Cultural conservation and residents’ attitudes about ethnic minority tourism

Abstract

Tourism to areas traditionally inhabited by ethnic minorities has become an important topic in China during recent years, but the attendant issue of ethnic cultural conservation has become an increasing problem. This study investigates residents’ attitudes toward cultural conservation and their perception of the impact of tourism. The study site is the ancient city of Fenghuang in Hunan province, China. The study’s results show that residents in Fenghuang agree with the cultural conservation, and that their positive perceptions of the impact of tourism are influenced by their attitudes toward cultural conservation. This result means that there is the positive relationships between tourism development and cultural conservation in ethnic minority area. All results reflect the importance of residents’ attitudes toward cultural conservation in the development of tourism, so the study may be useful for both tourism developers and cultural managers.

Keywords

Ethnic tourism cultural tourism tourism development sociocultural sustainability residents’ attitudes

Introduction

Tourism has become an effective means toward regional and national socioeconomic development, as it has significant potential to improve local and national economies as a source of income, foreign exchange, employment, and government revenues (Richard, 2009). In China, Deng Xiaoping’s open-door policies of 1978 brought about a series of economic and policy changes, including policies that encouraged the development of tourism and policies toward the ethnic minorities that included strengthening cultural identity and economic development (Sofield and Li, 1998). Thus, China has emerged as one of the fastest growing tourism destinations in the world along with the development of market-oriented economy, with tourism emerging as an effective strategy for regional development (Yang et al., 2008). China is a multinational country that is home to Han Chinese and 55 ethnic minorities. The Han Chinese population numbers more than 1.2 billion, making up more than 91.5% of the total population (National Bureau of Statistics of China, 2011). Fifty-five ethnic minority people account for approximately 8.5% of the population, so tourism opportunities to areas traditionally inhabited by ethnic minorities (hereafter: ethnic minority tourism) are highly diverse.

King (1994) and Smith (1989: 4) defined ethnic tourism as that which is “marketed to the public in terms of the ‘quaint’ customs of indigenous and often exotic people” or “the search for ‘exotic’ cultures and travel which is motivated by purposes of ethnic reunion.” Therefore, the ethnic minority areas’ unique folk customs, cultures, and heritages have made ethnic minority tourism more attractive to the cultural tourists.

The literature has highlighted that tourism has become an option for developing the economies of minorities’ areas where traditional industries are in decline (MacDonald and Jolliffe, 2003; Ying and Zhou, 2007). In China, tourism in rural areas is supported by the government for its potential to drive economic development, so most tourism planning inclines to less developed areas or rural areas (Ryan and Gu, 2009; Sun and Bao, 2006), where most of China’s ethnic minorities live (Gustafsson and Shi, 2003). Ethnic tourism tends to commoditize minority cultures, while the economic benefits produced through such commoditizing can accelerate the development of minority areas (Yang, 2011). However, many scholars point out that, in addition to its development benefits such as economic growth (Chow, 2005; Pitchford, 1995; Swain, 1989; Ying and Zhou, 2007), conservation and revitalization of cultural heritage (Inskeep, 1991: 370; Swain, 1989), renewal of cultural pride and cross-cultural exchange (Inskeep, 1991: 370–371), and conservation of natural and cultural resources within minorities’ communities (Henderson, 2003; Pigram, 1980), tourism development can lead to negative impacts, particularly for minority cultures—both material culture like art and nonmaterial culture like customs. Thus, the development and promotion of ethnic minority tourism brings numerous sociocultural issues and contradictions, such as cultural exoticism versus modernity, cultural preservation versus economic development or social change, authenticity versus cultural commodification, state regulation versus ethnic autonomy or self-determination, and so on (Chambers, 2009; Li, 2003; Wood, 1984; Yang and Wall, 2008, 2009). McKercher et al. (2005) noted the tangled relationship between tourism and cultural heritage management.

