Environmental Impacts of Tourism in Mauritius

CHAPTER ONE - INTRODUCTION

Tourism has become the main focus for countries mainly for Small Island developing states and has affected residents in terms of economic, socio-cultural and environmental impacts. So, there is a need to understand how local resident’s perceptions contribute towards tourism. The purpose of the study is mainly to provide a theoretical basis and framework for assessing host attitudes on the environmental impacts of tourism in Mauritius. Tourism and the environment are interrelated; the relationship between tourism and the environment has been universally recognized with the rapid increasing demand of tourists interacting with the natural environment. Tourism has the capacity to preserve as well as to destroy the environment. Studying the environmental impacts is a critical component of understanding how tourism affects the environment in Mauritius. An extensive literature covers the nature of the main interaction of tourist and host, characteristics of host-tourist relationship and their association with the environment. Researchers have been more interested towards the interaction between the tourists and the host. However, there are previous studies that have looked into the issue from tourist perspective. For achieving the purpose of the study a questionnaire was designed and a survey was done among the local residents. For the analysis part, quantitative approach was applied and the aim and objectives were in line with the majority of relevant literature. Consequently the methodology was elaborated, the sampling designs adopted, choice of instrument used, data collection follow the requirements, the limitation of the study was discussed and this leading to the conclusion and recommendation of the study.

1.1 Profile of Mauritius

Mauritius is a small island in the Indian Ocean situated in the African continent. The area of Mauritius is about 2,040 sq.km. and its population is around 1.3 million. The ethnic groups consist of: Indo-Mauritians 68%, Creoles 27 %, Sino-Mauritian 3% and Franco-Mauritian 2%.Religions found in Mauritius are: Hindu 48 %, Creoles 27 %, Muslim 16.6 %, Christian 8.6% and others 2.5 %. Since 1968, Mauritius has evolved from a low-income, agriculturally based economy to a middle-income diversified economy with growing industrial, financial and tourist sectors. The economy rests on sugar, tourism, textiles and apparel and financial services and it is also expanding into information technology. Annual tourism growth has been in the range of 5 % to 6%. This remarkable growth has led to more equitable income distribution, increased life expectancy, lowered infant mortality and much improved infrastructure. Mauritius is has become is one among the most successful and competitive economies in Africa; 2010 GDP at market prices was estimated at $9.5 billion and per capita income at $7,420, one of the highest in Africa. Moreover, Mauritius also has international relations with countries found in the west ,with India and countries of southern and eastern Africa. It is a member of the African Union (AU), World Trade Organization (WTO), the commonwealth, La Francophonie, the Southern African Development Community (SADC), the Indian Ocean Commission, the common market for Eastern and Southern Africa (COMESA) and the Indian Ocean Rim Association.

1.2 Problem Statement

Tourism is a major industry and remains a valuable sector in many countries of the world. Tourism also contributes significantly to the country’s economy. Like most destinations; the development of tourism presents challenges to a country’s environment. As tourism development become more widespread, there tend to be changes in the environment (Husband & Harrison, 1996), the capacity to absorb large numbers of people will be challenged (WTO, 1990) and environmental problems tend to rise. Recently, Mauritius has been facing some considerable negative environmental impacts from the tourist industry. This issue is quite debatable, because negative environmental impacts of tourism must be minimized and the aim must be towards building a green Mauritius. The challenge is therefore to maintain the long-term sustainability of tourist industry in Mauritius and subsequently derive benefits from it. Very oftten, tourism is seen as an opportunity for economic development, a tool for natural resource conservation and an opportunity for community development and empowerment of locals. As such, it becomes important to assess resident’s perceptions of the environmental impacts of tourism in Mauritius and to know whether residents support tourism development occurring or not. Understanding resident’s attitudes is complicated. Research shows that resident’s attitudes towards the environment are an indication of support for tourism development (Gursoy, 2002 & Jurowski, 1997). A good understanding of the factors influencing support for development is important for residents, investors and policy makers (Gursoy & Rutherford, 2004). Resident’s must have positive perceptions of tourism in order to sustain tourism development in a country and it is agreed that active support from the host population contributes towards sustainability of a country.

