지역주민의 관광영향 인식이 관광정책 갈등요인과 정책수용성에 미치는 영향

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to empirically examine the effect of local residents' perceptions of tourism impact on policy conflict factors and policy acceptance by analyzing the case of Jeju, where numerous tourism development projects have sparked controversies and conflicts in recent years. First, this study reviews existing theories on perceptions of tourism impact, policy conflict factors, and policy acceptance. The findings of the theoretical review were used to develop a model and hypotheses. The perceptions of tourism impact, which constitutes an independent variable in this study, is based on the social exchange theory. In addition, in order to measure comparison (independent variable and dependent variable) and policy acceptance (dependent variable), survey questions were developed based on literature on public administration, policy science, and politics. A questionnaire was developed using the questions, and reviewed by experts. Then, the final questionnaire was completed by improving the validity, appropriateness, and comprehensibility of the questionnaire through a preliminary survey with local residents. The current status of tourism development in Jeju was analyzed to determine the survey areas. Based on the findings, the Animal Theme Park and the Ora Tourism Complex were selected. Then, in order to finalize the participants of the questionnaire survey in the two areas, news articles on two development projects were collected and analyzed. Survey participants were selected based on the findings of the news article analysis: for the Animal Theme Park, residents of twelve villages (Ri) in Jocheon-eup; for the Ora Tourism Complex, residents in Ora-dong and Ara-dong, which are scheduled for a development project, as well as residents of Samdo1-dong, Samdo2-dong, Yongdam1-dong, Ildo1-dong, Ido1-dong, Yeon-dong, and Nohyeong-dong, who were identified as stakeholders for the development project. The survey consisted of online survey and interviews, and was conducted for 20 days from February 26 to March 17, 2021. A total of 340 questionnaires were distributed, of which 313 valid samples were used for the empirical analysis. The collected data were analyzed in a five-stage process using SPSS 24 and SmartPLS 3.0. This study tested 28 sub-hypotheses under 6 main hypotheses. The findings of the analysis can be summarized as follows. First, Hypothesis 1(Hypotheses 1-1 to 1-8) were analyzed to examine the effect of positive perceptions of tourism impact and negative perceptions of tourism impact on political conflict factors, administrative conflict factors, legal and institutional conflict factors, and economic conflict factors. Positive perceptions of tourism impact did not have significant impact on any of the four groups of policy conflict factors, whereas negative perceptions of tourism impact significantly affected all conflict factors. As such, Hypotheses 1-1 to 1-4 were dismissed, and Hypotheses 1-5 to 1-8 were adopted. Unlike the expectation that positive perceptions of tourism impact would be negatively correlated with policy conflict factors, the findings indicated no correlation between the two variables. This finding appears to be attributable to the fact that the term "conflict" itself has negative connotations, and respondents with positive perceptions of the benefits of tourism did not associate the benefits with the negative concept(conflict). As for the effect of negative perceptions of tourism impact on policy conflict factors, the perceptions were found to have the most significant effect on political conflict factors. The findings can be interpreted to indicate that residents who are more negative about the effect of tourism industry or development are more likely to think that political factors arising from the implementation of tourism policies are the most significant causes of conflict. The findings on Hypothesis 2, which addresses the effect of policy conflict factors on policy acceptance, show that political administrative and economic conflict factors have negative effect on policy acceptance. The findings suggest that policy acceptance is undermined by unfairness in policy goals and contents, poor response from administrative bodies, lack of trust toward administrative bodies and operators, and conflicts regarding financial compensation or distribution of profits. On the other hand, the findings do not support the hypothesis that policy acceptance is affected by the lack of experts or expert organizations on conflict resolution, or shortcomings of the relevant laws and systems. As shown in the comparison of the mean values of policy conflict factors, residents do not frequently experience conflicts caused by legal or institutional issues. Nor do they think that there exist great needs for the intervention of conflict resolution experts or organizations. The findings highlight the need for ways to mitigate political, administrative, and economic conflicts perceived by local residents in order to improve policy acceptance through conflict resolution. As such, Hypothesis 2 was partially adopted. Hypothesis 3, which consists of Hypotheses 3-1 and 3-2, relate themselves to the effect of positive/negative perceptions of tourism impact on policy acceptance. Positive perceptions of tourism impact were found to have positive effect on perceptions of tourism impact, whereas negative perceptions negatively affected policy acceptance. The path coefficients of positive and negative perceptions of tourism impact were measured at 0.569 and 0.277, respectively. The findings suggest that increasing positive perceptions may be a more effective way to increase policy acceptance than lowering negative perceptions. By testing Hypotheses 1 to 3, this study sought to examine whether political, administrative, and economic conflict factors have mediating effect on the relationship between perceptions of tourism impact and policy acceptance. The findings support the mediating effect of administrative conflict factors between