pleasure of exterior space usage ın samatya

8/2/2019 pleasure of exterior space usage n samatya

1/14

Title:Residents Attitudes and Pleasure Towards Outdoor Space Usage of Samatyas Entertainment

Centers.

Keywords: pleasure, attitude, exterior space usage, Samatya Sqaure

H1: Social status of the residents are effective on the formation of their satisfaction and attitudes

towards outdoor space usage of restaurants at Samatya Square.

1.Introduction

1.1 The aim of the research

1.2 Hypothesis

1.3 Significance

2. Residents Position in Touristic Places

2.1 Sustainable Tourism Planning Theory

2.1.a Residents Participation to Tourism Development

2.1.b Factors thatDetermine Residents Attitudes and Social Status Theory

2.2 Tourism Development at Samatya

2.2.a Samatya

2.2.b Current Tourism Activities at Samatya

2.2.c Outdoor Space Usage and ResidentsAttitudes at Samatya

3. Methodology

3.1 Results and Discussion

4. Conclusion

5. References


2/14

1. Introduction

Local communities are known as the key stakeholders in leisure and tourism management.

Tourism has to be managed with the help and interest of all stakeholders in a given territory with a

focus on local inhabitants (Guyer and Pollard, 1997). Considering the importance of residents who

have a key role in tourism, many studies have been carried out by researchers in developed countriesabout local community perceptions toward tourism. But unfortunately, hardly any work has been

devoted to examine residents attitudes on touristic places from the view of architecture.

This research aims to seek about the residents attitudes and pleasure about the touristic

entertainment areas, specifically the outdoor spaces of these places at Samatya Square. Since Samatya

includes both a residential and a touristic character, it is quite appropriate to adopt this topic into the

site. Samatya Square is a lively touristic place with its taverns and restaurants that open to the square.

At that point the spatial condition of the outdoor space usage of entertainment places play an important

role for this research with its interface character that creates a tension between tourists and locals.

With no difference from other touristic places, at Samatya Square, increasing number of taverns and

entertainment venues are arranged according to the tourists demands. Activites and organizations are

made by local administrations and Samatya is planned to be open to the global tourism market with

big investments.

At that transformation period, a sensitivenees about the locals perception is very necessary for

a balanced and sustainable development process. This research aims to step in to seek residents

attitudes towards outdoor space usage of entertainment areas and determine their pleasure criterias for

further plannings about tourism development at Samatya.

1.1 The aim of the research

The research studies about the residents position in the touristic places. The main idea on

which the research is constructed is that the local peoples attitudes are essential as well as tourists for

a healthy and sustainable tourism development. So, the research aims to find out what criterias are

effective that shape the residents attitudes and satisfaction about the outdoor space usage of

restaurants at Samatya.

1.2 Significance

What is significant for a sustainable tourism is a balanced development process that is

sensitive to residents pleasure as well as tourists demands. The participation of the residents to

social, economic and cultural life at touristic places is essential for the permanence of the place as a

focal touristic region. This research plays a significant role for future tourism plannings conducted by

local administrations by exposing the underlying reasons that residents feel uncomfortable or

displeased. Besides, the research can lead further detailed researches about residents attitudes at

touristic places.

The research contains four parts. In the second part of the research, literature review and main

theories on which the research is based will be presented about pleasure and residents position. Thethird section will explain the methods of the site work, data collection procedures, participants and

evaluation methods. In the fourth and the last part, findings will be evaluated and drawn a conclusion.


3/14

1.3 Hypothesis

The research raises the assumption that the social status of the residents is the determinant

factor for the formation of their satisfaction and attitudes towards outdoor space usage of restaurants at

Samatya Square.

H1:Social status of residents are effective on the formation of their attitudes and satisfaction towards

outdoor space usage of restaurants at Samatya.

H0:Social status of residents are not effective on the formation of their attitudes and satisfaction

towards outdoor space usage of restaurants at Samatya.

In order to test this main hypothesis, 8 different variables for pleasure and attitude; and 3 different

variables for social status is determined. These variables are listed like following:

Variables about social status are determined based on the social status theory of Michelson (1970) that

he categorizes social status under three factors which are salary, education and occupation. Thevaribles for pleasure and attitude of residents are determined based on the social exchange theory that

categorizes the impacts of tourism under social, economic and environmental aspects.