1.3 Aims and Objectives

The aim of this study is to assess resident’s perceptions of the environmental impacts of tourism in Mauritius. Tourism impacts are very complex to model as such investigating resident’s perceptions is a good method to analyze the status of tourism impacts prevailing in a country and to know resident’s support for future tourism development. The purpose of this study is therefore, to analyze environmental impacts in Mauritius resulting from tourism activities with the objectives to understand the nature of these impacts. To meet the above goals, four specific objectives have been developed.

The objectives are as follows:

1. To investigate resident’s perceptions of the environmental impacts of tourism in Mauritius
2. To find out if residents in Mauritius are aware of environmental issues
3. To investigate the extent to which locals are involved in sustaining the environment
4. To measure resident’s attitudes and responsibility towards environmental practices  

Following these objectives two hypotheses have been put forward for testing.

H1: There is a significant relationship between length of residency and positive environmental impacts of tourism

H 5: There is a significant relationship between gender and environment oriented activities

1.4 Outline of dissertation

Chapter 1 - Introduction

This chapter outlines the purpose of the research and the layout of the dissertation. The profile of our study that is Mauritius is also found in this chapter.

Chapter 2 - Literature Review

In this chapter, the literature review consists of the various issues such as: resident’s perceptions towards tourism, positive and negative environmental impacts of tourism, tourism development and environmental sustainability in Mauritius.

Chapter 3 - Methodology

This part covers the type of methodology that was used for conducting the survey and also highlights the limitation of the survey.

Chapter 4 - Results and Discussions

This part shows the results obtained from the questionnaires that were distributed to residents in different regions. Data has been analyzed using graphical and Statistical Package for the Social Science (SPSS) Software.

Chapter 5 - Conclusions and Recommendations

The last part identifies the possible solutions for the problems encountered with the poor involvement of locals and of the positive perceptions of residents towards environmental impacts of tourism, leading to a concluding note of the project.

CHAPTER TWO - LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Introduction

The Tourism Industry is regarded as one of the most important and fastest growing industry around the world. Travel has been of great interest to people since the beginning of the civilization. Recently, it has been noted that there has been an increase in tourist’s arrivals, especially in small island states. According to UNWTO, tourism will continue to grow in 2011. Tourism sector has suffered from the global financial crisis in 2008 and 2009, but thanks to the improved economic conditions worldwide, international tourism has been able to recover from the decline brought in the financial crisis (United Nations, 2010). The travel and tourism industry is one of the largest and most dynamic industries in the world and this industry is expected to generate about 9% of global GDP and provide for more than 235 million jobs representing 8 % of global employment (Merco Press, 2010).The WTO has set up the long-term forecast of the assessment of the development of tourism up to the first 20 years of the new millennium known as the Tourism 2020 vision.UNWTO’s Tourism 2020 vision predicts that international arrivals are expected to be over 1.56 billion by the year 2020. Among the worldwide arrivals in 2020, 1.2 will be within the same region and 0.4 will be long distance travellers. The top three receiving regions will be Europe with 717 million tourists, East Asia and the Pacific around 397 million and the Americas with 282 million, followed by the Africa, Middle East and South Asia (UNWTO, 2011). As such, the tourist will continue to be a flourishing industry in the coming years. Tourism has been described as the smokeless industry that can bring maximum benefit to a community as compared to other economic activities.

2.2 Tourism impacts

There are many academic researchers that have been done on the impacts of tourism. Many local communities believe that tourism bring changes in social, cultural, environmental and economic positions where tourism activities have had a close connection with the local communities (Beeton, 2006; Richards & Hall, 2000).It is imperative to understand and assess tourism impacts so as to ensure that sustainability is maintained in the long-term of the tourism industry (Diedrich & Garcia-Buades, 2008).As such, it becomes important to understand tourism impacts towards the community. Thus, the model at figure 1 helps to illustrate tourism impacts on the community.

2.2.1 Model of Support for Tourism development

In the twenty-first century, researchers on tourism believe that there are two categories of impacts which are the positive and negative impacts and they have a direct occurrence on the host community as a result of tourism development (Fredline and Faulkner, 2000; Upchurch and Teivane, 2000). For example, as Ryan (1991) states that the greatest impacts of tourism will occur when there is a greater gap between the culture and income level of both host and tourist.

