Tourism Management 22 (2001) 289}303

Challenges of sustainable tourism development in the developing

world: the case of Turkey
Cevat Tosun*
School of Tourism and Hotel Management, Mustafa Kemal University, P.K. 23 Pirinclik, 31200 Iskenderun, Turkey
Received 4 April 1999; accepted 6 June 2000

Abstract

This article presents an analysis of the challenges to sustainable tourism development in developing countries with special
references to Turkey as a part of the developing world. It was found that the factors that have emerged as challenges to sustainable
tourism development related to priorities of national economic policy, the structure of public administration, an emergence of
environmental issues, over commercialisation, and the structure of international tourism system. It concludes that although the
principles of sustainable tourism development are bene"cial, their implementation is an enormously di$cult task to achieve and
owing to the prevailing socio-economic and political conditions in the developing world. Hence, any operation of principles of
sustainable tourism development necessitates hard political and economic choices, and decisions based upon complex socio-economic
and environmental trade-o!s. Moreover, it states that implementation of these hard decisions may not be possible unless international
organisations encourage and collaborate with governments of developing countries to implement the principles of sustainable tourism
development.  2001 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Sustainable development; Sustainable tourism development; Challenges; The developing world; Turkey

1. Introduction vehicle for policy formulation to progress sustainable

Following the popularisation of sustainable develop-
ment as an environmental management concept by the
publication of the World Commission on the Environ-
ment and Development's (WCED) &Our Common
Future' in the late 1980s (WCED, 1987), a growing pro-
portion of the tourism research literature has focused
on the principles and practice of sustainable tourism
development. &The term sustainable tourism has come to
represent and encompass a set of principles, policy pre-
scriptions, and management methods' (Hunter, 1997,
p. 850). It is interesting to note that this literature has
originated from developed countries (English Tourist
Board, 1991; Globe'90, 1991; D'Amore, 1992; Owen, Witt
& Susan, 1993; Harris & Leiper, 1995, etc.). Conse-
quently, the principles of sustainable tourism develop-
ment appear to have been established by developed
countries without taking into account conditions in the
developing world. They fail to provide a conceptual
* Fax: #90-326-642-7381.
E-mail address: cevattosun@hotmail.com (C. Tosun).
tourism development in those countries owing to limita-
tions that originate from the structure of developing
countries and the international tourism system.
The main objective of this article is to examine chal-
lenges to sustainable tourism development in the context
of the developing world with special references to Tur-
key. However, it should be noted here that it may not
be possible to "nd evidence to strictly support every
contention about challenges of sustainable tourism
development because of formidable di$culties to obtain
information from public and private sources and
non-availability of written material about sustainable
development issues in many developing countries where
almost every kind of information is treated as con"den-
tial. Therefore, this paper may re#ect in part a polemic
based upon the author's observation. Following a review
of the underpinnings of development, sustainable devel-
opment and sustainable tourism development, the paper
then considers challenges to sustainable tourism develop-
ment in Turkey. A major conclusion is that sustainable
tourism development is an enormously di$cult task to
achieve in developing countries without the collabora-
tion of the international tour operators and donor

0261-5177/01/$ - see front matter  2001 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
PII: S 0 2 6 1 - 5 1 7 7 ( 0 0 ) 0 0 0 6 0 - 1
290 C. Tosun / Tourism Management 22 (2001) 289}303
agencies such as the World Bank and the International
Monetary Fund.
2. Sustainable development
De"nitions of sustainable development have two com-
ponents: the meaning of development and the conditions
necessary for sustainability (Miltin, 1992). Generally,
development implies a process that makes an e!ort
to improve the living conditions of people (Bartelmus,
1986). In the words of Dudley (1993, p. 165), &Develop-
ment is not just about increased wealth. It means change;
changes in behaviour, aspirations, and in the way which
one understands the world around one'. &Economic
growth does not by itself constitute development. Devel-
opment is &round'; it includes human and institutional
change as well as economic growth' (Hapgood, 1969,
p. 20). It involves broader concerns of the quality of life
such as life expectancy, infant mortality, educational at-
tainment, access to basic freedoms, nutritional status and
spiritual welfare (Pearce, Barbier & Markandya, 1990).
That is to say, development should not be regarded and
treated as a technical engineering exercise and more
attention should be paid to historical, cultural, social,
economic and political realities (Stiefel & Wolfe, 1994).
Additionally, the emphasis of sustainable development is
to carry developmental achievements into the future in
such a way that future generations are not left worse o!
(Department of Environment, 1989; Pearce et al., 1990;
WCED, 1987).
In this context, sustainable development is de"ned by the
United Nations' World Commission on the Environment
and Development (WCED) (1987, p. 42) as a &development
that meets the needs of the present without compromising
the ability of future generations to meet their own need'.
Repetto (1986: 15, cited in Pearce et al., 1990, p. 4) has
re#ected the above broad concern of sustainable develop-
ment as follows:
Sustainable development is a development strategy
that manages all assets, natural resources, and human
resources, as well as "nancial and physical assets, for
increasing long-term wealth and well-being. Sustain-
able development, as a goal rejects policies and practi-
ces that support current living standards by depleting
the productive base, including natural resources, and
that leaves future generations with poorer prospects
and greater risks than our own.
Examining the above context of sustainable develop-
ment reveals several main points as yardsticks. First,
sustainable development is predominantly considered as
a long-term strategy to preserve and conserve the envi-
ronment, though the present is not ignored. Second, it
proposes an inter- and intra-generational balanced level
of welfare. Third, it is perceived as a universally valid
prescription, which is supposed to be applicable to all
countries without considering their level of development,
socio-cultural and political conditions.
3. Sustainable tourism development
Sustainable tourism development should be seen as an
adaptive paradigm, a part of the parental concepts of
development and sustainable development, and it should
aim at contributing to objectives of sustainable develop-
ment and development in general by determining speci"c
principles in the light of its parental concepts. That is to
say, sustainable tourism development should be &accep-
ted as all kinds of tourism developments that make
a notable contribution to or, at least, do not contradict
the maintenance of the principles of development in an
inde"nite time without compromising the ability of fu-
ture generations to satisfy their own needs and desires'
(Tosun, 1998a, p. 596). In this manner, Butler's (1993,
p. 29) de"nition of sustainable tourism development
appears to be a substantial contribution to unify the
concept of sustainable tourism development with its
parental terms. Butler stated that:
2sustainable development in the context of
tourism could be taken as: tourism which is developed
and maintained in an area (community, environment)
in such a manner and at such a scale that it remains
viable over an inde"nite period and does not degrade
or alter the environment (human and physical) in
which it exists to such a degree that it prohibits the
successful development and well-being of other activ-
ities and processes. That is not the same as sustainable
tourism, which may be thought of as tourism which is
in a form which can maintain its viability in an area for
an inde"nite period of time.
It is worth emphasising that Butler has distinguished
sustainable tourism development from sustainable
tourism. Although this distinction seems not to be widely
recognised, it is important. Sustainable tourism develop-
ment has been also reviewed comprehensively by other
several researchers such as Bramwell and Lane (1993),
Owen et al. (1993), Murphy (1994), Harris and Leiper
(1995), Tosun (1996), Mowforth and Munt (1998) and
Tosun (1998a) etc. For the purpose of this article it may
be useful to identify some basic principles of sustainable
tourism development by taking into account conceptual
arguments for development, sustainable development
and sustainable tourism development (STD). These prin-
ciples may be stated as follows:
E STD should contribute to the satisfaction of basic and
felt needs of those hitherto excluded in local tourist
destinations.
E STD should reduce inequality and absolute poverty in
local tourist destinations.
 C. Tosun / Tourism Management 22 (2001) 289}303
E STD should contribute to the emergence of necessary
conditions in tourist destinations which will lead local
people to gain self-esteem and to feel free from the evils
of want, ignorance and squalor (see Goulet, 1971;
Thirlwall, 1989). That is to say, STD should help host
communities be free or emancipated from alienating
material conditions of life and from social servitude to
nature, ignorance, other people, misery, institution,
and dogmatic beliefs (see Todaro, 1994).
E STD should accelerate not only national economic
growth, but also regional and local economic growth.
This growth must be shared fairly across the social
spectrum.
E STD should achieve the above objectives or principles
in an inde"nite period of time without compromising
the ability of future generations to meet their own
need.