2. Residents Position in Touristic Places

2.1 Sustainable Tourism Planning Theory

Tourism is often characterized by haphazard development that generates unevenly distributed

benefits. Such circumstances apply especially to rural communities, in which few residents stand to

benefit directly from tourism. Many communities experience economic leakages, in which most of the

profits from tourism leave the community. This outflow occurs mainly because those who have

decision-making authority over tourism development reside outside the community. This situation can

lead to the eventual deterioration and abandonment of tourism destination sites, leaving the local

people worse off than before tourism development began (Mitchell and Reid 2000).

According to the sustainable tourism theory, in order to minimize the threats of the developing

tourism, there is a need for dialogue, cooperation, and collaboration among the various stakeholders

involved (Aas et al., 2005). Arrangements about touristic places are being performed without a


4/14

sensitiveness about habitants comfort. Instead, tourist pleasure is the only issue to be focused by

investors. Habitants attitudes are generally left outside of this development process.

Extrem examples of this situtation can be seen in the unhealthy and ubalanced transformationprocess of a place that exceeds without any attendence of local habitants. Loss of community identity

and local culture often occurs when a high growth rate with poor planning and growth management

are combined. (Rosenow and Pulsifer, 1979) Therefore, development and the transformation periods

should be definetely planned taking account of habitants attitudes as well as tourist pleasure. The

sresidents involvement must be included in any sustainable tourism plan in order to reduce conflict

(Byrd 2007).

Menningg (1995) noted development of sustainable tourism in a community is not simply a

matter of matching product supply with tourist demand. Local acceptibilty must also be considered. As

Richardson and Long (1991) argued, residents leisure needs and wants must take precedence over

development for tourists. Concern with residents desires is obviously necessary to maintain support

for tourism given their permanent status within the community.

2.1.aResidents Participation to Tourism Development

Tourism development should consult the participation of local groups and their opinions.

Dijanira Rojer states that one important step towards achieving sustainable tourism is a plan and the

inclusion of the different stakeholders in the tourism development.(2009) On the other hand McCool

and Moisey indicates that the level of resident participation in tourism management varies in different

countries. Compared with many developed countries, local residents in many third world countries do

not have the opportunities to share in the decision making process of tourism development.(2001)

Mowforth and Munt have discussed and provided vast evidence on how local communities in third

world countries have been exploited. Little control is given to them to steer the direction of tourism

development in their region. Their views are rarely heard. (2003)

The issue of residents perception, attitude or pleasure has been studied by many disciplines.

Many of them deal with the problem within a more general framework than this research aims to do.

Most of the researchers handle the residents attitudes issue towards tourism case as a general mean.

This research seks to find out more specific evidences about spatial attitudes in architectural field.

Anyway a general look to the literature about the subject will be essential to understand the issue. As

an overall framework, many authors have suggested that attitudes tend to fall into three basic

categories; economic, sociocultural and environmental. Other types of attitudes such as support foradditional tourism, perceptions of personal benefit from tourism and other varibles have also been

considered.

2.1.b Factors thatDetermine Residents Attitudes and Social Status Theory

As discussed above, it is important to understand local residents attitudes toward tourism

development in order to plan and develop tourism in a sustainable manner. Accordingly, local

residents attitudes toward tourism have been widely examined in the literature. Harrill (2004) outlined

three types of factors that influence attitudes toward tourism development: sociocultural factors,

environmental (spatial) factors, and economic factors.


5/14

Early studies of resident attitudes often rested on the ontological perspective that communities

are relatively homogeneous places whose residents either generally support or do not support tourism.

It did not take long for researchers to determine that there is often great heterogeneity within

communities and as a result great variety in attitudes about tourism development (Snaith and Haley,

1999; Mason and Cheyne, 2000; Iroegbu and Chen, 2001/10) In fact some groups of residents may

find more in common with other residents in neighbouring communities than within their own. Forexample, Iroegbu and Chen (2001) found that male, college educated, urban residents who made more

than 25000 dollars per year were most likely to support for tourism development, regardless of region

of residence in Virginia. Snaith and Haley (1999) found a great deal of variation in support for tourism

development within an historic community in England. In general, those who are not economically

tied to tourism view it more negatively than those who are; those who own their own homes view

tourism development more negatively than those who rent; and those who live far from the city center

are more likely view tourism development more negatively than those who live in town. In other

words, persona characteristics have some effect on the respndents view of tourism development,

perhaps due to the myriad ways in which people with different personal characteristics experience the

impact of tourism. Similarly, Smith and Krannich (1998) found that residents in tourism-dependentcommunties prefer less tourism development and perceive more negative tourism-related impacts than

residets in less tourism-dependent communities.