Local’s perceptions towards the tourism impacts can vary significantly. According to Sharma (2004), if residents have more positive attititudes towards tourism impacts, tourism development will be more successful in a community. If resident’s benefit from tourism development they support additional tourism planning and development in a community. Gursoy & Rutherford (2004) outlines that tourism developers need to consider the perceptions and attitudes of residents before investing in scarce resources. In addition, understanding of residents perceptions towards tourism impacts can also help in identifying the types of tourism which have the potential for building community capacity (Moscardo, 2008, p.86). So, there exist different types of tourism impacts which have been discussed in details.

2.2.1 Economic impacts

In the beginning, tourism was encouraged because of its economic impacts. It is highly accepted that tourism provides economic benefits to the community..Economic impacts are easier to research in a local community because it is small and generally it is more accessible. Moreover, tourism bring positive benefits on local economies and creates a visible impact on a country’s national GDP growth which can be an essential component for community development and poverty reduction. (Ashe, 2005). For instance, tourism creates employment for locals, investment opportunities, business opportunities, tax revenues for government and it also help small and medium enterprises for countries, regions and communities to expand (Ryan, 1998; Choi & Sirakaya, 2005; Dyer, 2007) but on the other hand tourism can have negative economic impacts on the society such as: too much dependency on foreign capital, inflation , leakages and a low education trap for locals (Giannoni & Maupertus, 2007). Yet, more important is the benefits spread to the residents of local communities (Scheyvens, 2001).

2.2.2 Social and cultural impacts

According to (Law, 1993) social and cultural impacts refer to changes to resident’s everyday experiences as well as to their values, way of life and intellectual and artistic products such as: arts, artifacts, customs, rituals and architecture. Social and cultural impacts are strongly interrelated and not limited only to the host area population (Glasson, 1995, p.34).In many destinations, the nature and traditional meanings of culture may be substantially changed when culture is redefined as market share (Earrington and Gewertz, 1996). Because of this, a host community may face cultural problems of the commercialization of culture, religion and the arts together with the misuse of indigeneous culture as attractions and be forced to adopt cultural habits of the tourists, such as their language, dress and manner to satisfy visitors (Cohen, 1979).Another downside of tourism development is seen in many parts of the world where tourism developments threaten the displacement of local people. On the other hand, (Glasson, 1992) argues that along with the downside of development, there are cultural benefits and intercultural communication between hosts and visitors that increase good understanding between them and without tourists, local culture and tradition may have been lost completely, as there is no market for traditional products.

2.2.3 Environmental impacts

Environmental impacts occur as a result of tourism development in many regions of the world as communities struggle to find an optimal balance between optimal and conservation. Recently, it has been found that tourism activities are highly dependent on the environment. Research has shown the impacts that tourism has on natural resources (Green, Hunter and Moore, 1990).Most of the researchers have been conducted on natural or semi-natural areas, with very little research done on urban settings (Green, 1990).Specific sites have been examined such as Alpine areas (Goodman, 1989; Rodriguez, 1987), islands (Wilkinson, 1989), coastal areas (Martinez-Taberner, Moya and Forteza, 1990). In addition, most research has been focused around the negative impacts that tourism has on natural resources after the damage has taken place. As such, tourism is always blamed to be responsible for resource degradation (Farell and McLellan, 1987). Broader perspectives of the environmental impacts of tourism are discussed in the next paragraph.

2.3 The Environmental Impacts of Tourism

“The environment is probably one of the most important contributors to the desirability and attractiveness of a destination. Scenic sites, amenable climates and unique landscape features have an important influence in tourism development and the spatial distribution of tourism movement.” (Coccossis and Nijkamp, 1995, p.4)

Tourism and the environment are interrelated as tourism is dependent on natural resources to survive. There are studies that have identified both the positive and negative environmental impacts of tourism (Burns & Holden, 1995; Puckzo & Ratz, 2000). Some of negative and positive impacts of tourism on the environment are illustrated in table 2.3.