Many studies in recent years have examined the cultural impacts brought by tourism, and a number of studies have demonstrated host residents’ perceptions that tourism impacts their native culture (Degang and Jingjing, 2007; Ko and Stewart, 2002; Kuvan and Akan, 2005; Yang et al., 2008). However, although many studies have addressed the cultural impacts of tourism development, few studies have focused on residents’ attitudes toward cultural preservation. The lack of such studies results in developers’ ignoring local residents’ attitudes toward cultural preservation and could restrict the development of tourism to some extent, especially in the minority areas. This study investigates the influence of residents’ attitudes toward cultural preservation on their perception of tourism impacts. The results can provide useful data for scholars’ theoretical orientation on residents’ perceptions of the impacts of tourism and for the government and tourism sectors’ efforts to improve tourism planning.

Literature review

Cultural conservation in tourism development

There is increasing evidence that culture holds an important position in ethnic minority tourism. Yang (2011) noted that ethnic tourism motivated by tourists’ curiosity about indigenous cultures generally includes seeing folk villages, experiencing ethnic customs, watching traditional performances, and shopping for ethnic artifacts and other products. Along with the development of various kinds of cultural tourism, culture is an effective draw for the development of tourism in ethnic and peripheral areas (MacDonald and Jolliffe, 2003; Ryan, 2002; Yang et al., 2008). Tourism development in minority areas has already had some negative influences on local culture, and there is significant literature on the change or destruction of culture as a result of tourism, as both natural and historical environments are affected by the development of tourism (Andereck et al., 2007; Coppock, 1982; Stonich et al., 1995). Grünewald (2002) found that host communities’ original cultures changed frequently in order to promote economic benefits, which cause deviations from the natural acculturating process. The model of creative destruction also describes the cultural issues around the issue of tourism development (Fan et al., 2008; Mitchell, 1998). The literature has also focused on how to preserve the original culture by ensuring that cultural tourism is based on cultural preservation and maintenance, rather than on remodeling the heritage resources to increase tourism (Meng et al., 2011). However, giving consideration to both cultural preservation and tourism development is not easy. As Wang and Bramwell (2012) indicated, although heritage activities and cultural activities as independent variables can generate economic benefits, they can also cause the decline of traditional cultures and their irreplaceable significance (Yang et al., 2008). Although a number of studies relate to tourism that is centered on cultural preservation and how to enhance and balance the relationship between tourism development and cultural conservation (McKercher et al., 2005; Meng et al., 2011; Teo and Huang, 1995), few studies address the host community’s response to cultural conservation related to tourism development in ethnic minority area.

Residents’ attitudes toward tourism

The literature on residents’ attitudes toward tourism, which dates back to the 1970s in China, has increased during the past few decades. Research in this field is important because understanding why residents’ attitudes toward tourism differ can help to promote successful development of tourism (Vargas-Sánchez et al., 2011). The literature on residents’ attitudes toward tourism generally deals with their perceptions of the impact of tourism, including economic, sociocultural, and environmental impacts and is considered as dependent variables or independent variables. For example, Ko and Stewart (2002) examined the relationship between residents’ perceptions of the impact of tourism and attitudes toward their own communities, and Dyer et al. (2007), Kuvan and Akan (2005), and Vargas-Sánchez et al. (2011) examined how residents’ perceptions of tourism impacts influenced their support for tourism development. In summary, residents’ perceptions of the impact of tourism play a vital role as influence factors in tourism development, or are influenced by other related factors as dependent variables.

However, the lack of explanatory research on why residents perceive tourism impacts positively or negatively has led to an underdeveloped theoretical orientation of research on this subject (Ap, 1992). Many related studies have emerged, but most focus on the same points, such as personal benefits from tourism, the level of tourism development, and tourist ratios (Faulkner and Tideswell, 1997; Vargas-Sánchez et al., 2011; Weaver and Lawton, 2001). A few scholars have put forward other viewpoints, such as Xiaohai and Zhenfang (2011), who examined the relationship between tourism and cultural conservation. But the current situation requires more detailed and comprehensive empirical study to focus on the relationship between residents’ perceptions of the impact of tourism as dependent variables and their attitudes toward cultural protection as independent variables.