The above principles of sustainable tourism develop-
ment remind the reader that &the remit of sustainable
tourism development is extended to consider the role of
tourism in contributing to sustainable development more
generally' (Hunter, 1997, p. 860). In this regard, sustain-
able tourism must be regarded as an adaptive paradigm
capable of addressing widely di!erent situations and ar-
ticulating di!erent goals. This implies that sustainable
tourism development, as an adaptive paradigm is
a multi-disciplinary and broad concept. Hence, it touches
upon a wide range of issues such as economic develop-
ment policy, environmental matters, social factors, struc-
ture of the international tourism system, etc.
Generally speaking, sustainable tourism development
appears to be bene"cial. If applied, most of the negative
e!ects of mass tourism may be eradicated and many
alternative forms of tourism might be induced. However,
there seems to be several limitations to moving towards
a sustainable tourism development in a developing coun-
try such as Turkey. These are the priorities of a national
economy, a lack of a contemporary tourism development
approach, the structure of the public administration sys-
tem, the emergence of environmental matters and over-
commercialisation, and the structure of the international
tourism system. These variables are termed as &challenges
of sustainable tourism development' in the context of the
developing world. It should be noted that some of these
challenges are inter-related, and, thus, are not completely
exclusive. In the following sections they will be examined
with special references to Turkey as a developing country
to exemplify those points made under the given broad
context of sustainable development and principles of
sustainable tourism development.
3.1. Priorities of national economy
When the balance of payments and external debt of
Turkey are examined, it is clear that the country requires
291
foreign currency earning in the short and long term. The
balance of payments current account de"cit increased
from 0.6 per cent of GDP (Gross Domestic Product) in
1992 to 3.9 per cent of GDP in 1993. In 1993, the current
account de"cit of US$6.4 billion and debt repayment of
US$4.4 billion were largely "nanced by foreign borrow-
ing. For 1994, foreign debt service was some US$9.5
billion. The downgrading of Turkey's sovereign credit
rating in January 1994 limited new foreign borrowing to
US$721 million. The immediate mechanical e!ect of
the depreciation of the Turkish Lira (TL) was to raise
the foreign debt burden. Consequently, the increase
in the debt service ratio raised concerns about Turkey's
ability to meet its external commitments without
debt rescheduling. Further, the dominant feature of the
labour market in Turkey is the rapid growth of the
working-age population and the large proportion of
lower-age groups * implying that strong job creation is
needed merely to hold the unemployment rate steady
(OECD, 1995, 1996).
Worker remittances are an important contribution to
the balance of payments of the country, but the second
and third generations of Turkish workers abroad have
a tendency not to spend or invest their money in Turkey.
When this tendency is taken into account, tourism seems
to be one of the few main alternative sources of foreign
currency earning. These economic necessities have forced
decision-makers to encourage tourism development
without considering principles of development and sus-
tainable development.
Consequently, Turkey saw tourism as an easy, e!ective
and relatively cheap instrument to achieve export-led
industrialisation as a core principle of the free market
economy formulated by international donor agencies
such as the World Bank and the International Monetary
Fund (Tosun, 1999). The government in 1982 enacted the
Tourism Encouragement Law No. 2634 to accelerate
mass tourism development. This Law has induced many
private and public entrepreneurs to undertake large
amounts of "xed investment in tourism by building ho-
tels, yacht ports, swimming pools, etc.
The Tourism Encouragement Law No.2634 provided
a wide range of "scal and monetary incentives. It also
appropriated State-owned land for tourism development,
reduced bureaucratic formalities for tourism investors,
relaxed restrictions on the employment of foreigners in
the tourism sector, introduced vocational education and
training development projects, and gave precedence in
telephone, telegram and postal services. These incentives
were given to tourism investments that took place in
tourism regions, tourism zones and tourism centres as de-
termined by the Tourism Incentive Act No.2634. This
ushered in spatial concentration at the expense of
regional balanced development.
It is argued that the incentives that were given to the
tourism sector are a result of the adoption of a liberal
292 C. Tosun / Tourism Management 22 (2001) 289}303
capitalist economic policy. This has created a &get-rich-
quick' mentality coupled with dubious practices in "scal
and monetary policies (Sezer & Harrison, 1994; Tosun,
1998a). Additionally, it was claimed that there were cases
where incentives were given on the basis of inner party
courtesy or intimacy of friendship and relationship rather
than entrepreneurial capability (Kusluvan, 1994). This
seems to be a re#ection of the haphazard system in
Turkey for resource allocation by the state authorities
and the preferential access to state decision-making bo-
dies that is extremely important for success in business
(Ayata, 1994).
This may suggest that patron}client relationships have
become a tool to achieve national objectives at the
expense of local communities in those local tourist
destinations, widening intra-generation inequity and
unbalanced regional development alongside wider
socio-economic and political concerns. That is to say, the
pattern of tourism development was shaped by the gener-
ous tourism incentives that re#ect concerns of central
government while, it is argued here, environmental, equi-
table or similar societal considerations have been deemed
as being secondary. These issues in the context of Turkish
tourism have also been discussed in details elsewhere
(Sezer & Harrison, 1994; Tosun & Jenkins, 1996; Tosun,
1998a).
It is not realistic to expect that a sector of the economy
of a developing country will contribute to sustainable
development of that country without a signi"cant change
in both the overall socio-economic structure and the
public administration system (Tosun, 2000). Sustainable
tourism development requires equity both inter-and-
intra generational, which seems to be incompatible with
the interests of those people who invested their capital in
the tourism industry. It appears to be very di$cult, if not
impossible, to formulate a tourism policy which contra-
dicts the investors' interests. Thus, it is unrealistic to
achieve sustainable tourism development and expect
tourism &to promote greater equality in the distribution
of the bene"ts of that industry, if the forces making for
inequality are left a free rein in their society and if policies
aimed at the eradication of poverty are not vigorously
pursued' (de Kadt, 1979, p. 45).
The implication of the Turkish tourism development
policy is clear. The opportunity to derive foreign ex-
change from tourism export and employment created by
the tourism industry are opportunities not easily ignored.
Thus, tourism is too important to leave to the lower level
of governmental bodies rather than cabinet level. Not
surprisingly, tourism as a primary source of foreign cur-
rency earning and employment generation is perceived as
a national priority that pre-dominates over secondary
objectives and wider issues such as preserving cultural
heritage, environment, fair distribution of economic
growth, etc. all of which comprise the principles of sus-
tainable tourism development.
3.2. Lack of a contemporary tourism development
approach
The tourism sector has been represented at a minister-
ial level for more than 30 years in Turkey, but a contem-
porary approach to tourism development has not
developed (Tosun, 1998b). Although enacting the legisla-
tion of the Tourism Incentives Law No. 2634 appears to
have provided a more detailed structure for the tourism
development; it was not the objective to create sustain-
able tourism development. Rather, the main objective
was to achieve tourism growth in volume and value
terms, in both demand and supply-side aspects. In the
words of Brotherton and Himmetoglu (1997, p. 77); &The
plans have essentially consisted of volume/value objec-
tives designed to be achieved through an allocation of
state-owned resources and the provision of a range of
incentives to help facilitate the achievement of these
goals'. In the broader context of sectoral development
planning, these activities in relation to tourism growth in
Turkey are not e!ective planning and do not re#ect the
concerns of contemporary development approaches to
tourism development. Obviously, these activities are a
part of overall economic growth policy to achieve cen-
trally determined objectives driven by not only the need
of the country, but also by dominant business interests.
Yet it may be said that in the absence of a fair distribu-
tion of the fruits of economic growth across the social
spectrum, such a policy may be counter-productive.
Examining seven Five-Year Development Plans
(FYDPs) reveals that the main concerns of tourism devel-
opment have not changed much since the "rst such plan
in 1963. These tourism plans have focused merely on
maximising foreign tourists' receipts and thus increasing
the supply capacity of the tourism industry. In this
context, the main shortcomings of tourism development
approach in Turkey are determined as follows: (1) a lack
of #exibility and decentralisation, (2) some lack of com-
prehensiveness and integration (3) lack of community
perspective, (4) being driven by an industry dominated by
international tour operators, multinational companies,
major domestic business interests and central
government and (5) lack of consistency, co-ordination
and co-operation (Tosun, 1996; Tosun, 1998b).
That is to say, sectoral planning is done in isolation.
Co-ordination, two-way communication and co-opera-
tion between and amongst related bodies are very weak
and in most cases do not exist. Turkey has a traditional
powerful bureaucracy that dominates legislative and op-
erational processes. Any approaches that con#ict with
this traditional bureaucracy are not acceptable to the
powerful bureaucrats. This is an obstacle to establishing
co-ordination and co-operation between and among the
various bodies. Moreover, there is competition among
public bodies to increase this traditional bureaucratic
structure in order to enlarge their area of in#uence.