As obviously seen, attitudes and pleasure criterias vary acording to residents personal

conditions as well as socicultural, economic and spatial conditions. A number of studies based on

social exchange theory have verified a relationship about the attitudes towards tourism. For example,

structural equation models have verified a reationship between support for tourism development and

economic involvement, ecocentric attitudes, residents perceptions about impacts, the state of the

economy, how far residents live from the tourist activities. (Gursoy et al., 2002) According to the

social exchange theory, attitudes and pleasure levels are measured under the categories which are

social, economic and environmental aspects.

The research aims to seek the social factors that affect the attitude and pleasure level of

residents. For an overall framework for the topic, social status theories are also significant to

investigate. In sociology or anthropology, social status is the honor or prestige attached to

one's position in society (one's social position). In pre-modern societies, status differentiation is widely

varied. In some cases it can be quite rigid and class based, such as with the Indian caste system. In

other cases, status exists without class and/or informally, as is true with some Hunter-

Gatherer societies such as the Khoisan, and some Indigenous Australian societies. The German

sociologist Max Weber developed a theory proposing that stratification is based on three factors that

have become known as "the three p's of stratification": property, prestige and power. He claimedthat social stratification is a result of the interaction of wealth, prestige and power. Mitchells social

status theory is intimate to Webers and it classifies the social statue under the categories which are

salary, education and occupation. This theory which the research is based on provides clear and

explicit data in order to measure the social status.

2.2 Tourism Development at Samatya

2.2.a Samatya

Samatya locates at the seaside of Fatih county where the old Byzantine walls end. Samatya is a

very old settlement of Istanbul where Muslim, Armenian and Christian people live together in apeaceful neighborhood with an intricate cultural mosaic. It is known that Samatya Region is as old as
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sociologyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthropologyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prestige_(sociology)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_classhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Societyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_positionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indiahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hunter-Gathererhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hunter-Gathererhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khoisanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indigenous_Australianshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Max_Weberhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_(sociology)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_stratificationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_stratificationhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_(sociology)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Max_Weberhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indigenous_Australianshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khoisanhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hunter-Gathererhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hunter-Gathererhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indiahttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_positionhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Societyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_classhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prestige_(sociology)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthropologyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sociology


6/14

the city itself. In the period of Byzantine Emperor I. Theodosius, Samatya existed as a small village far

from the old city. Samatya conserve its character and identity with its non-Muslim residents even after

the Fatih Sultan Mehmet conquered Istanbul. Once upon a time 'Little Paris' so-called Samatya is a

place that serves a delightful life with its taverns, casinos, fishermen, delicatessen, sport activities and

boat trips along coast in summer times. This lively and multicultural life gradually perished after the

big migrations at 6th-7th of September 1950. Since then, Samatya has been living with its newhabitants immigrated from the east part of Turkey with a few Armenian and Christian families left. In

the present day we cannot say it lost all its identity and soul. The region sustain its existence with an

increasing number of taverns, fishermen culture and surviving authenticity as a tourisric destination.

2.2.b Current Tourism Activities at Samatya

Samatya has been a touristically attractive district with its multicultural and identical character

since hundreds of years. Samatya did not lose all its identity and cultural mosaic however, it has been

damaged seriously since the unfortunate migration movements at history. But nowadays, it tries to

create new touristic attractions as well as to sustain its historical and cultural context. With the studies

conducted by local administrations, Samatya has been entering a new transformation period focusing

on the touristical investments and activites. TURAD plays an important role that undertakes this

transformation and healing studies. TURAD prepared a project that aims to vitalize Samatyas tourism

potential to appeal both local and foreign tourists. With the scope of this project, studies about the

outdoor spaces play a huge role. At first stage, a logo was designed to be used at the outdoor spaces

like tents, shopwindows etc. Afterwards, the tableclothes and tables were renewed, the equipments

used for service are renewed, the facades that looks through the square was painted and repaired, the

outdoor spaces of the retaurants were taken under a regular control. Besides them, a new city image of

Samatya that highlighted the fish and rak culture was strengthened by the arranged activites and

advertisements, music festivals were organized and service trainings were given to the personal

working at restaurants. These attempts improves the existing tourism potential of Samatya. Theincreasing number of taverns and incoming tourists are the vast evidences of this touristic

transformation and healing process.