Scope and method

Study area

This study focuses on the ancient town of Fenghuang to investigate how residents’ attitudes toward cultural preservation influence their perceptions of the impact of tourism. Xiangxi is an autonomous ethnic minority prefecture located in western Hunan province, China, one of the main habitations of Tujia and Miao people. Xiangxi Tujia and Miao prefecture consists of eight counties of which Fenghuang, one of the eight counties, covers an area of about 1751 km², with a total population of 416,900 according to the Chinese 2010 census results. There are nine towns and 22 townships under the jurisdiction of Fenghuang County. It is situated in the southernmost part of Xiangxi prefecture, at E109°10′–110°22.5′, N27°44.5′–29°38′ (Figure 1). As a multiethnic, traditional agricultural county, Fenghuang is occupied mainly by Miao, Tujia and Han, and Miao and Tujia ethnic minorities, which comprise 75.8% of the county’s total population, with an agricultural population of 88.3% (The people’s government of Fenghuang, 2013). As one of the most representative ethnic minority tourism destinations in China, Fenghuang is famous for its well-preserved ancient architectures and ethnic minority cultures. The main attraction of Fenghuang is the ancient city located in Tuojiang town, which is divided into two parts: the old town and the new town (Figure 2). With its beautiful scenery, indigenous customs, and the historical architectures that are combined with ethnic minority characteristics, the ancient city of Fenghuang attracts visitors from all over the world, and Chinese State Council approved Fenghuang as a national historical and cultural city in 2001.

The development of tourism in Fenghuang started in 1985. Taking advantage of the city’s rich tourism resources, the tourism sector progressed rapidly. Particularly during 2004–2012, the number of tourists and the amount of tourism revenues increased dramatically (Figure 3) and tourism has become the leading industry of Fenghuang County, according to the data collected from Hunan Provincial Bureau of Statistics (2013) and The people’s government of Fenghuang (2013).

Selection of variables and survey method

This paper focuses on the residents’ attitudes toward cultural conservation and their perceptions of the impact of tourism in Fenghuang County. First, variables related to the residents’ perceptions of the impacts of tourism (both positive and negative impacts) were developed based on a review of the literature. From a review of the questionnaires in Dyer et al. (2007), Fan et al. (2008), and Ko and Stewart (2002), nine items related to residents’ perceptions of the impact of tourism impacts (four items relate to economic impacts and five items related to sociocultural impacts) were selected, considering the economic effects and sociocultural impacts toward tourism development of ethnic minorities (Chambers, 2009; Chow, 2005; Li, 2003; MacDonald and Jolliffe, 2003; Pitchford, 1995; Ryan and Gu, 2009; Sun and Bao, 2006; Swain, 1989; Wood, 1984; Yang, 2011; Yang and Wall, 2008, 2009; Ying and Zhou, 2007).

Next, items related to attitudes about cultural conservation were derived from Ondimu (2002) and Xiaohai and Zhenfang (2011), because the tourism development of ethnic minorities can influence on the conservation and the revitalization of their intrinsic cultural assets positively (Henderson, 2003; Inskeep, 1991: 370–371; Pigram, 1980; Swain, 1989). Twelve items were grouped into the three dimensions of attitudes about cultural conservation: cognition of cultural preservation knowledge, approval of cultural protection (ACP), and behavior tendency of cultural protection (BTCP). The items related to cognition of cultural preservation knowledge were changed significantly in this paper: one was deleted because of overlap with other variables (understand the policies and regulations related to cultural protection) and three were added considering of Fenghuang’s minority attributes (knowledge about minority customs, festivals, and languages). Items related to ACP and behavior tendency associated with the protection of culture were modified in only minor ways to fit the social environment of Fenghuang.

The questionnaire was fielded in March 2013 among residents of Fenghuang. Including demographic features, the questionnaire consisted of 27 items organized into three parts. The first part contained items about the residents’ attitudes toward cultural conservation, the second part contained items about the residents’ perceptions of the impacts of tourism impacts, and the third part included questions about personal characteristics like age, gender, education level, monthly income, nationality, occupation (whether related to tourism or not), and the respondent’s present residence. A 5-point Likert scale was used to measure the items in the first and second parts (5 = strongly agree or strongly understand; 1 = strongly disagree or strongly do not understand), and a nominal scale was employed to measure the personal characteristics.

Four hundred questionnaires were distributed to randomly chosen residents who live in both the new town and the old town in Fenghuang by authors. The survey was conducted using a three-page Chinese questionnaire along with an introducing page including the purpose of this study by face-to-face method. Three hundred and nine completed questionnaires were received for an outstanding 77.3% response rate. After removing 19 invalid questionnaires, there were 290 usable questionnaires for a 72.5% effective response rate.