Table 2.3.1 ‘Balance sheet’ of environmental impacts of tourism

For the negative impacts of tourism, Puckzo and Ratz (2000) observed that tourism development that are not well-planned often leads to increased stress on destinations and in negative changes in the destination’s physical and socio cultural attributes. According to Wood (1991), it is possible to identify broad categories of impacts that may affect all destinations. Therefore, it is important to elaborate on the positive and negative impacts of the environment. The negative environmental impacts of tourism can be as follows:

2.3.1 Water Pollution

Water pollution is believed to be one of the environmental impacts caused by tourism. It can affect surfaces such as rivers, lakes and oceans. Chemical and oils spills from boats can cause devastating water pollution that kills water birds, shellfish and other wildlife. Tourists can also contribute to the degradation of the marine life also through:snorkelling,scuba diving and sport fishing can threaten fisheries and other marine resources. For example, tourism is known to have contributed to inappropriate development around Lake Tahoe in the United States (Iverson, Sheppard & Strain, 1993) and at Pattaya in Thailand (Mieczkowski, 1995); oil pollution in water at King George island (Harris, 1991).

2.3.2 Waste Disposal

Apart from the consumption of large amounts of natural resources, the tourism industry also produces considerable waste and pollution. In fact, disposal of liquid and solid waste generated by the tourism industry has posed a problem for many developing countries and some countries are incapable of treating these waste materials. This has led to reducing the availability of natural resources such as fresh water. For example, in Kerala state the tourist industry collapses after two decades of fast growth because there was inadequate disposal of solid waste. Tourists also contribute to land pollution from solid waste and the contamination of marine waters and coastal areas from pollution generated by marinas, hotels and cruise ships. For example: the cruise ships in the Caribbean Sea alone produced more than 70,000 tons of liquid and solid waste a year during the mid-1990s (UN,1999).the cruise sector around the world are facing this problem. In fact, the expansion of the cruise sector ensures that the environment is protected across the world oceans and between the world’s tourist destinations (Johnson, 2002).

2.3.3 Coastal area degradation

Tourism has already had adverse effects on coastal areas, especially in small islands developing states. Beaches are destroyed by sand quarrying and are normally not being replenished because of the destruction of coral reefs by waste disposal and pollution. Erosion occurs because of tourism facilities and infrastructures built too close to beach destruction and coastal degradation. Destruction to coastal areas is the removal of the mangrove forests which act as a home for birds and other animal which act as a barrier against damage to sea. Marine life can be disturbed by intensive use of thrill craft, boat tours and boat anchors. Anchor damage is regarded as one of the danger to coral reefs in the Carribean Sea as there are a growing number of both small boats and large cruise ships in the region (Michael Hall, 2001).

2.3.4 Climate Change

External environmental shocks could be threatened to tourism, especially climate change such as: global warming and sea-level rise. Rises in sea level could threaten tourism activities particularly in coastal regions and small islands. Global warming is expected to change climate temperature and provoke climate events such as: tropical windstorms, coastal flooding and storms that may affect tourist activities in a destination (UN, 2000).

2.3.5 Land Degradation and littering

Land resources include minerals, fossil fuels, fertile soil, forests, wetland and wildlife. Pressures on natural resources have been increased due to intensive tourism development. Tourism can lead to the clearance of native vegetation for the development of new facilities and infrastructure; demand for fuel wood will be increased and even forest fires. Fragile areas such as: rain forests, wetlands and mangroves are threatened by tourism activities. Littering cause by tourists degrade the physical appearance of the environment. For example: tourists on expeditions leave behind their garbage and belongings. Such practices by tourists degrade the environment and some areas have few disposal facilities.

2.3.6 Damage to ecosystems

The delicate ecosystems of most small islands are damaged by tourism activities, because they rely heavily on tourism. Tourism activities which are not properly controlled can also cause severe disruption of wildlife habitats and increased pressure on endangered species. For example, in Africa’s national parks tourists vehicles approach wild animals and very often distract them from hunting and breeding, (Masny, 2001). Trampling occurs by tourists, they use the same trail and trample the soil, causing damage which lead to loss of biodiversity and other impacts. Habitat loss, fragmentation and erosion in Nepal (Croall, 1995); destruction of wildlife at Zakynthos in Greece (Prunier, Sweeney & Green, 1993); disturbance of animals and loss of area for production in Kenya (Sindiga & Kannunah, 1999).

