After reading the article from this module's Sport Tourism

Learn material, answer the following questions:

• What are the practical applications of this research for sport event organizers?
• What concerns, or additional questions, do you have after reading this study?

Articles

Small business owner's perception of the value and impacts of sport tourism on a destination

Nancy Hritz

&Amanda Cecil

Abstract

Sports tourism is perceived to bring significant benefits to a community hosting a sporting event. This purpose of this study was to explore the perceptions of small business owners, who are also residents of a community, on the economic, environmental and social cultural impacts of sports tourism. The results uncovered the level of support for sports tourism among small business owners varied based on the type of small business. This study is an important contribution to the literature and has significant implications for destination marketing organizations, tourism planners, and sport tournament organizers attracting and planning sport events in cities.

Keywords:

• Sport tourism
• event impacts
• small business owners

Introduction

"I would much prefer a city with a symphony than a football stadium" - Small business owner in the Midwest.

All types of tourism brings both positive and negative impacts to a destination. The positive impacts can include the benefits of increased employment opportunities, preservation of heritage and traditions, and development of recreational areas for residents. The downfalls can be inflationary pressure on goods and services for residents, environmental pollution, and increased crime in the community (Goeldner & Ritchie,2012).

Sport tourism can be both an asset and a hindrance to a local economy, environment, and resident way of life. Primarily, sport tourism known to bring large economic impacts to an area. Moreover, sport tourism has helped to revitalize the economies of cities and towns (Weed and Bull,2004). Sports tourism spurs a variety of growth at the local, regional and state levels that has faced hardships or years of tourist inactivity (Higham,2009). A prime example is sports tourism brings in additional tax revenues that feed state budgets. Travel related to sport, both big and small, draws in visitors from distances that yield tax state revenues through gas and sales tax. On a regional level, cities and towns near each other benefit from sports travel. One city hosting a sports event may have visitors spilling over into a nearby city to sightsee, eat, or use accommodations (Daniels,2007).

However, sport tourism also contributes to a destination in other ways. This niche of tourism brings a variety of travelers to an area who seek a wide variety of experiences (Higham,2009). This can bring quality of life benefits to a community by strengthening local traditions and values, as well as, increased political power from a favorable image of the host region (Parent,2008). Yet, not all stakeholders of a sport tourism destination feel the benefit of these events. Why the discrepancy?

It is not uncommon to measure the success of tourism on a destination by visitation numbers and showing increases year-after-year. Tourism needs to be planned and managed effectively if it is to be a success. This requires input from all stakeholders of a destination: residents, government officials, business owners alike. Since tourism can be a positive means on the economy, environment and way of life of a destination, the challenge is how tourism managers can work to enhands responsible, sustainable tourism industry that brings long-term benefits - while at the same time mitigating or perhaps eliminating, adverse effects. Unfortunately, this type of planning has been undertaken after much tourism development has occurred (Archer, Cooper, & Ruhanen,2005).

Aside from the impacts of tourism, there is growing importance and debate on what types of tourism is best for a destination. Archer, Cooper, and Ruhanen (2005) note that what type of tourists the destination's stakeholders desire is one the most important questions tourism planners and city officials should consider. Previous research has shown that stakeholder groups have a preference for one type of tourism over another considering the impacts (Hritz & Hji-Avgoustis,2009).

While research on individual stakeholder groups and tourism is vast, little has examined and compared tourism impacts among multiple stakeholder groups (Byrd, Bosley, & Dronberger,2009). Among the many stakeholders at a destination are business owners representing the tourism industry sectors such as accommodation providers, attractions, and food and beverage vendors (Goeldner & Ritchie,2012). While these businesses are all in the same industry, they may have differing viewpoints on the impacts of tourism and its development. Therefore, more research that compares multiple stakeholder groups, to include business owners, is needed (Hardy & Beeton,2001).

Small business owners in a tourism industry are a unique group of stakeholders. While they represent the business community, many are also residents. An understanding of the support level for tourism by small business is crucial for the success and sustainability of tourism for any destination. Small business owners who support tourism translates to better hospitality to travelers in the area. By gathering their input into the impacts of specific types of tourism, destination managers are developing trust and partnerships for the future. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to build on the existing body of knowledge about stakeholder perceptions of the impacts of sports tourism by examining if differences existed between small business owners representing different segments in the tourism industry.