Data analysis was conducted using SPSS 17.0 and was performed in two stages. In the first stage, the analysis of mean value and standard deviation was used to test the scales of items related to attitudes and perception of local residents in Fenghuang, and exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was conducted to uncover the underlying structure of a relatively large set of variables, and to identify a set of latent constructs underlying some measured variables, because some items were added and deleted in this study. In the second stage of the analysis, the relationship and the influence between latent constructs, namely, residents’ attitudes about cultural preservation and their perceptions of the impact of tourism, were explored using correlation coefficient and regression analysis. The correlation analysis and regression analysis were conducted to measure the strength and direction of the linear relationship between two latent variables, and to understand which among the independent variables are related to the dependent variable.

Study results

Profile

Minority residents except Han race comprised 77.6% of respondents, and this result was similar to the real population composition (75.8%) of ethnic minorities in Fenghuang by The people’s government of Fenghuang (2013). About 42.8% of respondents were between 20 and 39 years old, and approximately 54.8% were female. Respondents with high school-level and below high school-level educations constituted 61.4% of the sample, while 38.6% had graduated from universities. A clear majority of respondents (72.4%) worked in jobs unrelated to tourism. As to income, 34.9% of respondents earned RMB 800–1200 (about US$130–195) every month, and 47.2% earned more than RMB 1200 (about US$195) (Table 1). More than half of the respondents’ monthly average incomes were lower than RMB 1200 (about US$195), far below the monthly average incomes of urban residents (RMB 2247 or US$366) (National Bureau of Statistics of China, 2011).

Table 1.

Result of frequency analysis in relation to demographic features.

		Frequency	Valid percentage
Sex	Male	131	45.2
Sex	female	159	54.8
Age	20s–30s	124	42.8
	40s–50s	101	34.8
	After 60	65	22.4
Educational background	High school	178	61.4
Educational background	University	112	38.6
Monthly income	800 yuan (RMB) (about US$130)	52	17.9
	800–1200 yuan (RMB) (about US$130–195)	101	34.8
	1200 yuan (RMB) (about US$ 195)	137	47.2
Job	Relative to tourism	80	27.6
Job	Not relative to tourism	210	72.4
Nationality	Miao	125	43.1
	Tujia	91	31.4
	Han	65	22.4
	Other	9	3.1
Present address	Ancient town	103	35.5
Present address	New town	187	64.5

Descriptive statistics

The means and standard deviations in Table 2 show that respondents had a high level of agreement about cultural protection and the impacts of tourism development, responding especially positively to the items, “Cultural heritage should be protected,” “Tourism promotes community infrastructure,” and “National traditional culture, customs, and festivals should be protected.” This high degree of concern about conservation of cultural heritage, traditional culture, customs, and festivals may be because such heritage and culture are part of their lives. However, the high degree of agreement with “Tourism promotes community infrastructure” is likely the result of tourism development’s having promoted the social overhead capital of Fenghuang, such as transportation system, roads, communication facilities, sewage and drainage system, disposal system, green areas, and so on (Inskeep, 1991: 343). Especially, Chinese government takes the lead of the tourism development toward ethnic minorities in contemporary era, and its development policies are needed to improve local infrastructure (Johnson, 1995), in order to secure the publicity of development. In addition, results show that the standard deviation of “I understand the language of my nationality” is the highest among the items, perhaps because respondents belonged to several ethnicities, and people of different ethnicities who live together in an area may communicate in a dominant language with the result that some cannot speak their own language.

Table 2.

Means and standard deviation.