 C. Tosun / Tourism Management 22 (2001) 289}303
Ultimately, these structural and historical problems in
the public administration system are an important limi-
tation to the planning process.
Furthermore, the planning approach lacks a time di-
mension. The short-term issues have dominated the
planning process. The nature of the tourism sector has
increased the domination of the short-term planning
approach and policies. The State Planning Organisation
(SPO) has failed to create clear solutions to sectoral
problems. There is a belief that to be important is to be
successful which leads the need to maximise foreign cur-
rency earning in the present tourism season. This short-
term thinking has increased the level of dependency on
foreign tour operators.
One of the main obstacles in this regard is political
instability, which ushered in inconsistent tourism policies
and planning practices. It is interesting to note that in
a 75 year history of the Turkish Republic 56 governments
have been in power. The average span of duty of every
government was 1.3 years. According to the Ministry of
Tourism (1997), between 1963 and 1996, 30 ministers
were appointed to this position. The average span of duty
of each Minister of Tourism (MT) was 1.1 years, a span
too short to achieve anything, particularly at national
level. Because of this, &the historical position of the
Turkish state with respect to tourism has been fairly
inconsistent' (Sezer & Harrison, 1994, p. 82).
Furthermore, ministers and even general directors have
a tendency to change the personnel in their departments
when they are appointed to a new post. The Ministry of
Tourism is not exceptional in this regard. Naturally, high
personnel turnover rates decrease e$ciency, continuity
and thus the e!ectiveness of tourism development plans
in particular and state bureaucracy in general. As
Brotherton, Woolfenden and Himmetoglu (1994) noted,
the change in government gave birth to something of
a political hiatus and re-ordering of priorities, changes in
policies and personnel. These unstable policies have
caused uncertainty, which has led to the emergence of
a laissez-fairel approach to tourism development.
To sum up, it may be said that these common short-
comings of the current tourism development approach
pose challenges to sustainable tourism development in
Turkey. It would be naive to expect that truly sustainable
tourism development will be achieved under the guid-
ance of such an ad hoc, short-term and narrow tourism
development approach. Indeed, under this given climate
of uncertainty, it seems to be improbable to sustain
sound tourism development. It is therefore evident that
alternative approaches are required to achieve the goal of
sustainable tourism development.
3.3. Structure of public administration system
Turkey as a unitary state contains a network of local
o$cials who are centrally appointed and closely related
293
to locally elected bodies. In this unitary state, &power is
devolved to subordinated area units, but central author-
ity always retains the sovereignty and the right to deter-
mine the degree of autonomy that is enjoyed by these
units' (Harper, 1987, p. 15). That is to say, Turkey could
not establish local governments as separate corporate
entities (Ersoy, 1992). Consequently, local governments
were never permitted to develop independent policies free
from the strict central government control (Ersoy, 1992;
Koker, 1995).
Therefore, historically, Turkey has a strong central
government that has practised administrative tutelage on
local government. This tutelage practice of the central
government has precluded an emergence of responsive,
e!ective and autonomous institutions at the local
level. Ultimately, this has ushered in non-participation
or pseudo-participation of local people in their own
a!airs. Not surprisingly, the public administration
system in Turkey seems to be too bureaucratic to re-
spond to public needs e!ectively and e$ciently. As
a two-stage survey sponsored by the International Re-
publican Institute (IRI) illustrated, an overwhelming ma-
jority of urban settlers are very dissatis"ed with
the service delivery system by the municipalities and
overwhelmingly express feelings of being left out of the
political process (IRI, 1995). In this regard, Carkoglu
(1997, p. 89) stated that &there is no reason to believe the
situation should be any better at that administration
level'.
The above argument in relation to public administra-
tion system in Turkey reveals that Turkey evidently has
a weak local government with lack of "nancial resources
and authority to defend the interest of local people in
their constituencies. In the words of Ersoy (1992, p. 336),
the most important structural problem is that &no rela-
tionship has been established between the functions and
responsibilities of municipalities and their income struc-
tures. 2one of the most important aspects of the prob-
lem is persistently ignored'. Consequently, any approach
to sustainable tourism development in the absence of
strong local planning authority and involvement of local
communities in the planning process to some degree
seems to be very di$cult.
In turn, therefore, local governments in popular
local tourist destinations seem to have failed to meet
local people's needs and have not, for example,
addressed issues like the migration of large numbers of
tourists and second-home owners into those local holi-
day resorts. For example, the Municipal Governor of
Kusadasi (a well-known coastal resort on the Aegean
Sea), stated that the population of Kusadasi has been
dramatically increased due to the new jobs in the tourism
sector and those who settled here to spend the rest of
their lives * mainly retired people. Moreover, the popu-
lation has been further increased during the summer
season.
294 C. Tosun / Tourism Management 22 (2001) 289}303
Every person who moves into a second home for 3}4
months [and every tourist visiting Kusadasi for one or
two weeks] during the summer adds to the existing
burden on the shoulders of Kusadasi Municipal Gov-
ernment. The range and cost of services have increased.
In spite of this, the revenues of the municipal
government have not increased to be able to meet the
additional demand for services. In grants extended by
Ministries and other bodies2to the Municipalities,
population is a criterion besides other characteristics
of the town (Suyolcu 1980, pp. xii}xiii).
It is also reported that Bodrum (a well-known coastal
resort on the Aegean Sea) has grown from a small "shing
village to a centre of tourism explosion which houses
nearly 100,000 tourists even though its population
capacity is around 10,000. This has taken not only
Bodrum by surprise but Turkey itself. Bodrum has
become the hottest tourist spot in Europe (Lamar, 1988).
The statements regarding Kusadasi and Bodrum seem
to be still valid for many local tourist destinations in
Turkey, owing to the fact that not much progress has
been made in the decentralisation of the public adminis-
tration system since 1980. Moreover, &2decentralisation
practices created an opposite move towards centralisa-
tion in the 1980s' (Tosun & Jenkins, 1996, p. 528) and
local bodies have been organised in a way that can still be
used by the ruling party. Hence, if central and local
government are not in the same political party,
this creates con#ict and further problems in terms of
#exibility, simply because of partisanship.
Given the lack of "nancial resources and authority to
make independent decisions at local level, it seems to be
very di$cult for mayors of these resort towns to respond
e!ectively to the needs of tourists and residents
simultaneously. As a result, the power structure and
patron}client relations in these tourist destinations have
led local governments to respond primarily to the needs
of tourism entrepreneurs and tourists, and thus ignoring
the needs felt by permanent residents. It is clearly observ-
able in many local tourist destinations in Turkey that
there seem to be two di!erent communities. One con-
sists of tourists, tourism entrepreneurs and second
homeowners. This community is well organised and has
a leading role in local politics owing to its members'
"nancial power and client-relations with central govern-
ment. Most members of this community do not live
permanently or educate their children in those local
administrative units. This mobile community to a large
extent belongs to high-income groups or educated elites
at the national level.
Moreover, access of indigenous people to beaches in
front of luxury hotels and holiday villages has been
prevented via physical barriers such as fences. Addition-
ally, luxury hotels have hired security guards to stop
access of non-hotel guests onto beaches. These attitudes
and mistreatment by hoteliers are against the Coastal
Law dated 04. 04. 1990, No. 3621 and the 1982 Constitu-
tion, according to which, coastal areas including beaches
are under the protection of State. The coastal areas are
public properties accessible free for everybody and
with no limitation (see Kalkan, 1991). Somehow, there
appears to be no political will, opposition and legal
action against the misuse of beaches and mistreatment by
hoteliers. This may be due to the fact that local people do
not have much knowledge and information about the
relevant law and regulation. On the other hand, it
may also be a re#ection of a weak local government that
"nds it di$cult to protect the interests of the local com-
munities by taking legal action against the rich business
elites.
The second community is composed of indigenous
people and local civil servants (teachers, nurses, police,
postmen, etc.). This immobile community (permanent
settlers) is separated from the mobile (seasonal) or tem-
porary community. Members of this community live at
the rear of the developed local holiday destinations,
where components of basic infrastructure are very poor
or at a primitive level. The settlements of the indigenous
people are in the form of slum housing, most of which do
not have hot water systems, inside toilet, proper bath, etc.
Naturally, there seems to be a very limited and negli-
gible relationship in primitive form between members of
these two communities during the peak season: local
people work for the temporary community as cleaners,
waiters, night-keepers of hotels and luxury second
homes, dishwashers, gardeners, etc. These jobs are, by
nature, low paid and do not have high social status.
