(2017). Host-guest relationship in the context of volunteer tourism. European Journal of Tourism Research, 16, 177–200.

73.

Puczkó

Smith

(2012). An analysis of tourism QOL domains from the demand side. In Uysal

Perdue

Sirgy

M. J.

(Eds.), Handbook of tourism and quality-of-life research: Enhancing the lives of tourists and residents of host communities (pp. 263–278). Springer Science & Business Media.

74.

Punch

(2002). Research with children: The same or different from research with adults? Childhood, 9(3), 321–341.

75.

Rawlins

M. A.

Steinmayr

Kornexl

(2020). Enabling ecotourism development in Cambodia. Retrieved September 10, 2021, from https://blogs.worldbank.org/eastasiapacific/enabling-ecotourism-development-cambodia

76.

Reisinger

Turner

(2003). Cross-cultural behaviour in tourism: Concept and analysis. Elsevier.

77.

Rejeski

W. J.

Mihalko

S. L.

(2001). Physical activity and quality of life in older adults. The Journals of Gerontology Series A Biological Sciences and Medical Sciences, 56(Suppl 2), 23–35.

78.

Ridderstaat

Croes

Nijkamp

(2016). The tourism development–quality of life nexus in a small island destination. Journal of Travel Research, 55(1), 79–94.

79.

Saarinen

Manwa

(2008). Tourism as a socio-cultural encounter: Host-guest relations in tourism development in Botswana. Botswana Notes and Records, 39, 43–53.

80.

Sharpley

(2008). Tourism, tourists and society (4th ed.). Elm Publications.

81.

Sharpley

(2014). Host perceptions of tourism: A review of the research. Tourism Management, 42, 37–49.

82.

Sixsmith

Nic Gabhainn

Fleming

O'Higgins

. (2007). Children’s, parents’ and teachers’ perceptions of child wellbeing. Health Education, 107(6), 511–523.

83.

Soulard

McGehee

N. G.

Stern

M. J.

Lamoureux

K. M.

(2021). Transformative tourism: Tourists’ drawings, symbols and narratives of change. Annals of Tourism Research, 87, 1–28.

84.

Huang

(2018). Effects of destination social responsibility and tourism impacts on residents’ support for tourism and perceived quality of life. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, 42(7), 1039–1057.

85.

Tan

(2008). Two views of education: Promoting civic and moral values in Cambodia schools. International Journal of Educational Development, 28(5), 560–570.

86.

UNWTO. (2020). Global code of ethics for tourism: Ethics, culture and social responsibility. Author. Retrieved September 3, 2021, from https://www.unwto.org/global-code-of-ethics-for-tourism

87.

U.S. Department of State. (2021). 2021 trafficking in persons report: Cambodia. https://www.state.gov/reports/2021-trafficking-in-persons-report/cambodia/

88.

Uysal

Sirgy

M. J.

Woo

Kim

(2016). Quality of life (QOL) and wellbeing research in tourism. Tourism Management, 53, 244–261.

89.

van Den Berghe

P. L.

Keyes

C. F

. (1984). Introduction tourism and re-created ethnicity. Annals of Tourism Research, 11(3), 343–352.

90.

Wheeler

Laing

(2008). Tourism as a vehicle for liveable communities: Case studies from regional Victoria, Australia. Annals of Leisure Research, 11(1-2), 242–263.

91.

Woo

Uysal

Sirgy

M. J.

(2018). Tourism impact and stakeholders’ quality of life. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, 42(2), 260–286.

92.

Yang

M. J. H.

Yang

E. C. L.

Khoo-Lattimore

(2020). Host-children of tourism destinations: Systematic quantitative literature review. Tourism Recreation Research, 45, 231–246.