Literature review

Sport tourism, while seemingly straightforward, is a complex phenomenon to define. Gibson (1998) has one of the most universally accepted definitions as people who travel for leisure away from their communities to watch, participate, and/or appreciate sport activities. These sporting activities include the International Olympics, a national baseball team, a local bocce ball club, health and fitness clubs and mini golf facilities (Gammon and Robinson,1997). Over the years, these broad definitions have evolved to examine whether sport tourism should only be exclusively for competitive and exclude recreational pursuits (Deery, Jago, & Fredline,2004). Recreational sporting activities are undertaken on a person's time away from work and may or may not involve travel. However, Deery, Jago, and Fredline (2004) argue that what all competitive sports tourism definitions have in common is that they are events. The activity itself is organized, require planning, and travel away from a person's community.

Sport tourism has become a cornerstone of many destinations image and culture (Higham,2009). For example, in Augusta, Georgia, the tourism destination's branding and culture is centered on the golf industry - as it has hosted the Masters Tournament for over fifty years (Augusta Convention & Visitors Bureau,2018). Indianapolis, Indiana touts itself as the "amateur sports capital" of the world, as the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) and several national governing bodies, such as the USA Diving and Track & Field) are headquartered in their destination.

Most forms of tourism, not excluding sport, bring beneficial aspects and negative impacts on destinations. The impacts of sport tourism impacts are undoubtedly viewed differently by stakeholder groups such as residents, government officials, and businesses (Andriotis,2005; Puczko & Ratz,2000). Not all stakeholder groups in a tourism destination perceive the impacts of tourism in the same way. Bryd et al. (2006) found that entrepreneurs in the business community perceived tourism differently than other stakeholders in the destination. Their results from participants from rural North Carolina counties, revealed that government officials were more in agreement that the destination benefitted from positive impacts; whereas, residents and the business community were more likely to agree the destination experiences negative impacts. The entrepreneurs, as business owners, more closely reflected the resident's perceptions of the impacts of tourism than the government. This highlights the fact that the social, cultural, economic and environmental impacts of a destination are very complex (Higham,2009).

The hospitality of a tourism destinations is essential to the success of the industry; and therefore the destination should be developed with host community needs and input to gain their support (Andriotis,2005). Without support "is difficult to develop a sustainable tourism industry in the community" (Andereck & Vogt,2000, p. 27). The United Nations World Tourism Organization (UNWTO) posited that to have a sustainable tourism destination, it must take into account current and future economic, social and environmental impacts, while addressing the needs of stakeholders in the community (UNWTO, 2005).

Economic

The economic impacts of sports travel are well documented. Many destinations are now seeing a significant percentage of their hotels booked by groups - which sports events are included. A destination's economy may be bolstered by a one-off major, international sporting events such as the Fdration Internationale de Football Associations' (FIFA) World Cup (Siyabulela,2016) or the International Olympics (Kasimati,2003), to an annual major sporting events such as the U.S. Open Tennis Tournament (Bandenhausen,2015). Importantly regional or local sporting events are also bringing revenue into small to mid-size designations (Gibson, Kaplanidou, & Kang,2012). For sporting events not requiring infrastructure (such as running events), destinations of any size can host and yield economic benefits. Limited service properties tend to book a number of sports tournaments, bringing in significant revenue to a segment that gets left out of traditional, downtown conventions and meetings. Commonly, the majority of spending by travelers to these events was found to be in accommodations, followed by food and drink, and shopping/souvenirs (Wilson,2006).

Given the wide variety of sporting events, the economic benefits are not equal among the types of events (Wilson,2006). Even though events such as the Olympics, and the FIFA World Cup are one-time events, their impact is greater than local or regional events that are held more frequently and regularly. Studies on the impact of sporting events often includes data such the number of outside visitors the event brings to the community, how much they spend, and where they spend it. These economic factors, while important and the most easily recognized, do not provide a complete picture of the impacts sports tourism has on a destination. Other economic impacts include the number of (new) jobs created, leakage, and secondary economic impacts experienced in the community. Leakage, most commonly defined as when money leaves the local economy and prevents secondary impacts "rippling" through a local community (Mules & Dwyer,2005). Leakage occurs when tourism businesses are owned by corporations, thus the money spent at these establishments do not benefit the local community.