Moreover, these jobs do not create opportunities to accu-
mulate skills and quali"cations that can be transferable
to other employment areas. Thus, when tourism disap-
pears, the jobs will also disappear.
The above discussion and author participant observa-
tion suggest that tourism development in prime local
tourist destinations has brought powerful and organised
business interests into the powerless, unorganised in-
digenous communities. In the course of time, the business
interests have become dominant power holders and ser-
ved their self-interest at the expense of indigenous people
who live on the margin of their felt-needs. This seems to
be largely due to &the formation of local government in
Turkey [that] has been initiated by the state, re#ecting
administrative and "scal concerns of the centre, and has
not been a source of democratic citizen participation in
a public space' (Koker, 1995, p. 61). In this regard,
tourism development appears to have ignored intra-gen-
eration equity by catering for tourists and tourism entre-
preneurs' needs at the expense of indigenous local people.
It should be kept in mind that transferring public re-
sources to tourism investors via the noted generous
tourism incentives has accelerated this process. In brief,
tourism continues to be driven by central government
 C. Tosun / Tourism Management 22 (2001) 289}303
and its clients, rather than community interests in
Turkey. This reveals that tourism development in many
local tourist destinations in Turkey and elsewhere in the
developing world contradicts principles of sustainable
tourism development as stated at the outset of this study.
Thus, it is extremely di$cult to achieve sustainable
tourism development in Turkey without the political will
to re-structure the public administration system towards
decentralisation and community empowerment.
3.4. Emergence of environmental matters
In the 1980s hard currency bottlenecks were serious
problems for Turkey. It was very di$cult for the govern-
ment in power to "nd short-term foreign loans at even
relatively steep interest rates, due to the serious socio-
economic and political crisis that brought on the last
military intervention. This caused Turkey to lose its
credibility in the international "nancial market. There-
fore, the government decided to develop the tourism
industry without considering its opportunity costs. Soon
after, it prepared all necessary legislation that gave gener-
ous incentives to develop the tourism sector in order to
secure foreign currency earnings. Moreover, natural re-
sources, historical sites and cultural heritage have been
conceived as idle and cost-free instead of a long-term
asset.
Not surprisingly, the negative impact of tourism on the
physical environment has appeared, following the phase
of more or less uncontrolled development during the
1980s. In the absence of pro-active, comprehensive and
integrated planning approaches, development has
concentrated in a spatially unbalanced manner. It is
interesting to note that successive governments have en-
couraged this spatial concentration by deliberately chan-
nelling generous tourism incentives to pre-determined
tourism regions, tourism areas and tourism centres. Unbal-
anced and geographical concentration of tourism devel-
opment has created environmental problems in various
forms at di!erent local tourist destinations.
First, uncontrolled hotel construction has emerged on
the coastal areas. To Alipour (1996) and Brotherton and
Himmetoglu (1997, p. 77), &these tourism facility develop-
ments in the prime Aegean and Mediterranean coastal
regions took place to a large extent in a haphazard way'.
Although physical land-use planning and development
guidelines were prepared for these regions (Southwest
Turkey Touristic Investment Areas) by the Ministry of
Tourism, implementation of these guidelines have not
been controlled. Moreover, it is stated that &Even if they
are operating in the o$cial economy, Turkish business-
men specialise in getting round the rules' (The Econom-
ist, 1996, p. 13). This implies that unless there is a strong
control mechanism, implementation of the land-use
planning regulations will be ignored easily by private
entrepreneurs.
295
As a result, Aegean and Mediterranean coastal strip
development has taken place, which may re#ect the
absence of comprehensive and integrative planning
approaches to tourism development. Moreover, many
hotels and holiday villages violated construction regula-
tions and the Coastal Law No. 3621. The construction
of hotels and other facilities has not been integrated
into traditional or dominant architectural styles. This
haphazard building and polluting of resources has
endangered sustainable tourism development. Thus, the
"nal output is architectural pollution and an example of
construction site syndrome.
Second, environmental pollution has become an
important problem at these popular local tourist
destinations due to the lack of measures to cope with
the generation of new or increased waste residues.
Sewage disposal systems were installed solely according
to local residents' needs without taking into
account tourism development in many if not all tourist
destinations in Turkey. The carrying capacity of
sewage disposal systems have been exceeded due to
a rapid increase in numbers of hotels and second-homes
construction in addition to the migration of signi"cant
numbers of people from less-developed regions of
the country to work in the construction of hotels
and second homes. These people who worked in the
construction industry then remained in the labour
force as gardeners, dishwashers, waiters and the
like. On the other hand, some hotels outside the
main settlements have not linked their sewage disposal
system to the main system because of installation
costs. Moreover, since there was no strict control
and regulation that would have prevented hoteliers from
polluting the environment, particularly at the initial stage
of tourism development, it is possible that non-solid
waste "nds its way into natural water supplies. Hence,
there may be pollution of underground and surface
water.
Yacht tourism also has created considerable water
pollution at some local tourist destinations on the coastal
areas. For example, yachts have polluted seawater
around the yacht port in Kusadasi by discharging dirty
water into the sea without any pre-treatment. Solid waste
such as cans and bottle, etc. are thrown into the sea from
yachts in the area.
Third, overcrowding, tra$c jams and noise have cre-
ated discomfort for local people. It can be clearly observ-
able in prime local tourist destinations such Kusadsi,
Bodrum, Marmaris, Urgup, etc. that buses carrying tour-
ists unnecessarily use their horns. Some leave the main
road, passing through the local residential streets. In
particularly both early in the morning and late at night
these buses have created an unacceptable disturbance for
local residents whilst transporting tourists from hotels to
airport or vice versa. Moreover, some bars, discos, night-
clubs remain open, playing loud music late at night. This
296 C. Tosun / Tourism Management 22 (2001) 289}303
disturbs local residents who have to rise early in order to
work on the farms, etc.
Tra$c congestion seems to have become a problem
particularly in the region of Cappadocia during the peak
tourist season. For example, this problem can be ob-
served in front of the main rock churches that are on the
main road. At times there are 4 or 5 buses bringing
visitors to the rock churches and underground towns.
The visitors stay 2}3 hours visiting some main attrac-
tions, and tend to leave at the same time. The tra$c
congestion keeps tourists and residents waiting which
consequently create discomfort. However, the tra$c
problem appears to be due to an uncontrolled and disor-
ganised tra$c system in addition to overcrowding. If
some arrangements were to be put in place, the problem
could be solved, at least in the short term.
On local market-days (halk pazari), overcrowding has
become an unmanageable problem in the public open-
market areas in many local tourist destinations since
these areas were designed and arranged according to
local people's needs. Open public markets appear to be
very attractive for foreign tourists as they create a natural
shopping atmosphere in a traditional form and the shop-
ping is relatively cheap. However, sellers seem to pay so
much attention to foreign tourists that they sometimes
ignore local residents' shopping needs. Local people feel
humiliated by the lack of attention accorded to them.
Shop owners "nd it more pro"table to deal with foreign
tourists who are likely to buy more without bargaining as
local people do.
Fourth, the most detrimental impact of tourism devel-
opment and tourists has been on both the unique and
highly fragile natural and man-made resources. This
could be observed in Pamukkale and in the region of
Cappadocia since the mid-1980s. Pammukkale has be-
come very attractive for tourists and, thus, for tourism
entrepreneurs, owing to the "ssure-ridge and terraced-
mound travertines created over the last 400,000 years as
a result of deposition from thermal waters that spring at
353C from within active "ssures and faults. Many of these
"ssures travertine are up to 10 m wide. The actively
accumulating travertine attracts visitors to Pamukkale in
increasing numbers. Consequently, urbanisation of the
areas has accelerated since the 1980s. Such uncontrolled
urbanisation has given rise to two main problems:
(1) Hotels and motels have been extracting subsur-
face thermal waters to supply private swimming pools
and baths. Pumping has led to a fall in the water table
and is beginning to exhaust some of the natural hot
springs. (2) Some open "ssures are being "lled by
domestic waste from adjacent municipalities, hotels
and motels. Surface waters collecting in these "ssures
will wash pollutants into the main thermal-water reser-
voir. This will bring two major problems. Firstly, the
polluted thermal waters will precipitate unclean
travertine of unsightly appearance and, secondly and
more importantly, the polluted thermal waters will
pose a threat to human health where they continue to
be used supplying baths, swimming pools and even
medicinal drinking water. (Altunel & Hancock, 1994,
p. 129).
Tourists, both foreign and domestic, have tended to
behave in an irresponsible way. Visitors appear to have
carelessly left solid waste such as cans, bottles and ciga-
rette butts on the travertine. This has contributed to the
deterioration of this fragile and unique natural resource.