2.3.7 Air pollution

Tourists contribute towards air pollution. Transport by air, road and rail are continuously increasing. Moreover, polluted air and water, dust, fumes from traffic congestion also degrade the quality and natural beauty of tourist destination (Williams, 1998, p.2) .Air pollution is the result of emissions from vehicles. Although, tourism is not so concerned for the overall emissions problems, recent issues such as: ozone destruction, greenhouse effect and global warming make tourism related to air pollution (Wheatcroft, 1991).But tourism is responsible for a large share of emissions, it accounts for more than 60% of air travel.

2.3.8 Noise pollution and visual pollution

It is a fact that noise pollution from airplanes, cars, buses, discotheques and recreational vehicles are becoming an ever growing problem for modern life. Noise pollution cause disturbance and annoyance to the lives of people, stress for humans and it also causes distress to wildlife in sensitive areas. For example, noise generated by vehicles of tourists can cause animals to change their natural activity patterns .There is a lack of planning that fails to integrate tourism structures. Large resorts may clash with indigenous design. Building and structures; poorly designed do not comply with local building control and cause negative impacts on the picturesque scenery (Williams, 1998, p.2). These may include violations congestion of buildings and structures that are not harmonious with the natural landscape.

2.4 Preservation and conservation

On the other side, tourism also contributes positively towards the environment. Tourism is regarded as the catalyst for preserving natural areas. Doswell (1997) argues that tourism lays emphasis to conserve and protect the environment. Tourism also draws attention to subjects regarding biodiversity, natural resources,endangered species and human impacts on the environment. Tourism is also used as a means to preserve natural areas rather than to develop them for alternative uses such as: agriculture, forestry and mining (Master, 1998). Mathieson and Wall (1982) further argued that tourism has fostered the protection of many species since they serve as major attractions. For example, in Ghana tourism has helped in maintaining the natural reserves.. In this way, natural areas become valuable and this can lead to creation of national parks and wildlife parks. National parks in East Africa were developped almost exclusively because they attract large number of international tourists .For example, in Hawaii, new laws and regulations have been set to preserve the rainforest and to protect native species.

2.4.1 Improvement of infrastructure

The government is encouraged to invest more in infrastructure and recreational facilities when there are large number of tourists coming to a destination. As such, there is an improvement on road system, sewage disposal, and telecommunications among others which tourists use. Tourism can also act as a medium for improving the environment, according to Youell (1998) revenue received from park-entrance fees can be used to pay for protecting and managing sensitive areas. On the hand, in some places government collect money from tourists in indirect ways. For example: revenue obtained from recreation of equipment, license fees  obtained from hunting and fishing can help the government to fund and manage natural resources and finance infrastructure. As such the community will be able to benefit from facilities such as: attractive places, signage, lighting, litter bins and renovation of parks.

2.4.2 Creating environmental awareness

People of the community become more environmental conscious of the problems prevailing in the environment. Tourism makes people becomes more environmental conscious. As such, people’s behavior towards the environment will change. Ross & Wall (1999) suggested, tourism has the potential to contribute to both conservation and development and it involves the creation of positive synergetic relationships among tourism, biodiversity, and local people through the application of appropriate management strategies.

2.5 Resident’s perceptions towards tourism

Sustainable tourism development can be achieved normally when all stakeholders are involved in tourism development process (Bryd, 2007). Sustainable tourism believes that the community is the focal point of tourism and planning process (Choi and Sirakaya, 2005).In addition, investigating the resident’s perceptions towards tourism is important because it influences their behaviour towards tourism (Andriotis and Vaughan, 2003). Studies show that the perceptions of residents towards tourism differ from resident to resident. Sustainable tourism development largely depends on the host’s acceptability of tourists and tourism-related programs, offerings and activities by locals (Musa, Hall, and Higham 2004). The active support of the local population is required for tourism development to occur in a community. One indicator that affect’s tourism development in a destination is the host attitude (Lepp, 2007). In a destination area, the attitudes of the tourists and residents are taken into account. Another factor that is likely to influence the negative and positive impacts of tourist’s destination is resident’s attachment to community. Some researchers, Canan and Hennessy (1989) states that the longer the residents live in a community, the more negative they are towards tourism development. The lengths of residency of locals have a direct impact on tourism development.