Items	Mean	SD
Residents’ attitude toward cultural conservation
I understand the history of my nationality.	3.74	1.00
I understand the customs of my nationality.	3.80	.90
I understand the festivals of my nationality.	3.77	.93
I understand the language of my nationality.	3.81	1.21
Residents’ understanding of national cultural value should be enhanced.	4.19	.77
The policy of cultural protection of the ancient town of Fenghuang should be completed.	4.14	.90
National traditional cultures, customs, and festivals should be protected.	4.22	.80
Cultural heritage should be protected.	4.29	.77
I will discourage the destruction of cultural relics.	3.72	.99
I will help the relevant departments to protect the culture in Fenghuang.	3.73	.97
I will comply with the policies and regulations related to cultural protection.	3.86	.91
Residents’ perception of tourism impacts
Tourism increases employment opportunities.	3.80	.92
Tourism promotes the development of the economy.	3.93	.88
Tourism increases the standard of living.	3.63	1.01
Tourism contributes to income.	3.60	1.01
Tourism promotes community infrastructure.	4.26	.95
Tourism increases the price of goods.	3.12	1.09
Tourism increases the crime rate.	3.61	1.02
Tourism damages the natural environment.	3.51	1.04
Tourism damages historic buildings.	3.58	1.02

EFA

EFA was used in this study to analyze the respondents’ attitudes toward cultural conservation and their perception of the impacts of tourism and to reveal any underlying patterns of their responses. Based on principal component extraction and varimax rotation with Kaiser normalization, EFA was performed to divide complex variables into a few core factors. Tables 3 and 4 display the factor loadings explained by each factor, while all eigenvalues were over 1.0, and the total variance explained is 52.6%. There was no variable that had been removed according to the results of EFA. In terms of attitudes about cultural conservation, principal component factor analysis generates three factors: “cognition of cultural knowledge (CCK),” “ACP,” and “BTCP.” CCK factor explains fully 18.2% and is therefore most important in determining the structure of responses, and four items with factor loadings above .6 constitute this factor (Table 3). Analysis result of residents’ perceptions of the impact of tourism shows two factors: “positive perception of tourism impact (PPTI)” and “negative perception of tourism impact (NPTI)” (Table 4).

Table 3.

Result of EFA in relation to residents’ attitudes toward cultural conservation.

Variable name and description	Component
Variable name and description	1	2	3
CCK
I understand the history of my nationality.	.807	−.020	.028
I understand the customs of my nationality.	.771	.180	.110
I understand the festivals of my nationality.	.741	.115	.126
I understand the language of my nationality.	.645	.171	.154
ACP
Residents’ understanding of national cultural value should be enhanced.	.329	.628	−.007
The policy of cultural protection of the ancient town of Fenghuang should be completed.	.142	.776	.098
National traditional culture, customs, and festivals should be protected.	.081	.774	.171
Cultural heritage should be protected.	−.018	.702	.249
BTCP
I will discourage destruction of cultural relics.	.128	.153	.835
I will help the relevant departments to protect the culture in Fenghuang.	.138	.047	.828
I will comply with the policies and regulations related to cultural protection.	.105	.378	.584
KMO			.768
Bartlett’s test of sphericity	Chi-Square		880.183 (0.000)

ACP: approval of cultural protection; BTCP: behavior tendency of cultural protection; CCK: cognition of cultural knowledge; KMO: Keiser-Meyer-Olkin.

Table 4.

Results of EFA in relation to residents’ perception of the impact of tourism.

Variable name and description	Component
	1	2
PPTI
Tourism increases employment opportunities.	0.677	-0.158
Tourism promotes the development of the economy.	0.723	-0.112
Tourism increases the standard of living.	0.703	-0.081
Tourism contributes to income.	0.777	0.043
Tourism promotes community infrastructure.	0.461	0.25
NPTI
Tourism increases the price of goods.	0.030	0.387
Tourism increases the crime rate.	-0.295	0.611
Tourism damages the natural environment.	0.046	0.689
Tourism damages historic buildings.	-0.033	0.740
KMO	.716
Bartlett’s test of sphericity	Chi-Square	365.755 (0.000)

EFO: exploratory factor analysis; NPTI: negative perception of tourism impact; PPTI: positive perception of tourism impact; KMO: Keiser-Meyer-Olkin.