In brief, the urbanisation of the Pammukkale travertine
plateau, and tourists themselves have progressively
impaired the attractive environment that visitors come
to view. There are too many people in too small an
area.
The Cappadocia region is arguably one of the most
attractive and fragile sites in the world due to its unique
cultural heritage and natural volcanic beauty. The geo-
logical history of the region dates from Oligocene times,
38 million years ago or so (Bowen, 1987, 1990). The
geological structure of volcanic origin has formed, by
wind erosion, bizarre formations that are known as the
&fairy chimneys'. The "rst inhabitants date back to 3000
BC. in the Cappadocia plateau. Cappadocia provided an
asylum to early Christians who had selected the Goreme
Valley and Urgup for building churches in the year 53
AD, thus laying the foundations of Christianity in this
part of the World. The broken valleys, which were for-
med by erosion, sheltered the Christians #eeing Roman
oppression. Christians built a multitude of churches by
hollowing into the rocks in the Valley of Goreme. The
rock churches were decorated with impressive religious
frescoes (Turizm Bankasi, 1986; Nevsehir Il Turizm
Mudurlugu, 1995).
The unique scenery, geological structure, religious
relics and historical sites are the primary attractions for
tourists. They distinguish the Cappadocia region from
other local tourist destinations in Turkey. However,
those tourists who do not have an interest in religious
relics and natural attractions have damaged these an-
tique human and natural resources by behaving in an
irresponsible way. Some of the rock houses have been
used as tea gardens, bars, etc.; and some have been
bought by foreigners, who visit the region every year, to
use as accommodation during their stay in Cappadocia.
Moreover, since there were no strict planning regulations
or local authorities with power to implement existing
regulations, ribbon development has occurred along the
scenic routes and in areas of volcanic beauty. There are
some examples of integrated building styles in the
environment, but generally there has been a failure to
integrate the superstructures of the tourism industry with
the natural volcanic beauty, which in the words of Pearce
(1978), is &architectural pollution'.
 C. Tosun / Tourism Management 22 (2001) 289}303
The Ministry of Tourism has become aware of the
environmental matters and has taken some measures to
prevent environmental damage through tourism devel-
opment. For instances, the most signi"cant attractions
(Goreme, Derinkuyu, Ihlara Valley, Zelve, etc.) were
taken under State protection, which can play an impor-
tant role to keep Cappadocia a world-class site. How-
ever, measures have not been taken in time to stop this
environmental erosion in some other parts of the region
such as in Urgup and Ortahisar. Turkey has successfully
implemented an Environmental Protection program
to save Caretta caretta and Chelonia mydas, which are a
species of sea turtle, on a small part of the Mediterranean
Sea. This project was strongly supported by the central
government because of international pressure, but excep-
tional cases should not be generalised.
The report of the special professional group of tourism
(Devlet Planlama Teskilati (State Planning Organisa-
tion), 1995), which had been taken as the basis for
tourism sector development planning, seems to have fail-
ed to provide a comprehensive legislative guideline to
stop environmental deterioration due to the tourism de-
velopment. However, the report of the special profes-
sional group for environment (Devlet Planlama Teskilati,
1994) highlighted the gap between legislation and imple-
mentation. Consequently, the Seventh FYDP (State
Planning Organisation, 1995, p. 206) clearly pointed out
that &It is required that the articles of the Constitution
which are directly or indirectly concerned with environ-
mental matters should be amended in line with the prin-
ciples of a sustainable economic development'.
More speci"cally, it was suggested that the Environ-
mental Law No. 2872, the Law on Forests No. 6831, the
Law No. 2634 on Encouraging Tourism, the Law of
Resettlement No. 3194, the Law of Coasts No. 3621 and
the Law on the Protection of Cultural and Natural
Entities No. 2863 should be updated and amended ac-
cording to the requirement of sustainable development.
The relevant governmental documents in review reveal
that some professional groups in Turkey have already
become aware that new legislative measures are ne-
cessary to preserve, protect and improve natural and
man-made resources. However, there is still not a com-
prehensive plan to cope satisfactorily with environmental
matters that have appeared through tourism develop-
ment. It is clear that the present level of legal action and
measures in respect to environmental codes appear to be
insu$cient. That is to say, planning lags behind change,
as it often does in Turkey as a developing country, and
change brings the destruction of much of the country's
rich historical heritage. Hence, this matter is one of the
dominant threats to tourism development in Turkey.
Perhaps, as the Economic Intelligence Unit (EIU) (1989,
p. 54) stated, &Turkey may need international help and
support in the years immediately ahead' to deal with this
serious problems of tourism development in Turkey.
297
3.5. Emergence of over commercialisation
Utilising culture as a tourism resource is a critical
issue. Culture should not be manipulated or exploited
particularly as an instrument for tourism development.
In the past, several studies emphasised the negative im-
pact which unplanned and irresponsible tourism devel-
opment may have on the indigenous culture of a region
(Jafari, 1974; Young, 1973; Ritchie & Zins, 1978). How-
ever, it is claimed that cultural heritage and traditional
values were manipulated and exploited for the sake of
economic bene"ts of tourism development by placing the
Ministry of Culture under the umbrella of tourism in
Turkey (Sosyal, 1982).
Although the Ministry of Culture and Tourism was
separated into two separate ministries in 1989, the cur-
rent circumstances in many local tourist destinations
re#ect Soysal's concern. Local cultural values in many
local tourist destinations have become a part of the
tourism product. They have been used as a commodity
and marketing tool to increase the average length of stay
of the tourists and maximise foreign currency earning.
Consequently, a &get-rich-quick' mentality has emerged
in the tourism industry. Hoteliers, and other tourism-
related entrepreneurs, have tried their best to use every-
thing available to maximise their pro"t margin without
considering the consequences of their activities even for
their future business. Traditional ceremonies, folk
dances, etc. have been performed as part of the entertain-
ment activities in hotels, bars, discos and restaurants. For
example, the author personally witnessed that a circum-
cision feast has been presented in such a way that it
created fear in boys who would be circumcised. To be
paraded in front of so many foreign people with di!erent
language and colour should not be allowed and it be-
comes an additional stress factor for those boys kept
waiting for the sake of tourists and money. It is not only
uncomfortable for these boys, but the content of the
circumcision feast has become exaggerated that it is
inconsistent with reality.
Another example, in this regard, is the performance of
&Turkish Nights'. Eroglu (1995) stated that Nevsehir
School of Tourism and Hotel Management established
a team specially educated to perform folk dance and folk
drama in restaurants and hotels in Cappadocia, but
hoteliers and restaurant operators have not accepted the
specially educated team because of its relatively high
cost, and prefer cheaper, unprofessional teams at the
expense of the destruction of cultural values. Eroglu
(1995) particularly emphasised that some of the folk
dramas have been performed in forms that have humili-
ated the local communities from where the dramas and
dances originated.
Additionally, it can be argued that traditional handi-
crafts have become a matter of mass production without
paying much attention to their origins owing to the
298 C. Tosun / Tourism Management 22 (2001) 289}303

&get-rich-quick' mentality that has been brought by Table 1

over-commercialisation. Moreover, a tourist may won- Origin regions for international tourist arrivals in Turkey, 1996
der whether he or she is in a Turkish town. Shops, bars,
Origin region Arrivals (%)
discos and even tourism employees use foreign version of
their names: Zafer is changed to Victor, Cevat to Gerald, Europe OECD 4,707,253 54.65
Meryem to Mary, Isa to Jesus, etc. It is not surprising to Other OECD 491,305 5.70
see shops named as the Irish Bar, English Bar, Elegant Eastern Europe 2,219,627 25.77
Wear, Leather Jacket Shop, etc. Even 10}15 years old Africa 119,718 1.39
West Asia 541,439 6.29
children speak some words in English, French, German, South Asia 466,956 5.42
etc. They prefer greeting foreign tourists with a foreign North America 4383 0.05
language without knowing their nationalities while they Central America 10,729 0.12
are polishing tourists' shoes. South America 38,631 0.45
Using cultural values at the wrong place, wrong time Oceania 937 0.01
Haymatlos 13,107 0.15
with the wrong standard has created in turn a misleading Total 8,614,085 100
and damaging image about local communities in those
tourist destinations. Overtime, it may become increasing- Source: Ministry of Tourism (1997).
ly di$cult to discern di!erence between commercially
inspired and authentic cultural shows, thereby compro-
mising the ability of future generations to satisfy their
own needs. 1994). It is noted that investment in promoting Turkey as
a tourist destination has a very minor impact on inter-
3.6. Structure of the international tourism system national tourist #ows to Turkey (Uysal & Crompton,
1984). Moreover, it is also reported that &it is rather
The structure of the international tourism industry in di$cult to claim that the popularity of Turkey as a tour-
developing countries is characterised by the domination ist destination is not the result of conscious and well
of Transnational Tourism Corporations (TTCs) from planned marketing and promotional e!orts of the MT
relatively advanced wealth industrialised countries and other related organisations' (Ozturk, 1996, p. 278).