Theories such as the attribution theory (Pearce, 1989); dependency theory (Preister, 2008), the social representation theory (Andriotis & Vaughan, 2003), Butler’s (1980) tourist area life cycle, Doxey’s Irridex model (1970), the intrinsic and extrinsic framework (Faulkner & Tideswell, 1997) and the social exchange theory (SET) (Ap, 1982) have been developed  in an attempt to better understand the host perceptions towards tourism. However, it is the SET that have received the greatest attention by scholars attempting to study resident’s attitudes towards tourism and their support towards tourism development (Gursoy & Rutherford, 2004).

2.5.1 Social Exchange Theory

In a tourism context, social exchange theory would mean an exchange of resources between the tourists and the host population where each of them supply each other with valued resources (Ap, 1990).SET implies that residents who gain benefits from the tourism industry are likely to perceive the industry as positive and thus support tourist industry, while those who perceive themselves incurring costs because of tourism would display negative attitudes towards tourism thereby opposing such development. Social exchange theory firmly believes that a need exists to measure the level of active participation of residents in the planning and development process associated with tourism development (Wang & Pister, 2008). But, the theory has been criticized by stating that humans are isolated individuals and they respond like computer machines (Pearce, 1996). Furthermore, this theory needs to be further tested due to the complex nature of residents both in isolation and as collective individuals (Zhang, 2006). So, to have a better idea of resident attitude it is important to look at the intrinsic and extrinsic model.

2.5.2 Factors affecting resident’s attitudes towards tourists

Intrinsic and Extrinsic Model

The factors that affect resident's attitudes towards tourism are intrinsic and extrinsic variables (Faulkner & Tideswell, 1997).The intrinsic variables refer to “the characteristics of the host community that affect the impacts of tourism with the host community” (Faulkner & Tideswell, 1997, p.6) and includes factors such as: employment, length of residence, proximity to tourist zones and involvement within the tourism industry. Length of residency affect tourism development in a community, native born of the community have been found to have more negative perception of tourism development because they are attached to that place (Madrigal, 1995). On the other hand, Bisle and Hoy (1980) found a positive relationship between distance of residence from the tourist zone and perceptions. As regards to community attachment, studies showed that the longer a host has been a resident in the area; as such they become less attached to tourism (Weaver, 2001). Residents who are dependent and involved in the tourism sector are more likely to have positive attitudes towards tourism (Lindberg, 1997). The intrinsic variable shows that the host community is not homogeneous but rather heterogeneous meaning that the perceptions of tourism differ among the residents (Andriotis & Vaughan, 2003)'

The extrinsic factors are “the characteristics of a location with respect to its role as a tourist destination including the nature and stage of tourist activity and the types of tourists involved” (Faulkner & Tideswell, 1997, p.6).The extrinsic factors that are likely to influence host attitudes towards tourism is the stage of tourism development occurring in a destination (Andriotis & Vaughan, 2003) as argued by Butler (1980) and Doxey (1975). The extrinsic factors are: seasonality, type of tourists, particular stage of development, the tourist guest-ratio (Doxey, 1973; butler, 1980; Ap, 1983).Seasonality affect a destination, during peak seasons there is high flow of tourists resulting in economic inflation, traffic congestion and this affect the residents way of lives on the other hand, residents who are dependent on tourism are likely to tolerate these disruptive conditions  (Rothman, 1978; Beliste, 1980; Sheldon, 1984).The type of tourists is another factor that affects resident's perceptions of tourism. Some tourists are independent travellers while others depend on locals, they try adjust with locals they accept the hosts local conditions (Amir, 1985; Page 2003). In understanding resident's perceptions towards tourism, the stage of development is considered among the most important factors. To better illustrate this issue, it was important to investigate Butler's Tourism Destination Lifecycle Model.

2.5.3 Butler's Area Life Cycle

Another model in regard to the host-tourist destination is Butler's Area Lifecycle Model. Although that this model dates three decades, it is still academically recognized. Butler (1980) believes that tourist areas evolve and change over time. According to this evolution, the stages that tourist areas experience are: exploration, involvement, development, consolidation, stagnation, decline or rejuvenation. Using a life-cycle model, Butler describes the resident and tourist involvement in destination area. Unlike products, destinations have a lifecycle too.