Correlation coefficient

A correlation coefficient was applied to test the relationship between residents’ attitudes toward cultural conservation (independent variables) and their perception of the impact of tourism (dependent variables). Pearson correlation coefficient, which measures whether there is a linear relationship between two independent variables, showed a positive correlation among all the three of the factors of residents’ attitudes toward cultural conservation and their perceptions of the impact of tourism (Table 5). The detailed correlations between the factors are .310 between BTCP and PPTI, .217 between ACP and PPTI, .172 between BTCP and NPTI, and .128 between CCK and PPTI at the 5% significance level. The Pearson relationship between the BTCP and the perception of impacts of tourism presented the highest coefficient, so the stronger the BTCP, the more positive the perception of the impact of tourism. This result may also indicate that residents’ positive perceptions of the impact of tourism drive them to appreciate the importance of cultural protection. Residents’ CCK and ACP also correlate with the positive perceptions of impacts of tourism.

Table 5.

Result of correlation coefficient analysis: Pearson’s correlation coefficient (p).

Factors	PPTI	NPTI
CCK	.128 (.029)**	.042 (.476)
ACP	.217 (.000)***	.001 (.990)
BTCP	.310 (.000)***	.172 (.003)**

ACP: approval of cultural protection; BTCP: behavior tendency of cultural protection; CCK: cognition of cultural knowledge; NPTI: negative perception of tourism impact; PPTI: positive perception of tourism impact.

P < 0.05, ***P < 0.001.

Regression analysis

Regression analysis is also applied in order to determine the relationship between the respondents’ attitudes toward cultural conservation and their perceptions of the impact of tourisms. The analysis examines two dependent variables: the PPTI and the NPTI, and three independent variables: CCK, ACP, and the BTCP, according to the result of EFA.

Table 6 shows that the residents’ attitudes toward cultural conservation affected their perceptions of the impact of tourism. Three factors of cultural protection have differing β values, with BTCP having the largest value and CCK having the smallest at the 5% significance level. CCK refers to residents’ understanding of their own national history, customs, festivals, and language. Sofield and Li (1998) explained that tourism could improve minority cultural identity, so CCK affects the PPTI. The result of this study also shows that items related to ACP, including the approval of the content and measures of cultural protection and the development of tourism, can increase residents’ PPTI. The BTCP probably has the highest β values because residents can obviously feel that their protection behaviors are implemented more smoothly along with the development of tourism, but compared with behaviors the change of their cognition and approval cannot feel so directly. Thus, the BTCP influences residents’ positive perception more than other factors do. Table 7 shows the ambivalent result that the BTCP also influences the NPTI, possibly because the degree of BTCP and activities related to cultural protection lead to residents’ complex cognition toward the current situation of historic architecture preservation.

Table 6.

Result of regression analysis.

Independent variables	β	t	P
Coefficient		.000	1.000
CCK	.128	2.362	.019**
ACP	.217	4.006	.000***
BTCP	.310	5.709	.000***

Dependent variable: PPTI: positive perception of tourism impact.

Independent variables: ACP: approval of cultural protection; BTCP: behavior tendency of cultural protection; CCK: cognition of cultural knowledge.

P < 0.05, ***P < 0.001.

Table 7.

Result of regression analysis.

Independent variables	Β	t	P
Coefficient		.000	1.000
CCK	.042	.722	.471
ACP	.001	.013	.990
BTCP	.172	2.954	.003**

Dependent variable: NPTI: negative perception of tourism impact.

Independent variables: ACP: approval of cultural protection; BTCP: behavior tendency of cultural protection; CCK: cognition of cultural knowledge.

P < 0.05, ***P < 0.001.

Conclusion

The purpose of this study is to determine whether the attitudes of ethnic minority residents’ in rural areas of China toward cultural preservation influence their perceptions of the impact of tourism. Three factors related to the residents’ attitude toward cultural conservation include CCK, ACP, and BTCP, and two factors related to the impact of tourism development include both positive and negative perceptions. This study chooses the ancient city of Fenghuang, one of the most representative ethnic minority tourism destinations in China, as the study area in which to conduct a survey.

The results show that all three factors related to attitudes about cultural preservation influence the positive perception of impacts of tourism. Many studies focused on the negative impacts of cultural resources toward tourism such as destruction, change, and decline of cultural value in ethnic minority areas (Andereck et al., 2007; Coppock, 1982; Fan et al., 2008; Mitchell, 1998; Stonich et al., 1995; Wang and Bramwell, 2012), but this study identified the positive relationships between tourism and cultural conservation in ethnic minority area. The most significant finding is that the BTCP presents an ambivalent result in that it influences both positive and negative perceptions of the impact of tourism. Xiaohai and Zhenfang (2011) showed that the perception of tourism impacts promotes residents’ attitudes toward cultural protection, including the three factors studied here. This study confirmed that attitudes toward protecting the culture can also affect the perception of impacts of tourism. At the same time, results of this study determine that cultural protection occupies an important position in tourism development, especially in areas with abundant resources that are populated by ethnic minorities. This research may help government entities to formulate policies related to cultural protection and may provide useful information for tourism planning.