(Britton, 1982; Ascher, 1985; WTO, 1985; Dieke, 1988; The current pattern of international tourism demand for
Jenkins, 1994). It is argued that these industrialised Turkey supports these statements. The EIU (Economic
countries generate tourist demand for most developing Intelligence Unit) (1993, p. 82) found that, &over 55 per
countries, and the large foreign "rms from these generat- cent of all visitors to Turkey travel on all inclusive tour
ing countries dominate the #ow patterns (Jenkins, 1994). packages tour and 15 per cent on a part organised
Particularly, in the absence of unique attractions, tourist basis2 Eighty "ve per cent of all charter passenger
demand is largely externally determined (Jenkins, 1980). arrivals travelled by using the companies which are
That is to say, signi"cant decisions as to which destina- owned and operated by foreigners'. In 1996 60 per cent of
tion regions are to be favoured with tourism develop- foreign tourists who visited Turkey arranged their trips
ments are frequently exercised by travel intermediaries through tour operators (State Institute of Statistics,
based, not in destination regions, but in the tourist 1997).
generating countries. &Given such external control over A closer look at the international tourist arrivals in
the fortunes of the tourism industry in destination re- Turkey illustrates that tourism development is reason-
gions it must be concluded that tourism is too fragile and ably dependent on a small number of origin countries. In
unpredictable an industry on which to base total 1996 60.35 per cent (5.2 million) of Turkey's arrivals
economic development of destination regions' (Hall, originated from OECD countries and 25.77 per cent (2.2
1994, p. 119 quoting Goodall, 1987, p. 72). million) from East European (see Table 1). The largest
This argument regarding dependency of tourism devel- single tourist arrivals in 1996 were from Germany, which
opment in developing countries suggests that type and accounted for 25 per cent of all arrivals. The top three
scale of tourism development in the developing world is markets accounted for about 52 per cent of total inter-
at the mercy of the international tour operators to a large national arrivals to Turkey in 1996 (see Table 2).
extent. In this regard, it may not be wrong to claim that It should be noted that the 2.2 million visitors (26 per
developing countries are decision-takers, rather than de- cent of all arrivals) from East European countries could
cision-makers regarding the tourism development that not be regarded as tourists in the real meaning of the
has taken place in their territories. There is evidence that word. The vast majority of these visitors were &suitcase
international tour operators and multinational com- traders' who aimed at to sell goods brought from their
panies in the tourism industry have shaped and directed own country in the streets. If these visitors were excluded,
the tourism development in Turkey and elsewhere in the the top two markets, Germany and the UK, would ac-
developing world (Ascher, 1985; Dieke, 1988; Kusluvan, count for 45 per cent of total arrivals to Turkey in 1996.
 C. Tosun / Tourism Management 22 (2001) 289}303
Table 2
International tourist arrivals in Turkey by major origin country, 1996
Origin country Number of arrivals

Germany 2,141,778
Austria 235,540
France 251,976
Netherlands 216,672
United Kingdom 758,433
USA 326,214
Romania 191,511
UIS 1,582,423
Israel 254,445
Iran 378,130
Source: Ministry of Tourism (1997).

More than 2 per cent per origin country.
In this vein, the proportion of tourists who travelled on
all inclusive tour packages may have been higher than
the given 60 per cent.
Under the given high level of market dependency of
tourism development, and the badly needed foreign cur-
rency earning (particularly in the short term), it appears
to be very di$cult for Turkey to make a radical move to
change the current pattern of tourism development
(Tosun, 1999). Hence, in a developing country such as
Turkey, the government's role is to develop ad hoc strat-
egies for tourism to cope with the high bargaining power
of international tour operators and adjust policies to the
changes caused by external factors. As Tosun (1997)
argues, it is very di$cult for Turkey to develop a pro-
active planning approach by which to decrease or eradi-
cate the in#uences of the external factors on the tourism
development due to the nature of the international
tourism system. This suggests that the structure of the
international tourism system has led Turkey to create
a tourist infrastructure of facilities based on Western
standards even in relatively underdeveloped local areas
to provide the mass tourist with &the protective ecological
bubble of his accustomed environment' (Cohen, 1972,
p. 171) while local people in these areas have di$culty
in satisfying their felt-needs such as those of housing,
education and health. The type, direction, volume and
impact of international tourism in Turkey are being
determined by external factors to a large extent. In this
context, it may be stated that tourism is an industry
developed and run by foreigners for foreigners.
The above argument may suggest that the structure of
international tourism seems to be an obstacle to making
decisions to move towards a more sustainable tourism
development in the developing world. It has left no
choice for Turkey to consider except the current mass
tourism development, which is driven by the interna-
tional tour operators and appears to contradict prin-
ciples of sustainable tourism development. Thus, it has
299
become imperative for Turkey to accept and support
certain scale and types of tourism development in certain
geographic locations in her territory at the expense of
(%)
environmental degradation and worsening intra and
24.86 inter-generational-equity. In this context, it may be
2.73 said that under the current imperfect market conditions,
2.93 Turkey as a cheap popular tourist destination has two
2.52 choices. First, to accept the current type, scale and direc-
8.80
3.79 tion of tourism development that seems to contradict
2.22 principles of development and sustainable development.
18.37 Second, to reject the current type, scale and direction of
2.95 tourism development and accept a certain type and scale
4.39 of tourism development that will contribute to sustain-
able development. This second option seems not to be
acceptable in terms of current political preferences and
economic priorities. In fact, the "rst option may be the
only choice for Turkey.
4. Conclusion
Although arguments regarding the challenges to sus-
tainable tourism development have been raised with
special reference to Turkey as a part of the developing
world, they may be valid for many developing countries
that have adopted a similar tourism development ap-
proach and experienced similar di$culties. Hence, it may
be possible to draw several general conclusions.
First, like many other developing countries, Turkey
has chronic and severe macro economic problems such
as a high rates of unemployment, rapid growth of the
working-age population, high rate of in#ation and inter-
est, an increasing rate of de"cits in the current account of
balance of payments and an increasing debt: service ratio.
In the short term many developing countries do not have
alternatives to tourism to "nd sources of foreign currency
earnings and to create jobs for the rapidly growing work-
ing-age population. Thus, developing world governments
do not have much option other than to support current
tourism development even though it may not be compat-
ible with the principles of long-term sustainable deve-
lopment. The development of tourism is essentially built
on long-term investment, but for short-term bene"ts.
Sustainability as a long-term objective can only have
relevance if it can gather the support of present day
bene"ciaries. These macro-economic imperatives suggest
that unless developing countries "nd additional sources
of foreign currency earning and employment generation,
they will support whatever forms of tourism development
are available to them, including those that are unsustain-
able.
Second, in developed countries, approaches to tourism
development planning have moved from a historical,
narrow consideration of demand, supply and physical
requirements to more comprehensive, integrated and en-
vironmentally sensitive approaches, which are sine qua
300 C. Tosun / Tourism Management 22 (2001) 289}303
non for sustainable tourism development. However, this
evolutionary process has not had much opportunity to
be applied in developing countries. Thus, on the one
hand, contemporary approaches to tourism development
such as community involvement, comprehensive, integra-
tive and system approaches appear to be essential to
achieve a better tourism development, if not sustainable
tourism development, in the developing world. But, on
the other hand, adopting those planning models and
approaches developed in and for developed countries to
solve the problems of tourism in developing countries
requires considerable e!ort, "nancial resources and ex-
pertise, all of which may not be available in those coun-
tries. Even if these models are "nancially and technically
feasible, it may not be feasible in terms of &politics'. In
other words, decision-makers may not accept such
a model since it may be contrary to their interests. Any
planning model should be both politically acceptable and
desirable in developing countries if it is to be imple-
mented. Adapting the techniques and approaches de-
veloped by others does not necessarily meet developing
countries' needs. Hence, it is suggested that developing
countries need to develop their own contemporary
tourism development approaches by taking into account
their own socio-economic, political and legislative condi-
tions to cope with the unplanned and uncontrolled
tourism development that has emerged as a challenge to
sustainable tourism development.