Environmental

There is increased awareness of the intangible impacts of sports travel that are difficult to measure (Hinch & Higham,2004; Mules & Dwyer,2005). These intangibles include quality of life issues for local residents and environmental concerns. The magnitude of these impacts depends on the nature of the destination itself - a large, global destination will feel these intangibles differently than a small, rural destination. Furthermore, as sports events tend to occur on a regular basis, either seasonally or annually, the intangible aspects may be all that much harder to measure (Higham,2009).

Collins, Jones, and Munday (2009) explore two quantitative methods for measuring the environmental impacts of sporting events: the Ecological Footprint and Input-Output modeling. The Ecological Footprint focuses on traveler needs and supplies purchased for an event. Therefore, the amount of waste, food and drink purchases can be assessed. The Input-Output model can be utilized for key environmental indicators such as water usage and carbon emissions. Both approaches have the limitation of examining impacts after the fact and the authors suggest gathering data over time to see if the carrying capacity of the destination to absorb the environmental impacts of sport tourism is being reached or exceeded (Collins, Jones, & Munday,2009).

Sport tourism development is closely tied to a destination's physical resources, both natural and manmade (Higham,2009). Sport tourism's growth and subsequent needs for facilities and space, therefore, can make extensive demands on the environment. These can be both short-term and long-term impacts (Higham,2009). Sports tourism can create traffic jams on the day of the event, littering, and noise. An example of an impact that is felt long after the event is over is destruction of the natural environment due to construction of sports facilities and space. The long-term impacts are also considered to damage the overall tourism industry overall. May (1995) reported the long-term environmental implications of the 1992 Albertville (France) Winter Olympic Games that included loss of islands and native habitats, removal of forest lands and reductions in river biodiversity. Permanent and irreversible environmental damage was contributed to the event and implicated in the further stagnation of the winter sports season (May,1995).

Socio-cultural

The social impacts of tourism, including those of sport, are notoriously difficult to measure. These "intangible" costs and benefits include aspects such as community pride felt by locals as a result of holding the event, and event 'product extensions' such as youth clinics associated with the sport and philanthropy for sport scholarships (Mules & Dwyer,2005). Negative social impacts, or costs of hosting a sports event center on the disruption of the daily lives of residents, negatively affecting their quality of life. These include traffic and accidents, crowding in other parts of the city, noise, vandalism and other crimes (Mules & Dwyer,2005). There is evidence that age, proximity to the sports event and the number of years a resident has resided in the community can play a role in how they perceive social impacts. Residents perceive a strain on many public services such as water, electricity and police force (Ritchie, Shipway, & Cleeve,2009).

Moreover, some destinations may have a psychological limit to some forms of tourism. Thus, a community's psychological carrying capacity may be reached when they feel there are too many tourists in their area. This creates additional tension between locals and tourists, and possible conflict (Cooke,1982). The concept of psychological carrying capacity has been rebranded in recent years with the term overtourism and was the subject of the 2018 World Tourism Day Forum (Center for Responsible Travel,2018). The sentiment that locals feel there is too many tourists translates to a disruption of the lives of residents and degradation of the traveler experience (Tourtellot,2018)

Small business

Tourism is unique due to a reliance of small business enterprises (Rogerson,2005). Also referred to as entrepreneurs in the literature, small businesses have the potential to add to the vitality of the destination and the tourism experience (Morrison,2006). To experience the true flavor of a destination and the culture of the local residents, tourists seek out small tourism businesses. According to Bastakis, Buhalis, and Butler (2004), small and medium tourist enterprises "shoulder the distinctive function of offering a local character to the increasingly homogenized tourism packages" (p. 151).

Little is known about the roles of sport tourism, small business, and their relationship to perceived impacts. Small businesses provide a diverse range of tourism products and services while also contributing positively to the tourism economy as a jobs provider (Bastakis, Buhalis, & Butler,2004; Morrison, Carlsen, & Weber,2010). According to Shaw and Williams (1994), there is an absence of studies on small tourism business. Morrison, Carlsen, and Weber (2010) note that research below the "surface level" about what is currently known about the role of small tourism businesses is vastly needed.

Small tourism businesses, such as galleries, independent restaurants, theaters, art studios, bed and breakfasts, and local stores, find it difficult to compete and survive in a chain-dominated economy. However, it is this group of businesses that shapes the destination's image, exposing tourists to the destination's distinctiveness. Small tourism businesses owners are most likely to also be residents, providing further insight into how locals perceive tourism in their area. Many times small tourism businesses are being ignored or overlooked in the tourism planning and development of destinations.