2.2.c Outdoor Space Usage at Samatya and ResidentsAttitudes at Samatya

In touristic centers of the city, outdoor spaces play an important role in displaying an attractive

touristic image and a social atmosphere. Because it is the interface that tourists confront and start to

perceive the place at first step. The identitiy, sociabilty and the quality of a place reveals itself by this

interface. Therefore, outdoor space usage comes into prominence and becomes a dominant component

of a touristic place. So long as the global tourism evolves, touristic places start to invest in outdoor

arrangements and designs in order to attract more tourists. Physical arrangements of the place and

presentation of the service are tried to be improved to enhance the touristic character and the quality of

the place.

Outdoor space usage is also a very critical issue for Samatya as a fast growing touristical

region. Samatya Square, which is very dominant among touristical attractions at Samatya, is full of

recreational areas devoted to tourists like taverns, restaurants, etc. There are a few grocery shops and a

pet shop that looks towards the square. Rest of all the shops that locate at ground floor are functioned

as touristical entrtainment areas. There are 14 fish restaurants with music, 8 meat restaurants and 5

mixed restaurants that locate at the square. All the facilities use their outdoor patios with tables and

chairs. These outdoor spaces creates a lively image especially at nights with its lights, musics and

crowd. The restaurants serve at day times too. For Samatya, the outdoor spaces of restaurants are

dominant factors that shape and effect the character of the whole square with their proximity andvisual relation to daily life and pedesterian roads.


7/14

The outdoor spaces that are devoted to the touristical use, is a very dominant element for the

visual, social and cultural characteristic of the square indeed. The square is the place where all

Samatyas daily life is passing within it and where the residents of Samatya use it densely in a day.But, a remarkable part of the sqaure is excluded from the residents use because of their touristicalvalue. At this situation, the relationship between the residents and the outside spaces of restaurants

comes into prominence. The question remark rises from this tension. The research is situated at this

tension point and asks if the residents are pleased and satisfied about these outside spaces that they are

excluded from. Further questions try to find out that what factors are effective on the pleasant and

satisfaction level of residents towards these outdoor spaces. The research aims to investigate the

relationship between the social status of the residents and the satisfaction and attitudes of them

towards outdoor spaces of restaurants at Samatya Square.

3. Methods

The aim of the research is to investigate if there is a relationship between residents socialstatus and their satisfaction and attitudes towards outdoor space usage at Samatya Sqaure. The main

source of information for this quantitative study is questionnaries with Samatya residents. Before

preparing the questionnaires, literature review about the topic was done and main theories about thesubjects was investigated. The number of participants are 40. The participants were selected randomly

and were approached by asking them if they had a few minutes to fill the questionnaries about

Samatya.

The questions are categorized under two topics. At the first part, the demographic questions

were prepared. At the second part, questions that investigate the residents satisfaction and attitudeswere prepared by using a 5 point Likert Scale Method.

The independent variable of this hypothesis is the social status and the dependent variable of

the hypothesis is residents pleasure and attitudes towards outdoor space usage of restaurants. 8

different variables for pleasure and attitude; and 3 different variables for social status is determined.

Variables about social status are determined based on the social status theory of Michelson (1970) that

he categorizes social status under three factors which are salary, education and occupation. The

varibles for pleasure and attitude of residents are determined based on the social exchange theory that

categorizes the impacts of tourism under social, economic and environmental aspects. The variables

are tested by crosstabs and Chi-square analyzes with the help of the SPSS Inc Software.

Demographic data that is used for the research is given in the following chart. These data are

categorized under the categories that are age, gender, occupation, education and salary.

(demografik datalar belirt, bulgular zerinde konu)


8/14

At this part of the research, the relationship between the factors that constitute social status

and each variables of residents pleasure and attitude will be analyzed one-to-one. The factors that

generate social status will be examined if they create any difference on each variable of

residentspleasure and attitude.