Third, centralisation of public administration func-
tions has brought the dangers of concentration of power
in too few hands in developing countries. This public
administration structure has catered for business inter-
ests as clients of decision-makers at the expense of in-
digenous communities in many local tourist destinations.
This suggests that there is much truth in the German
proverb &stadtluft macht frei' (town air makes man free). It
is argued &in support of the conception that local bodies
know local problems and feelings, and so what is suit-
able, better than the central authorities possibly can'
(Allum, 1995, p. 413). Hence, local governments should
be re-organised to defend, protect and re#ect concerns
and interests of local people in their administrative terri-
tories. Obviously, without "nancial resources, local gov-
ernments cannot provide services to their constituencies.
Consequently, local government should be empowered
not only politically and legally, but also "nancially. Addi-
tional "nancial resources should be made available for
local governments to be used particularly for community
development projects. For example, a community devel-
opment tax or community compensation tax can be
collected to raise "nancial resources for this purpose.
This may encourage local government to "nd ways of
empowering those who live in its area.
However, re-organisation and empowerment of local
governments may move patron-client relations to prov-
incial level. In this vein, a cautionary approach is needed.
New measures should ensure the equality of treatment of
all residents and should avoid creating other problems or
shaping the form of prevailing problems rather than
solving them.
Fourth, there is a need to establishing quality stan-
dards for handicrafts so as to distinguish those handi-
crafts that are made in accordance with their origins from
those that are not. A special trademark or symbol can be
developed to represent this quality standard. When
buyers see this special trade mark or symbol, they can be
more con"dent about the quality of the products. The
quality standard marks should be publicised in tour
operators' brochures and via tourism information
centres. This measure may be a means to counter over-
commercialisation and protect consumers. Similarly, en-
tertainers such as folk dance performers, Turkish night
organisers, etc. should be controlled via a certi"cation
program. The Ministry of Culture or relevant organisa-
tion should certify those entertainers who perform folk
dances and organise traditional animation programs and
only certi"cate holders should be permitted to organise
entertainment programmes. This may also help govern-
ment to collect more taxes. For example, many entertain-
ment organisers are not registered as self-employed in
Turkey and therefore many of them do not pay taxes.
There is now considerable evidence that tourism does
have de"nite but variable impacts on communities and
the wider society in developing countries. It should be
noted that, as Harrison (1992) postulates, there may be
something quite patronising in the suggestion that the
culture of many developing countries may be weak and
require protection from outside in#uences. The cost of
achieving some economic advancement by adopting in-
ternational mass tourism must be measured against the
loss of cultural heritage, which can be observed in many
developing countries as the result of the modernisation
process. As tourism is part of this modernisation process,
it is important to anticipate and manage the negative
social, cultural, economic and environmental problems
arising from tourism. It should be kept in mind that it is
not the modernisation that attract tourists, but the tradi-
tional and authentic cultural values that are the main
sources of attraction alongside other socio-economic
factors and natural resources in a tourist destination.
Fifth, environmental codes should be developed and
enforced to protect unique and fragile natural resources
and cultural heritage. Necessary rules and regulations
should be enacted for this. These measures should be
strict and free of misinterpretation and misuse. If
necessary, international agencies should be approached
to collaborate to protect these non-renewable resources.
Additionally, signboards should be put in place to advise
tourists of restrictions. Through booklets and newsletters
tourists can be informed how these fragile resources can
be easily damaged. Tourist guides should be educated
about environmental issues. Tourist guides should be
 C. Tosun / Tourism Management 22 (2001) 289}303
responsible to introduce to tourists relevant environ-
mental codes and give, free of charge, relevant booklets
and newsletters, to tourists in their groups. Most impor-
tantly, there should be control to implement these envir-
onmental codes via empowering local government, non-
governmental organisations and local communities. If
those codes are ignored for any reason there should be
signi"cant monetary "nes that can be additional sources
of "nance to improve and the protect the relevant envi-
ronment.
Sixth, the Turkish tourism experience reveals that the
form and scale of tourism development that has taken
place in developing countries is shaped by international
tour operators. Intense competition between identical
tourist destinations in terms of price, rather than product
di!erentiation and quality, and increasing the supply of
almost identical commodity tourist destinations increase
the dependency of destination countries on the interna-
tional tour operators. This high level of market depend-
ency puts the developing world in a position of
a decision-taker, rather than decision-maker. In other
words, because of the nature of tourism and its reliance
on the international market it was a sector over which
the host community and governments could exercise
only limited control.
Given the structure of the international tourism sys-
tem, developing countries cannot a!ord to reject or op-
pose decisions of the international tour operators owing
to the real possibility of losing substantial economic
bene"ts from international tourism for which they have
already made massive and largely irreversible "xed in-
vestment. Additionally, there is often a desperate need for
international tourism receipts as a main source of foreign
currency earning.
The structure of the international tourism system and
economic imperatives in the developing world suggest
that moving towards a more sustainable tourism devel-
opment option is largely at the mercy of the international
tour operators and donor agencies. That is to say, unless
the international tour operators are willing to collabor-
ate with developing countries to take careful measures
for sustainable tourism development and international
donor agencies contribute to the solution of the macro-
economic problems of these countries, there seems to be
a real danger of losing the option of sustainable tourism
development forever.
Finally, this article suggests that the principles of sus-
tainable tourism development have originated from and
have been developed by advanced industrial countries
that experienced the basis of the pre-industrial phase last
century, and where far better economic, legislative and
political structures are in operation than in the develop-
ing world. Therefore, arriving at sustainable tourism
development requires re-structuring the public adminis-
tration system, and a re-distribution of power and
wealth, for which hard political choices and logical deci-
301
sions based on cumbersome social, economic and envir-
onmental trade-o! are sine qua non. This cannot be
achieved within the present conditions of many
developing countries without the assistance of interna-
tional organisation.
This study proposes that future research should focus
on how international organisations including the World
Bank, International Monetary Fund, European Union,
United Nations, International Tour Operators, etc. can
have a role in implementation of the principles of sustain-
able tourism development in developing countries. It
should be noted that economically advanced countries
need to protect and preserve both the environment, and
peace in the developing world since people of these coun-
tries have already accepted cross-border holidays as part
of their felt-need.
References
Alipour, H. (1996). Tourism development within planning paradigms:
The case of Turkey. Tourism Management, 17(5), 367}377.
Allum, P. (1995). State and society in Western Europe. Cambridge: Polity
Press.
Ascher, F. (1985). Tourism transnational corporations and cultural identi-
ties. Paris: UNESCO.
Altunel, E., & Hancock, P. L. (1994). Pollution of the Pamukkale
travertine as a consequence of urbanisation: What future for
a unique natural Turkish Monument? 47 Turkiye Jeoloji Kurultayi
1994 Bildiri Ozleri; Cevre Jeolojisi Oturumu. Izmir/Turkey: Dokuz
Eylul Universitesi.
Ayata, A. G. (1994). Roots and trend of clientelism in Turkey. In
L. Roniger, & A. G. Ayata, Democracy, clientelism and civil society
(pp. 49}63). London: Lynne-Rienner-Pblisher.
Bartelmus, P. (1986). Environment and development. Boston: Allen and
Unwin.
Bowen, R. (1987). Geology and the conservation of antique monuments
in Turkey. Environmental Geology and Water Sciences, 9(2),
71}84.
Bowen, R. (1990). The future of the past at Goreme in Turkey. Environ-
mental Geology and Water Sciences, 16(1), 35}41.
Bramwell, L., & Lane, B. (1993). Sustainable tourism: An evolv-
ing global approach. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 1(1),
6}16.
Britton, S. G. (1982). The political economy of tourism in the Third
World. Annals of Tourism Research, 9(3), 331}358.
Brotherton, B., & Himmetoglu, B. (1997). International Tourism Re-
port, Turkey. Travel and Tourism Intelligence (pp 59}81).
Brotherton, B., Woolfenden, G., & Himmetoglu, B. (1994). Developing
human resources for Turkey's tourism industry in the 1990s.
Tourism Management, 15(2), 109}116.
Butler, R. W. (1993). Tourism * An evolutionary perspective. In J. G.
Nelson, R. Butler, & G. Wall, Tourism and sustainable development:
monitoring, planning, managing (pp. 26}43). Waterloo: Heritage
Resources Centre, University of Waterloo.
Carkoglu, A. (1997). The Turkish general election of 24 December 1995.
Electoral Studies, 16(1), 86}95.
Cohen, E. (1972). Towards a Sociology of International Tourism. Social
Research, 39, 164}182.