Hritz and Ross (2010) studied the membership of the convention and visitor's bureau perceptions of sport tourism impacts in Indianapolis, Indiana. The membership overall supported this form of tourism in their city, however, they felt more neutral their quality of life has improved due to sport tourism and the construction of sporting facilities has destroyed the natural environment and that sport tourism has encouraged a variety of cultural activities by local residents.

Previous research has found that residents and entrepreneurs (tourism business) does not differ much in their perceptions of tourism impacts (Andriotis,2005; Pizam,1978). Byrd, Bosley, and Dronberger (2009) supported this in their study in a rural tourism destination in North Carolina. They found entrepreneurs were more likely to agree with the resident group of stakeholders that tourism development does not improve a community's appearance and does not necessarily improve the local economy. The government stakeholders felt these were more beneficial impacts. However, they did note one difference that the entrepreneurs rated the statement "tourism development increases a community's quality of life" lower than residents, the local government or tourist group. This was contradictory to further research by Kavallinis and Pizam (1994) who found little difference between residents and entrepreneurs in tourism impacts on quality of life issues.

These studies have grouped the impacts together, with factor analysis, into the categories of environmental, social, and economic impacts. However, this study recognizes the interconnectedness of the impacts and stipulates that small tourism business owners, given their composition of residents and business owners, do not separate one from the other. Therefore, the analysis examines the impacts separately for their magnitude and their influence on the business owner's support for sport tourism development in their city. Additionally, while the previous research has examined the various stakeholder groups separately and collectively, the investigation on the business sector is limited. This study sought to expand on previous work by diving into the business owner as a stakeholder group more closely by examining the types of businesses that comprise the cohort and their perceptions of sport tourism.

Methodology

Data was collected on how small tourism business owners perceive the impacts of sport tourism and if there is overall support for this type of tourism in their communities. Surveys were distributed to small businesses from three different cities within the United States. One city was located on the east coast, one in the Midwest, and one in the West. Each city was similar to the other in population size, types of tourism they currently market to, and are home to a college or university. A team of researchers distributed the survey questionnaire to the business with a mail-in enveloped and followed up via email with an online version.

Participants

The participants for the study consisted of small business owners in who gave informed consent to participate. The small businesses were defined as businesses with less than forty full-time employees and an annual revenue of less than $250,000, or limited infrastructure and assets. A small tourism business consisted of establishments in the following categories: (a) art galleries or studios, (b) performing/visual art center (c) food and beverage establishments (d) retail (including unique gift/souvenir shops) (e) attractions/tours, and (f) accommodations.

Instrument design

The survey instrument was created using the primary work of Chen (2000) on perceived economic, social, and environmental impacts and Bastakis, Buhalis, and Butler (2004) on small business owners. The survey ascertained (a) general business information and (b) perceptions of sport tourism impacts in their destinations. The general business information section collected data such as gender, education, number of years of business ownership, primary activity of the business, ownership type, and information on starting a small business. The sport tourism impacts section asked participants to rate perceptions of this type of tourism on their community, as well as, their overall support. There were three questions each addressing economic, social/cultural and environmental impacts of tourism. The economic impact statements included sport tourism "has created more jobs," "given economic benefits to local people and small business," and "my standard of living has increased considerably." The social/cultural impact statements included "has encouraged a variety of cultural activities," "meeting sport tourists from other regions is a valuable experience," and sport tourism "has resulted in positive impacts on the cultural identity of my community." The environmental impact statements were "roads and public facilities are kept at a high standard due to sport tourism," "has resulted in traffic congestion, noise and pollution," and "construction of sport tourism facilities has destroyed the natural environment." These all were presented on a five point Likert scale with 1=strongly disagree to 5=strongly agree.

Data collection procedure

The research team was divided and assigned to specific areas in each city to visit small tourism business owners and/or managers in person and ask a manager or owner to complete the survey questionnaire. During the visit, if there were not any small business owners or managers available to complete the survey, a self-addressed stamped envelope was provided to return completed surveys by mail. The completed surveys were compiled for data entry and analysis after they were received.