*Pearson Chi-Square x2: ... p: ... p: 0,05 (salary-privacy)

*Pearson Chi-Square x2: ... p: ... p: 0,05 (education-privacy)

*Pearson Chi-Square x2: ... p: ... p: 0,05 (occupation-privacy)

1. paragraf (yerel sakinlerin, restoranlarn d mekan kullanmna ve mahremiyete kar

tutumlarnn / geliregre nasl deitiini yzdeler zerinden belirt / bulgular zerinde kunu)

chi-squaresonucunda edindiin rakam sonucunda gelir ve mahremiyete kar taknlan tutum

arasnda biriliki olup olmadn syle.


tutumlarnn / eitimegre nasl deitiini yzdeler zerinden belirt / bulgular zerinde kunu)

chi-squaresonucunda edindiin rakam sonucunda eitim ve mahremiyete kar taknlan tutum

arasnda birilikiolup olmadn syle


tutumlarnn / mesleegre nasl deitiini yzdeler zerinden belirt / bulgular zerinde kunu)

chi-squaresonucunda edindiin rakam sonucunda meslek ve mahremiyete kar taknlan tutum

arasnda birilikiolup olmadn syle

Bu yntemi kalan 7 alt hipotez (kullanc tutum ve memluniyetleri) iin ayr ayr yap!


9/14

(yerel sakinlerin,restoranlarnd mekan kullanmna vesesekar tutumlarnn :gelire/eitime/mesleegre nasldeitii)

(yerel sakinlerin, restoranlarn d mekan kullanmna ve kalabalakar tutumlarnn :gelire/eitime/mesleegre nasl

deitii)


10/14

(yerel sakinlerin, restoranlarn d mekanlarndaki masa sandelye younluuna ve yayageiinekartutumlarnn :

gelire/eitime/mesleegre nasl deitii)

(yerel sakinlerin, restoranlarn d mekan dzenlemelrineve tarihi dokuyakartutumlarnn :gelire/eitime/meslee gre

nasl deitii)


11/14

(yerel sakinlerin, restoranlarn d mekan kullanmnavemeydandaki ekonomik canllakartutumlarnn :

gelire/eitime/mesleegre nasl deitii)

(yerel sakinlerin, restoranlarn d mekan tasarmlarna kar memluniyetinin :gelire/eitime/mesleegre nasl deitii)


12/14

(yerel sakinlerin, samatya meydannn elence amal kullanmasn kar memluniyetinin :gelire/eitime/meslee gre

nasl deitii)

Bu tabloda: herbir kullanc tutum ve memluniyetinin, sosyal staty oluturan faktrlerle

(gelir,eitim,meslek)olan ilikileri toplu olarak gsterilecektir.(chi-square sonular dogrultusunda)


13/14

6. References

1.Aas, C., Ladkin, A., Fletcher, j. (2005). Stakeholder Collaboration and Heritage Management.Annals

of Tourism Research, 32(1), 2848.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160738304001021

2.Rosenow, J.E. and Pulsifer, G.L. (1979) Tourism: The Good, The Bad and the Ugly. Media Publishing,

Kansas City, Montana

http://jtr.sagepub.com/content/19/1/30.2.full.pdf+html

3.Byrd, E.T., (2007) Stakeholders in Sustainable Tourism Development and their roles: Applying

Stakeholder Theory to Sustainable Tourism Development.Tourism Review. Vol 62 No. 2/2007http://www.emeraldinsight.com/journals.htm?articleid=1628309&show=html

4.Long, T. Patrick, (1991) Tourism on our terms: Rural community tourism development impacts and

policies, p.58

5.Rojer, D., (2009) Sustainable Tourism Development; Are (All) The Right Stakeholders Considered in

the Development.

http://www.tourism-master.nl/2009/10/26/sustainable-tourism-development-are-all-the-right-

stakeholders-considered-in-the-development/

6.McCool S.F., Moisey N.R., (2001) Tourism, recreation, and sustainability: linking culture and the

environment.p.238, p.255

7.Mowforth M., Munt I., (2003) Tourism and sustainability: development, globalisation and new

tourism in the third world, p.31

8.Snaith T., Haley A., (1999) Residents' opinions of tourism development in the historic city of York,

England, Western Governors' Association, p.595-603

9.Grsoy, D. and Jurowski, C., (2002) Resident Attitudes in Relation to Distance from Tourist

Attractions.

http://fama2.us.es:8080/turismo/turismonet1/economia%20del%20turismo/turismo%20y%20ocio/R

ESIDENT%20ATTITUDES%20IN%20RELATIONS%20TO%20DISTANCE%20FROM%20TOUSTIST%20ATRA

CTIONS.PDF

10.Mason, P., Cheyne, J. (2000).Residents attitudes to proposed tourism developmentAnnals of

Tourism Research, vol.27, pp.391-411

11.Iroegbu, H., Chen, J. S. (2001): Urban Residents Reaction Toward Tourism Development:Do

subgroups Exist?, Tourism Analysis, vol.6(2), pp. 155-161

12. Guyer, C., Pollard, J. (1997). Cruise visitor impressions of the environment of the Shannon-Erne

waterways system. Journal of Environmental Management, 51, 199215.