negative perceptions and policy acceptance. Then, the mediating effect of administrative conflict factors were analyzed in further details. The theoretical review and reliability analysis supported the categorization of negative perceptions into negative perceptions on economic impact, socio-cultural impact, and environmental impact. Thus, this study analyzed the mediating effect between policy acceptance and negative perceptions on each category. The findings confirmed the mediating effect of administrative conflict factors between negative perceptions on environmental impact and policy acceptance. The above findings indicate the importance of the attitude of administrative bodies and project operators, and transparent publication of the relevant information for policy acceptance of local residents with negative perceptions on the environmental impact of tourism development. Hypothesis 4 was tested to examine the regulation effect of external factors between policy conflict factors and policy acceptance. Among the four types of conflict factors, the external effects had regulation effect only on administrative conflict factors. The findings prove that the roles of the media and the press, interventions by NGOs, and public hearings and briefing sessions may make difference in the policy acceptance of residents who think that conflicts are caused by administrative factors. Hypothesis 5 tested how the effect on policy conflict factors and policy acceptance varies depending on residents' opinions regarding local tourism development, including whether they are for or against tourism development, or how much they think tourism development is needed in their areas. First, a comparison of mean values found differences across all factors depending on whether the respondents were for or against development. Among the factors affected by respondents' opinions, only administrative and political factors were found to be different between the groups for and against tourism development. As for residents' perceptions of the need for development, different mean values were reported between the group who thinks that development is highly needed, and the group who thinks that the need for development is low. Differences in the relationship between policy conflict factors and policy acceptance were only found with administrative factors. Lastly, Hypothesis 6 was designed to analyze the effect of residents' demographic characteristics on differences in positive/negative perceptions of tourism impact, perceptions of conflict factors, policy acceptance, and external factors. The demographic characteristics analyzed in this study include: whether residents were born and raised in the development areas; whether residents reside in the development areas; whether residents rely on the tourism industry for their income; and whether residents own real estates in the development areas. Differences in positive perceptions of tourism impact and political conflict factors were identified depending on whether the residents were born and raised in the development areas. Perceptional differences were also found in terms of positive perceptions of tourism impact, legal and institutional conflict factors, and economic conflict factors depending on whether the residents reside in the development areas. Differences were found across all factors depending on whether the residents rely on tourism businesses for their income, with greater differences observed in the mean values of positive perceptions of tourism impact and policy acceptance. A group with a higher level of reliance on the tourism industry reported higher values for perceptions of tourism impact and policy acceptance. A group with a lower level of reliance on the tourism industry reported lower level of perception of policy conflict factors. The residents' ownership of real properties in the development areas did not have statistically significant impact across all factors, with a comparison of mean values showing minimal differences. However, owners of real properties in the areas reported a slightly higher level of positive perceptions of tourism impact and a lower level of negative perceptions. The findings are related to the spillover effect of tourism development. Unlike the development of not-in-my-front-yard facilities, tourism development tends to create expectations that it will raise land and house prices in the area by boosting commerce and attracting move-ins in the areas. To summarize, among the individual characteristics examined under Hypothesis 6, resident status in the development areas and reliance on the tourism industry created significant differences. In addition, residents reported different values for some factors depending on whether they were born and raised in the area, or moved in from other areas. In a democratic society, as its members try to build a local community where diversity co-exists with pursuit of individual interests, conflicts inevitably arise from conflicting values and goals. The contribution of this study can be found in its new interpretation of the relationship between perceptions of tourism impact, policy conflict factors, and policy acceptance, under the assumption that difference in residents' perceptions of tourism development may cause conflicts among them. In order to ensure systemic and continuous control of conflicts regarding tourism development and raise the level of policy acceptance, it is not enough to merely identify the causes and levels of those conflicts. In this regard, this study offers findings that can be used as basic information for the efforts to improve residents' perception of tourism, systematically identify conflict factors, and improve policy acceptance. When addressing conflicts, focus should be on how to manage them rather than avoidance. The researcher hopes that this study will help Jeju Special Self-Governing Province consolidate its drive for timely management of conflicts regarding tourism development, while ensuring that a stable conflict management system secures its place in the province.