Next, a list of businesses in each destination was identified on site utilizing visitor guides and other marketing material found, such as rack cards. The information was utilized to send physical surveys through the mail and to create an online survey to send via email to the additional small businesses. The mail surveys included a short letter explaining the survey and its purpose, the survey itself, and a self-addressed stamped envelope.

Data analysis

The data was entered into a SPSS for analysis. Descriptive statistics were used to create an accurate profile of the survey participants, business characteristics, and their perceived impacts of sport tourism and their support overall. Multiple one-way analysis of variance (ANOVAs) were calculated to examine differences between small business types and for their support of sport tourism as well as their perceptions of the perceived impacts of sport tourism.

For the ANOVAs the following null hypotheses were tested:

There is no difference between the perceived impacts of sport tourism between the small business types.

There is no difference between small business types and support for sport tourism in their communities.

Results

Demographics

A total of 160 completed surveys were obtained out of 472 businesses contacted to participate in the study, resulting in a 33.89% response rate. Frequencies describing the sample can be found in Table 1. Females and males were equally represented in the results with 51.7% and 48.3% respectively. The survey participant most likely to hold a completed undergraduate degree or higher with 88.5%. This is supported by the age of the most typical survey participant as 60.5% were aged 36-65years. The years the business had been owned were spread evenly across the categories, however, 42.5% were open for five years or less and 35.2% open for more than 10years. Most of the businesses were boutiques, unique gift, souvenir shop, or other specialty retail with 42.1% of the sample, followed by food and beverage establishments with 21.1% of the sample. A majority of the businesses for-profit entities either individually (49.3%), jointly, (24.7%), or family-owned (14.0%).

Table 1.Demographics of survey respondents.

Download CSVDisplay Table

The means of the perceived impacts of sports tourism and overall support for sport tourism in their communities differentiated by small business type can be found in Table 2. Those small business owners most in favor of sport tourism in their communities overall were accommodation owners (4.50), food and beverage providers (4.10), and performing/visual arts owners (4.00). Those least in favor of this particular type of tourism were art galleries and studios at 3.41.

Table 2.Type of business, perceived impacts, and support for sport tourism.

Download CSVDisplay Table

Notably for all 10 impact statements, the perception that sport tourism has benefitted the small business was low. For the economic impacts that sport tourism has created more jobs, attraction small business owners rated this statement the highest than other business categories at 3.68. The idea of sport tourism contributing to economic benefits to businesses and local people was rated the highest at 3.80 for performing/visual centers and attraction/tour providers and for accommodation business owners at 3.86. Finally, the benefit of a standard of living increased due to sport tourism was not realized by these business owners as food and beverage business owners rated this statement the highest at 2.93 with attraction/tour owners at 2.90.

The benefits of sport tourism on the small business owner's quality of life were rated somewhat higher. Attraction/tour small business owners again felt sport tourism encouraged a variety of cultural activities (3.50), meeting sport tourists is a valuable experience (3.61), and it has resulted in positive impacts on the cultural identity of the community (3.47) than other types of small businesses.

The perceived environmental impacts of tourism of roads and public facilities kept at a high standard of tourism was at best rated neutral as the highest by performing/visual arts owners, food and beverage establishments, and attraction/tour small business owners at 3.00. Accommodation owners felt the negative impacts of roads and other public facilities kept at a high standard due to sport tourism by a rating of 1.86. The concept of sport tourism resulting in traffic, noise and pollution was agreed upon the highest by performing/visual arts owners at 3.40 with retail small business owners and attraction providers rating this statement at 3.27 and 3.29, respectively. Finally, the negative impact of sport tourism facilities construction destroying the natural environment was agreed most highly by performing/visual arts small business owners (3.40), while accommodation business owners disagreed with the statement at 1.57.

Lastly, a series of ANOVAS were performed to compare simultaneously the means of two or more groups seeing theFdistribution and probability value (pvalue) set a priori at .05 (Lind, Marchal, & Wathen,2015). Before ANOVA could be calculated, several assumptions needed to be met. First the population is independent of one another. Next an examination of the histograms revealed a normal distribution with a skew around the mean with no outliers. Lastly, a Levene test of homoscedasticity was performed for each ANOVA to ascertain the homogeneity of variance since the groups sizes were unequal. In this case a non-significant result (higher than alpha level .05) for the Levene test statistic is desired (Lind, Marchal, & Wathen,2015). For each, the test was not significant and therefore the null hypothesis that the variances are equal cannot be rejected. Multiple one way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and least significant difference (LSD) post hoc analysis examined the differences in the perceived impacts of sport tourism among the small business types.