Although this study pointed out the relationship between residents’ attitudes toward cultural preservation and their perceptions of the impact of tourism, it is limited by the uneven distribution of demographic characteristics, such as the paucity of respondents over age 60. As a result, the research may not be applicable to ethnic minority populations with a large percentage of older people.

Balancing the relationship between cultural conservation and tourism development is a challenge for ethnic minority populations in rural areas, so further research should continue to explore the relationship between attitudes toward cultural conservation and attitudes toward tourism development. Further study should also consider the cultural conservation level of Fenghuang which including the current situation of heritage protection and cultural management policies.

Footnotes

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

The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article:

This study was supported by 2013 Research Grant from Kangwon National University.

Author Biographies

Hee Jeong Yun is an associate professor in the Department of Tourism Administration at Kangwon National University, Republic of Korea. Her research interests focus on the planning and development of tourism resources, spatiotemporal analysis of tourism spaces, tourists tracking using new technologies and extensive regional development using tourism policies.

Xuan Zhang received the masters degree from the Department of Tourism Administration at Kangwon National University, Republic of Korea in 2014. Her research interests focus on the planning and development of tourism resources and tourism information of SNS.

References

Andereck

Valentine

Vogt

(2007) A cross-cultural analysis of tourism and quality of life perceptions. Journal of Sustainable Tourism 15(5): 483–502.

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

Chambers

(2009) From authenticity to significance: Tourism on the frontier of culture and place. Futures 41(6): 353–359.

Chow

(2005) Cultural diversity and tourism development in Yunnan Province. China. Geography 90(3): 294–303.

Coppock

(1982) Tourism and conservation. Tourism Management 3: 270–276.

Degang

Jingjing

(2007) An empirical study of influential factors of tourism development and residents’ perceived attitude. Tourism Science 21(4): 49–56.

Dyer

Gursoy

Sharma

(2007) Structural modeling of resident perceptions of tourism and associated development on the Sunshine Coast, Australia. Tourism Management 28: 409–422.

Fan

Wall

Mitchell

CJA

(2008) Creative destruction and water town of Luzhi, China. Tourism Management 29: 648–660.

Faulkner

Tideswell

(1997) A framework for monitoring community impacts of tourism. Journal of Sustainable Tourism 5(1): 3–28.

10.

Grünewald

(2002) Tourism and cultural revival. Annals of Tourism Research 29(4): 1004–1021.

11.

Gustafsson

Shi

(2003) The ethnic minority-majority income gap in rural China during transition. Economic Development and Cultural Change 51(4): 805–822.

12.

Henderson

(2003) Ethnic heritage as a tourist attraction: The Peranakans of Singapore. International Journal of Heritage Studies 9(1): 27–44.

13.

Hunan Provincial Bureau of Statistics (2013) Hunan statistics. Available at: www.hntj.gov.cn (accessed 10 June 2013).

14.

Inskeep

(1991) Tourism Planning: An Integrated and Sustainable Development Approach, New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., pp. 343. pp.370–371.

15.

Johnson

(1995) Czech and Slovak tourism: Patterns, problems and prospects. Tourism Management 16(1): 21–28.

16.

King

(1994) What is ethnic tourism? An Australian perspective. Tourism Management 15(3): 173–176.

17.

Stewart

(2002) A structural equation model of residents’ attitudes for tourism development. Tourism Management 23: 521–530.

18.

Kuvan

Akan

(2005) Residents’ attitudes toward general and forest-related impacts of tourism: The case of Belek, Antalya. Tourism Management 26: 691–706.

19.

(2003) Heritage tourism: The contradictions between conservation and change. Tourism and Hospitality Research 4(3): 247–261.

20.