13. Mitchell, R.E., and Reid, D.G. (2000). Community integration: Island tourism in Peru. Annals ofTourism Research, 28(1), 113-139.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160738304001021http://jtr.sagepub.com/content/19/1/30.2.full.pdf+htmlhttp://www.emeraldinsight.com/journals.htm?articleid=1628309&show=htmlhttp://www.emeraldinsight.com/journals.htm?articleid=1628309&show=htmlhttp://www.tourism-master.nl/2009/10/26/sustainable-tourism-development-are-all-the-right-stakeholders-considered-in-the-development/http://www.tourism-master.nl/2009/10/26/sustainable-tourism-development-are-all-the-right-stakeholders-considered-in-the-development/http://www.google.com/search?hl=tr&tbo=p&tbm=bks&q=inauthor:%22Stephen+F.+McCool%22http://www.google.com/search?hl=tr&tbo=p&tbm=bks&q=inauthor:%22R.+Neil+Moisey%22http://www.google.com/search?hl=tr&tbo=p&tbm=bks&q=inauthor:%22Timothy+Snaith%22http://www.google.com/search?hl=tr&tbo=p&tbm=bks&q=inauthor:%22Art+Haley%22http://fama2.us.es:8080/turismo/turismonet1/economia%20del%20turismo/turismo%20y%20ocio/RESIDENT%20ATTITUDES%20IN%20RELATIONS%20TO%20DISTANCE%20FROM%20TOUSTIST%20ATRACTIONS.PDFhttp://fama2.us.es:8080/turismo/turismonet1/economia%20del%20turismo/turismo%20y%20ocio/RESIDENT%20ATTITUDES%20IN%20RELATIONS%20TO%20DISTANCE%20FROM%20TOUSTIST%20ATRACTIONS.PDFhttp://fama2.us.es:8080/turismo/turismonet1/economia%20del%20turismo/turismo%20y%20ocio/RESIDENT%20ATTITUDES%20IN%20RELATIONS%20TO%20DISTANCE%20FROM%20TOUSTIST%20ATRACTIONS.PDFhttp://fama2.us.es:8080/turismo/turismonet1/economia%20del%20turismo/turismo%20y%20ocio/RESIDENT%20ATTITUDES%20IN%20RELATIONS%20TO%20DISTANCE%20FROM%20TOUSTIST%20ATRACTIONS.PDFhttp://fama2.us.es:8080/turismo/turismonet1/economia%20del%20turismo/turismo%20y%20ocio/RESIDENT%20ATTITUDES%20IN%20RELATIONS%20TO%20DISTANCE%20FROM%20TOUSTIST%20ATRACTIONS.PDFhttp://fama2.us.es:8080/turismo/turismonet1/economia%20del%20turismo/turismo%20y%20ocio/RESIDENT%20ATTITUDES%20IN%20RELATIONS%20TO%20DISTANCE%20FROM%20TOUSTIST%20ATRACTIONS.PDFhttp://www.google.com/search?hl=tr&tbo=p&tbm=bks&q=inauthor:%22Art+Haley%22http://www.google.com/search?hl=tr&tbo=p&tbm=bks&q=inauthor:%22Timothy+Snaith%22http://www.google.com/search?hl=tr&tbo=p&tbm=bks&q=inauthor:%22R.+Neil+Moisey%22http://www.google.com/search?hl=tr&tbo=p&tbm=bks&q=inauthor:%22Stephen+F.+McCool%22http://www.tourism-master.nl/2009/10/26/sustainable-tourism-development-are-all-the-right-stakeholders-considered-in-the-development/http://www.tourism-master.nl/2009/10/26/sustainable-tourism-development-are-all-the-right-stakeholders-considered-in-the-development/http://www.emeraldinsight.com/journals.htm?articleid=1628309&show=htmlhttp://jtr.sagepub.com/content/19/1/30.2.full.pdf+htmlhttp://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160738304001021


14/14

pleasure of exterior space usage ın samatya

Documents