Results indicated three significant ANOVA differences among the business types. The first difference was found for the impact statement that "sport tourism has encouraged a variety of cultural activities" (F=8.726,p=.003). The LSD post hoc analysis showed that attraction owners felt that sport tourism encouraged more cultural activities than art galleries, performing/visual art centers, and retail small business owners. A second difference was found in among the businesses in the perception the construction of sport tourism facilities has destroyed the natural environment (F=10.478,p=.001). The LSD test showed that performing/visual arts centers more agreed with this statement than accommodation business owners. A final difference was found in their overall support of this type of tourism (F=5.029,p=.025). This LSD test revealed that performing/visual arts centers, food and beverage businesses, and accommodation owners more readily supported sport tourism than art galleries.

Discussion/conclusions

The results both descriptively and the ANOVAs reveal that the perceived benefits and drawbacks of sport tourism are not experienced evenly across small business owners. From a descriptive point of view, owners of attraction/tour companies perceive the individual impacts of sport tourism more beneficial than other types of business owners. However, other types of businesses such as accommodation, food and beverage, and performing/visual arts facilities supported that type of tourism overall.

More troubling is the lack of economic benefit perceived by the business owners by sport tourism. The average score for all the participants on the statement "my standard of living has increased considerably" due to sport tourism was 2.80. This illustrates that while sport may be contributing to the local economy in some ways, business owners are not perceiving this form of tourism as improving their financial position. This may be to leakage with outside contractors and caterers benefitting from sports events. Additionally, the business owners did not feel that roads and other public facilities are kept at a high standard due to sport tourism. This is similar to how local residents perceive the impacts of sport tourism in their communities (Andriotis,2005; Kavallinis & Pizam,1994).

The attraction/tour operators also felt that sport tourism contributed to a variety of cultural activities by local residents with a significant ANOVA results than performing/visual arts centers. The performing/visual arts centers also identified with the negative impact of construction than other types of businesses. Art galleries also favored sport tourism in the community least among the other groups. Finally, art galleries and performing/visual art centers tended to not agree with many beneficial impacts of sport tourism and identify with the negative impacts from a descriptive level.

It appears from these findings that performing/visual arts centers and art galleries are at odds with sport tourism. This highlights that not all businesses feel the benefits from all types of tourism at their destination. While accommodation, food and beverage and attraction/tour companies experience economic and social benefits, others do not. The same missed results and support may appear when examining other types of tourism such as cultural, convention, or cruise tourism. This illustrates the importance of having community discussions of what type of tourists are desired for destinations. Given the mix of businesses in the community (and subsequent desire of types of businesses), one form of tourism may be better than another. This would ensure the support of stakeholders, and ultimately the success and sustainability of the destination.

While destinations may choose to involve stakeholders for discussion on what types of tourism a community may accept, how can destinations better manage the tourism they currently have, such as sport tourism? Spreading out the economic benefits to all types of businesses may alleviate any discrepancies in the financial benefits as previously mentioned, and there may be a number of strategies for overcoming the psychological impacts of overtourism. Destinations can concentrate on sport tourism groups outside of their peak seasons to help spread the affects more evenly. Moreover, destination managers can work with sport tourism groups with their down time from their sporting activity in planning activities and eating experiences that don't compete with local areas and adversely affect their quality of life.

Limitations

This study contained a number of limitations that prohibit wide generalizations. For the research findings are limited to those small businesses the researchers could locate and contact for participation. However, the study did locate over 400 businesses and obtained a 33.89% response rate from those participants. Moreover, the diversity of the participants in types of businesses represented is limited. Additional research with a larger sample of all types of small tourism businesses would yield a greater understanding of the issues. For example, do the small business owners feel they are in competition for facilities and space with the sport groups? Finally, the study was also limited in its lack of qualitative design. More open ended questions, and use of a focus group would allow for greater understanding of the businesses' perspective on sports tourism, and possible solutions for any negative impacts.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