Moreover, Butler has also explained why tourism leads to unsustainability. By using the example of the life-cycle model, he describes how a small group of tourists explore a natural attraction by involving local residents and making subsequent development of the area. With time, the number of tourists grows, eventually leading to mass tourism. And if the tourism products are not rejuvenated, stagnation occurs at the destination and there is a fall through over-consumption of tourism products which is beyond the carrying capacity of the destination (including adverse effects on the environment).Butler also focuses that if there is no proper management and control, environment degradation is inevitable once carrying capacity has been reached and then exceeded making mass tourism unsustainable. As noted by Jamison (1999), at the stagnation stage, locals have begun to express some discontent with tourism and its effects. When a destination develops, unmet resident's expectations and other negative impacts of development are also likely to result in changes and attitudes towards the industry. (Teye, Sonmez and Sirakaya, 2002). The TALC S-shaped curve has also been used to describe the host-guest dichotomy- from the excitement of the potential of tourism through to resentment of tourists, resulting from exceeding local social carrying capacity. However, certain limitations have been found in Butler's model. It has been pointed out that the model “assumes a degree of homogeneity of community reactions” (Mason and Cheyne, 2000), but Butler denies by saying “a consistent evolution of tourist area can be conceptualized”.Tosun (2002) suggests that this model applies to specific areas and not all areas because the cycle varies from one tourist area to another and the perceptions of residents differ from each other and they are not homogeneous.

2.5.5 Doxey's Irritation Index

Doxey's Irritation Index or Irridex can be associated with Butler's life cycle theory, which describes the resident-tourist interaction and attitude. This model explains host community reaction to tourism development in a specific area. The model outlines that negative impacts of tourism development might make residents feel irritated as with time host and tourists become incompatible with each other. The model has four stages which vary from euphoria, apathy, annoyance and to antagonism. Although Doxey's (1975) irridex is regarded as one of the most influential theory starting from Euphoria to Antagonism, one limitation of this theory can be identified, is that the model assumes that the community is homogeneous. The study implies that is the whole community that becomes irritated because of tourists, but very often different sections of the community have different attitudes and only part of the community is heterogeneous towards tourism (Zhang, 2006).

2.6 Resident's perceptions towards environmental impacts of tourism

The environment is one of the main area in which residents assess the potential impacts of tourism before they decide to embrace or reject it. According to Kuvan and Akan (2005, p.703) residents are more sensitive and concerned for problems related to the environment than the other negative impacts of tourism. Following this, Liu, Sheldon, and Var (1987) reported that residents have high ratings for environmental impacts. Kuvan and Akan (2005) describe scholars interests in investigating into community attitudes towards tourism impacts on the natural environment at a time when ecological problems such as: pollution, depletion of natural resources and deforestation are increasing. This means that mountaineous areas, savannahs, wetlands, deserts, islands and the arctic have biophysical characteristics that cause damage to the natural environment. These fragile areas when disturbed normally have relatively slow rates of recovery (Harrison & Price, 1996).

The focus on environmental impacts emerged from residents perceived impacts of the environmental impacts and other tourism impacts such as economic and social impacts of tourism has lagged behind. (Kuvan & Akan, 2005).Moreover, there is a lack of information on resident's perceived environmental impacts of tourism in developing countries (Kuvan & Akan , 2005; Madrgal, 1993). It is an agreed fact that tourism is believed to have a far more visible effect in rural areas and developing countries than urban areas and perhaps tourism has a greater effect on rural residents (Madrigal, 1993, p.337), studies related to resident's perceptions of the environment has focused more on destinations, communities and regions in developed countries rather than on developing countries. Furthermore, a proper analysis of the resident's perceived environmental impacts of tourism could help planners and tourism practitioners to identify real concerns and also to develop appropriate policies and actions.