D'Amore, L. J. (1992). Promoting sustainable tourism * the Canadian
approach. Tourism Management, 13(3), 258}262.
de Kadt, E. (1979). Social planning for tourism in the developing
countries. Annals of Tourism Research, 6(1), 36}48.
302 C. Tosun / Tourism Management 22 (2001) 289}303
Department of the Environment. (1989). Sustaining our common future.
A Progress Report by the United Kingdom on Implementing
Sustainable Development. United Kingdom: Department of
Environment.
Devlet Planlama Teskilati. (1994). Yedinci Bes Yillik Kalkinma Plani:
Cevre Ozel Ihtisas Komisyonu Raporu (Report of the Special
Professional Group for Environment). Ankara: Devlet Planlama
Teskilati.
Devlet Planlama Teskilati. (1995). Yedinci Bes Yillik Kalkinma Plani:
Turizm Ozel Ihtisas Komisyonu Raporu (Report of the Special
Professional Group for Tourism). Ankara: Devlet Planlama
Teskilati.
Dieke, P. U. C. (1988). The development of tourism in Kenya and The
Gambia: A comparative analysis. Doctoral thesis, The Scottish Hotel
School, University of Strathclyde, UK.
Dudley, E. (1993). The critical villager: Beyond community participation.
London: Routledge.
EIU (1989). International tourism report of Turkey. International
Tourism Report. No:1 (pp. 35}55).
EIU (1993). International tourism report of Turkey. International
Tourism Report. No:3 (pp. 77}97).
English Tourist Board/Countryside Commission. (1991). The green
light: A guide to sustainable tourism. London.
Eroglu, T. (1995). Yuksek Okul adina yapilan konusmalar. In
Kapadokya Toplantilari II: Turism Endustrisi- Turizm Isletmeciligi
ve Otelcilik Yuksek Okulu Isbirligi Imkanlari (pp. 30}33).
Ersoy, M. (1992). Relations between central and local governments in
Turkey: An historical perspective. Public Administration and Devel-
opment, 12, 325}341.
Globe'90. (1991). Tourism stream conference, action strategy for sustain-
able tourism development. Ottawa: Tourism Canada.
Goulet, D. (1971). The cruel choice, a new concept in the theory of
development. New York: Steward Ltd.
Hall, C. M. (1994). Tourism and politics: Policy, power and place. Chi-
chester: Wiley.
Hapgood, D. (Ed.) (1969). The role of popular participation in develop-
ment report of a conference on the implementation of title IX of the
foreign assistance act, June 24}August 2, 1968. Cambridge, MA: MIT
Press.
Harper, R. (1987). Devolution. The Society of Scottish Conservative
Lawyers.
Harris, R., & Leiper, N. (1995). Sustainable tourism: An Australian
perspective. Australia: Butterworth Heinneman.
Harrison, D. (1992). International tourism and the less developed
countries: The background. In D. Harrison, International tourism
and the less developed countries (pp. 1}19). London: Belhaven Press.
Hunter, C. (1997). Sustainable tourism as an adaptive paradigm. Annals
of Tourism Research, 21(4), 850}867.
International Republican Institute (IRI). (1995). Turkey, survey result:
Attitudes and priorities of citizens of urban areas, November 9}23,
1995. IRI, Washington, DC.
Jafari, J. (1974). The socio-economic costs of tourism to developing
countries. Annals of Tourism Research, 1(7), 227}262.
Jenkins, C. L. (1980). Tourism policies in developing countries: A
critique. International Journal of Tourism Management, 1(1), 36}48.
Jenkins, C. L. (1994). Tourism in developing countries: The privatisa-
tion issue. In A. V. Seaton, Tourism the state of the art (pp. 1}9).
Chichester: Wiley.
Kalkan, O. (1991). Turizm Menzuatimiz (Our tourism law). Ankara:
Devlet Su Isleri Genel Mudurlugu Basim Evi.
Koker, L. (1995). Local politics and democracy in Turkey: An appraisal.
The Annals of the American Academy of political and Social Science,
540, 51}62.
Kusluvan, S. (1994). Multinational enterprises in tourism: A case study
of Turkey. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, Strathclyde University, The
Scottish Hotel School, Glasgow, UK.
Lamar, J. V. (1988). Turkey, the hot new tourist draw. Time. June.
Miltin, D. (1992). Sustainable development: A guide to the literature.
Environment and Urbanisation, 4(1), 111}124.
Ministry of Tourism. (1997). Turizm Bakanligi, 1963}1996 (34th Anniver-
sary of Ministry of Tourism). Ankara: Ministry of Tourism.
Mowforth, M., & Munt, I. (1998). Tourism and sustainability: New
tourism in the Third World. London: Routledge.
Murphy, P. (1994). Tourism and sustainable development. In W.
Theobald, Global tourism: The next decade (pp. 274}290). Oxford:
Butterworth.
Nevsehir Turizm Il Mudurlugu (1995). Document of determining tourism
potential in Cappadocia (Received by personal mail application).
Nevsehir: Il Turizm Mudurlugu.
OECD. (1995). Economic survey of Turkey. Paris: OECD.
OECD. (1996). OECD economic surveys for Turkey 1993}1994. Paris:
OECD.
Owen, R. E., Witt, S. F., & Susan, G. (1993). Sustainable tourism
development in Wales. Tourism Management, 14(6), 463}474.
Ozturk, Y. (1996). Marketing Turkey as a tourist destination. Doctoral
thesis, The Scottish Hotel School, University of Strathclyde, UK.
Pearce, D., Barbier, E., & Markandya, A. (1990). Sustainable develop-
ment, economics and environment in the Third World. Aldershot:
Edward Elgar.
Pearce, D. G. (1978). Form and function in French resorts. Annals of
Tourism Research, 5, 142}156.
Ritchie, J. R. B., & Zins, M. (1978). Culture as determinant of the attractive-
ness of a tourist region. Annals of Tourism Research, 5(2), 252}267.
Sezer, H., & Harrison, A. (1994). Tourism in Greece and Turkey: An
economic view for planners. In A. V. Seaton, Tourism the state of the
art (pp. 74}83). Chichester: Wiley.
Sosyal, M. (1982). Turistik kultur (Touristic culture). Milliyet, 17(3),
1982.
State Institute of Statistics. (1997). Haber Bulteni: Yabanci Ziyaretcile
Anket Sonuclari (News Bulletin: Foreign Visitors Survey Results).
Ankara: Devlet Istatistik Enstitusi.
State Planning Organisation (SPO). (1995). Seventh xve year develop-
ment plan. Ankara/Turkey: State Planning Organisation.
Stiefel, M., & Wolfe, M. (1994). A voice for the excluded popular partici-
pation in development. London: Zed Books Ltd.
The Economist. (1996). A survey of Turkey. 8th June.
Thirlwall. (1989). Growth and development. (4th ed.) London: MacMillan
Education Ltd.
Todaro, M. P. (1994). Economic development in the Third World. New
York: Longman.
Tosun, C. (1996) Approaches to tourism development planning at sub-
national level: A case study of Cappadocia in Turkey. Unpublished
MPhil thesis, Strathclyde University, The Scottish Hotel School,
Glasgow, UK.
Tosun, C., & Jenkins, C. L. (1996). Regional planning approaches to
tourism development: The case of Turkey. Tourism Management,
17(7), 519}531.
Tosun, C. (1997). Questions about Tourism development within
planning paradigms: The case of Turkey. Tourism Management,
18(5), 327}329.
Tosun, C. (1998a). Roots of unsustainable tourism development at the
local level: The case of Urgup in Turkey. Tourism Management, 19(6),
595}610.
Tosun, C. (1998b). De"cits in approaches to tourism development
planning in developing countries: The case of Turkey. International
conference of international travel and tourism: Policy, law and man-
agement, 19}21 April 1998. Newcastle upon Tyne: University of
Northumbria.
Tosun, C. (1999). An analysis of contributions of international inbound
tourism to the Turkish economy. Tourism Economics, 5(3),
217}250.
Tosun, C. (2000). Limits to community participation in the tourism
development process in developing countries. Tourism Management,
21(6), 613}633.
 C. Tosun / Tourism Management 22 (2001) 289}303 303

Turizm, Bankasi. (1986). Cappadocia touristic development areas.
Ankara/Turkey: Turizm Bankasi A.S.
Uysal, M., & Crompton, J. L. (1984). Determinants of demand for
international tourist #ows to Turkey. Tourism Management, 11(3),
288}296.
World Commission on Environment and Development. (1987). Our
common future. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
WTO. (1985). The role of transnational enterprises in the development of
tourism. Madrid; WTO.
Young, G. (1973). Tourism: Blessing or blight? London: Penguin.