PreviousarticleViewissue table of contentsNextarticle

References

• Andereck,K. L., &Vogt,C. A. (2000).The relationship between residents' attitudes toward tourism and tourism development options.Journal of Travel Research,39(1),27-36. doi:10.1177/004728750003900104[Crossref],[Google Scholar]
• Andriotis,K. (2005).Community groups' perceptions of and preferences for tourism development: Evidence from Crete.Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Research,29(1),67-90. doi:10.1177/1096348004268196[Crossref],[Google Scholar]
• Archer,B.,Cooper,C., &Ruhanen,L. (2005).The positive and negative impacts of tourism.Global Tourism,3,79-102.[Crossref],[Google Scholar]
• Augusta Convention & Visitors Bureau (2018).About Augusta Georgia. Retrieved fromhttps://www.visitaugusta.com/plan/about-augusta/[Google Scholar]
• Bandenhausen,K. (2015).Business is booming at the U.S. Open.Retrieved fromhttps://www.forbes.com/sites/kurtbadenhausen/2015/09/10/business-is-booming-at-the-u-s-open/#125940e078a6[Google Scholar]
• Bastakis,C.,Buhalis,D., &Butler,R. (2004).The perception of small and medium sized tourism accommodations on the impacts of the tour operators' power in Eastern Mediterranean.Tourism Management,25(2),151-170. doi:10.1016/S0261-5177(03)00098-0[Crossref],[Web of Science ],[Google Scholar]
• Byrd,E. T.,Bosley,H. E., &Dronberger,M. G. (2006).Comparisons of stakeholder perceptions of tourism impacts in rural eastern North Carolina.Tourism Management,30(5),693-703. doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2008.10.021[Crossref],[Google Scholar]
• Center for Responsible Travel. (2018). Overtourism: Seeking solutions. Retrieved from:https://www.worldtourismdayforum.com/[Google Scholar]
• Chen,J. (2000).An investigation of urban residents' loyalty to tourism.Journal of Hospitality & Tourism,24(1),5-19. doi:10.1177/109634800002400101[Crossref],[Google Scholar]
• Cooke,K. (1982).Guidelines for socially appropriate tourism development in British Columbia.Journal of Travel Research,21(1),22-28.[Crossref],[Google Scholar]
• Collins,A.,Jones,C., &Munday,M. (2009).Assessing the environmental impacts of mega sporting events: Two options?Tourism Management,30(6),828-837. doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2008.12.006[Crossref],[Web of Science ],[Google Scholar]
• Daniels,M. J. (2007).Central place theory and sport tourism impacts.Annals of Tourism Research,34(2),332-347. doi:10.1016/j.annals.2006.09.004[Crossref],[Web of Science ],[Google Scholar]
• Deery,M.,Jago,L., &Fredline,L. (2004).Sport tourism or event tourism: Are they one and the same?Journal of Sport & Tourism,9(3),235-245. doi:10.1080/1477508042000320250[Taylor & Francis Online],[Google Scholar]
• Gammon,S., &Robinson,T. (1997).Sport and tourism: A conceptual framework.Journal of Sport Tourism,4(3),11-18. doi:10.1080/10295399708718632[Taylor & Francis Online],[Google Scholar]
• Gibson,H. J. (1998).Sport tourism: A critical analysis of research.Sport Management Review,1(1),45-76. doi:10.1016/S1441-3523(98)70099-3[Taylor & Francis Online],[Google Scholar]
• Gibson,H. J.,Kaplanidou,K., &Kang,S. J. (2012).Small-scale event sport tourism: A case study in sustainable tourism.Sport Management Review,15(2),160-170. doi:10.1016/j.smr.2011.08.013[Taylor & Francis Online],[Web of Science ],[Google Scholar]
• Goeldner,C. R., &Ritchie,J. R. (2012).Tourism: Principles, Practices, Philosophies.12thed.,Hoboken,NJ: Wiley.[Google Scholar]
• Hardy,A. L., &Beeton,R. J. S. (2001).Sustainable tourism or maintainable tourism: Managing resources for more than average outcomes.Journal of Sustainable Tourism,9(3),168-192. doi:10.1080/09669580108667397[Taylor & Francis Online],[Google Scholar]
• Higham,J. (2009).Sport tourism destinations: Issues, opportunities and analysis.Sport Tourism Destinations.(pp.17-30).Oxford:Elsevier.[Google Scholar]
• Hinch,T. D., &Higham,J. E. S. (2004).Sport tourism development.Clevedon:Channel View Publications.[Google Scholar]