MacDonald

Jolliffe

(2003) Cultural rural tourism: Evidence from Canada. Annals of Tourism Research 30(2): 307–322.

21.

McKercher

PSY

Cros

(2005) Relationship between tourism and cultural heritage management: Evidence from Hong Kong. Tourism Management 26: 539–548.

22.

Meng

Wei

(2011) On the life cycle of cultural heritage engineering tourism: A case study of Macau. Systems Engineering Procedia 1: 351–357.

23.

Mitchell

CJA

(1998) Entrepreneurialism, commodification and creative destruction: A model of post-modern community development. Journal of Rural Studies 14(3): 273–286.

24.

National Bureau of Statistics of China (2011) Communiqué of the National Bureau of Statistics of People’s Republic of China on Major Figures of the 2010 Population Census [1] (No. 1). Available at: www.stats.gov.cn (accessed 10 June 2013).

25.

Ondimu

(2002) Cultural tourism in Kenya. Annals of Tourism Research 29(4): 1036–1047.

26.

Pigram

(1980) Environmental implications of tourism development. Annals of Tourism Research 7: 554–583.

27.

Pitchford

(1995) Ethnic tourism and nationalism in Wales. Annals of Tourism Research 22(1): 35–52.

28.

Richard

(2009) Tourism Development and the Environment: Beyond Sustainability?, London: Earthscan.

29.

Ryan

(2002) Tourism and cultural proximity: Examples from New Zealand. Annals of Tourism Research 29(4): 952–971.

30.

Ryan

(2009) Tourism in China: Destinations, Cultures and Communities, New York: Routledge.

31.

Smith

(1989) Hosts and Guests: The Anthropology of Tourism, Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.

32.

Sofield

THB

FMS

(1998) Tourism development and cultural policies in China. Annals of Tourism Research 25(2): 362–392.

33.

Stonich

Sorensen

Hundt

(1995) Ethnicity, class, and gender in tourism development: The case of the Bay Islands, Honduras. Journal of Sustainable Tourism 3(1): 1–28.

34.

Sun

Bao

(2006) From absence to distinction: The research context of community participation in tourism development. Tourism Tribune 21(7): 63–68.

35.

Swain

(1989) Developing ethnic tourism in Yunnan, China: Shilin Sani. Tourism Recreation Research 14(1): 33–39.

36.

Teo

Huang

(1995) Tourism and heritage conservation in Singapore. Annals of Tourism Research 22(3): 589–615.

37.

The people’s government of Fenghuang (2013) Population of Fenhuang. Available at: www.fhzf.gov.cn (accessed 10 June 2013).

38.

Vargas-Sánchez

Porras-Bueno

Plaza-Mejía

(2011) Explaining residents’ attitudes to tourism: Is a universal model possible? Annals of Tourism Research 38(2): 460–480.

39.

Wang

Bramwell

(2012) Heritage protection and tourism development priorities in Hangzhou, China: a political economy and governance perspective. Tourism Management 33: 988–998.

40.

Weaver

Lawton

(2001) Resident perception in the urban-rural fringe. Annals of Tourism Research 28(2): 439–458.

41.

Wood

(1984) Ethnic tourism, the state, and cultural change in Southeast Asia. Annals of Tourism Research 11(3): 353–374.

42.

Xiaohai

Zhenfang

(2011) Residents’ attitudes towards culture protection and the influencing factors: A case of Zhouzhuang tourism area. Journal of Nanjing Normal University (Natural Science Edition) 34(2): 100–106.

43.

Yang

(2011) Ethnic tourism and cultural representation. Annals of Tourism Research 38(2): 561–585.

44.

Yang

Wall

(2008) Ethnic Tourism and Entrepreneurship: Xishuangbanna, Yunnan. China. Tourism Geographies 10(4): 522–544.

45.

Yang

Wall

(2009) Ethnic tourism: A framework and an application. Tourism Management 30: 559–570.

46.

Yang

Wall

Smith

SLJ

(2008) Ethnic tourism development: Chinese government perspectives. Annals of Tourism Research 35(3): 751–771.

47.

Ying

Zhou

(2007) Community, governments and external capitals in China’s rural cultural tourism: A comparative study of two adjacent villages. Tourism Management 28: 96–107.