• Hritz,N., &Ross,C. (2010).The perceived impacts of sport tourism: An urban host community perspective.Journal of Sport Management,24(2),119-138.[Crossref],[Web of Science ],[Google Scholar]
• Hritz,N., &Hji-Avgoustis,S. (2009).An investigation of perceived tourism impacts between market segments.Tourism Today,8,33-53.[Google Scholar]
• Kavallinis,I., &Pizam,A. (1994).The environmental impact of tourism: Whose responsibility is it anyway? The case study of Mykonos.Journal of Travel Research,33(2),26-32. doi:10.1177/004728759403300205[Crossref],[Google Scholar]
• Kasimati,E. (2003).Economic aspects and the Summer Olympics: A review of related research.International Journal of Tourism Research,5(6),433-444. doi:10.1002/jtr.449[Crossref],[Google Scholar]
• Lind,D.,Marchal,W., &Wathen,S. (2015).Statistical techniques in business & economics.Boston, MA:McGraw-Hill/Irwin.[Google Scholar]
• May,V. (1995).Environmental implications of the 1992 winter Olympic Games.Tourism Management,16(4),269-275. doi:10.1016/0261-5177(95)00016-H[Crossref],[Web of Science ],[Google Scholar]
• Mules,T., &Dwyer,L. (2005).Public sector support for sport tourism events: The role of cost- benefit analysis.Sport in Society,8(2),338-355. doi:10.1080/17430430500087864[Taylor & Francis Online],[Google Scholar]
• Morrison,A. (2006).A contextualisation of entrepreneurship.International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research,12(4),192-209. doi:10.1108/13552550610679159[Crossref],[Google Scholar]
• Morrison,A.,Carlsen,J., &Weber,P. (2010).Small tourism business research change and evolution.International Journal of Tourism Research,12(6),739-749. doi:10.1002/jtr.789[Crossref],[Web of Science ],[Google Scholar]
• Parent,M. M. (2008).Evolution and issue patterns for major-sport-event organizing committees and their stakeholders.Journal of Sport Management,22(2),135-164. doi:10.1123/jsm.22.2.135[Crossref],[Web of Science ],[Google Scholar]
• Pizam,A. (1978).Tourism's impacts: The social costs to the destination community as perceived by its residents.Journal of Travel Research,16(4),8-12.[Crossref],[Google Scholar]
• Puczko,L., &Ratz,T. (2000).Tourist and resident perceptions of the physical impacts of tourism at Lake Balaton, Hungary: Issues for sustainable tourism management.Journal of Sustainable Tourism,8(6),458-477.[Taylor & Francis Online],[Google Scholar]
• Ritchie,B. W.,Shipway,R., &Cleeve,B. (2009).Resident perceptions of mega-sporting events: A non-host city perspective of the 2012 London Olympic Games.Journal of Sport & Tourism,14(2-3),143-167. doi:10.1080/14775080902965108[Taylor & Francis Online],[Google Scholar]
• Rogerson,C. (2005).Unpacking tourism SMMEs in South Africa: Structure, support needs and policy response.Development South Africa,22(5),623-642. doi:10.1080/03768350500364224[Taylor & Francis Online],[Google Scholar]
• Shaw,G., &Williams,A. M. (1994).Critical issues in tourism: A geographical perspective.Hoboken,NJ: Blackwell Publishers.[Google Scholar]
• Siyabulela,N. (2016).Using sport tourism events as a catalyst for tourism development in the Eastern Cape Province, South Africa.African Journal of Hospitality, Tourism and Leisure,5(3),1-12.[Google Scholar]
• Tourtellot,J. (2018).Overtourism: Too much of a good thing. Retrieved from:https://www.nationalgeographic.com/travel/features/overtourism-how-to-make-global-tourism-sustainable/[Google Scholar]
• Weed,M. E., &Bull,C. J. (2004).Sports tourism: Participants, policy and providers.Oxford:Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann.[Google Scholar]
• Wilson,R. (2006).The economic impact of local sport events: Significant, limited or otherwise? A case study of four swimming events.Managing Leisure,11(1),57-70. doi:10.1080/13606710500445718[Taylor & Francis Online],[Google Scholar]
• United Nations World Tourism Organization (2005).Making Tourism More Sustainable - A Guide for Policy Makers.World Tourism Organization Publications,UNEP and UNWTO.[Google Scholar]