2.7 Tourism development in Mauritius

Mauritius is among the top 20 beautiful island of the world .Tourism contributes towards the economic growth of Mauritius. The World Bank has mentioned Mauritius as an example for southern Africa of an economy that has attained remarkable success in its economic development (World Bank, 1992; Hwedi, 2001). This success as mentioned cannot be escaped from tourism development, given Mauritius as the choice of destination for European visitors (Prayag, 2009; Prayag & Ryan, 2010).Mauritius's tourism industry success can be measured by the fact that it makes the highest gross domestic product contribution (30 per cent) and receives the second highest yearly total budget allocation(16.1 per cent) of countries in southern Africa (Fair Trade in Tourism South Africa [FTTSA], 2009).The Bank of Mauritius estimated that the tourism receipts for the first semester of 2010 were Rs19,809 million, that is, an increase of 8.5 % compared to Rs 18,249 million for the same period in 2009. Mauritius attracted a record of 934,827 tourists in 2010. The number of visitors increased by 7.3 percent compared with 2009 and exceeded an expected 920,000 tourists for 2010.(Bhuckory, Bloomberg;2011). The central statistics office forecasts 950,000 tourists in 2011. In 2010, there were 112 registered hotels in operation, with a total room capacity of 11,362 and 23,168 bed places. The average room occupancy for all hotels for the first semester of 2010 was 64 % (59 % in 2009) while bed occupancy rate averaged 56 % (52 % in 2009) the total number of people that are employed in the tourism industry as of 2010 was 27,161 (Central Statistics office, 2010).

Mauritius has an important place for the tourism industry and this makes it and interesting case study of tourism development and the challenges facing the hotel industry. The core product of Mauritius is the beach holiday with its associated facilities and activities (Archer, 1985). Mauritius remains no doubt an example of enclave tourism since the start of the tourism industry in the 1950s.As such; the principal development model used by tourism planners has been demonstrated to promote few economic or cultural linkages at local and regional levels (Britton, 1982; Wilkinson, 1989; Freitag, 1994; Kokkranikal, 2003). Luxury hotels has been described as the “the concentration camps of leisure with their fences and armed guards”, luxury hotels have been highly criticised for employing too few local workers and contributing far too little to improve infrastructure in local communities (Cohen, 1984; Reid, 1992). It can be noted that Mauritius has over the years benefitted from the increase number of tourists and foreign currency. The enclave model as mentioned above offers the benefits of restricting the number of tourists to specific areas, away from local people , thus at least limiting the negative impacts of tourism (Kokkranikal; 2003). This model continues to persist in Mauritius, while on the other hand its form has changed due to the government's National Tourism Development Plan (NTDP) in 2000, which redefined the island's previous and current position as a high-quality and upmarket tourist destination (Deloitte & Touche, 2002). The change was because of the government concern about the environmental impacts of tourism on the fragile island ecosystems.

2.8 Environmental Impacts of Tourist Industry in Mauritius

Mauritius is among the small island developing states and is known for its outstanding beauty and tropical biodiversity. The fragile nature and population pressures of small island Developing states present many challenges for the conservation of biological diversity (UNDP, Global Environment facility).  The tourism is highly dependent on the physical environment it can be noted tourism in Mauritius brings both positive and negative environmental impacts. Researchers in tourism literature has noted that main islands experience high tourism densities in relation to their population and land area (Archer, 1985;Briguglio & Briguglio, 1996).Therefore, tourism environment impacts in Mauritius has to be managed as the concept of carrying capacity is very critical. Over the years, Mauritius has revised its carrying capacity in order to attain and sustain and even increase the number of tourists coming to Mauritius, and the government has revised its target growth and is expecting 2 million tourists by the year 2015.To achieve this objective, an annual growth of 10 per cent will be necessary. Clearly such an approach is contradictory to principles of attaining sustainable tourism development. SIDS reach their original level of visitors very quickly, but as they increase tourist numbers the natural ecosystem suffers damages. (Briguglio & Briguglio, 1996). Very often, lack of experience and expertise in tourism development often makes it difficult for island commnunities to absorb and manage the inevitable impacts of tourism. (Kokkranikal, 2003).

While tourism is believed to be less environmentally destructive than any other forms of development on tropical islands, many types of the negative environmental impacts may be related to tourism development (Wilkinson, 1989). For example, in Mauritius, recent hotel development projects at Bel Ombre, have dredged the lagoon, constructed jetties and limited local community involvement in his development. Moreover, hotel development around the coastal areas has also been blamed for its contribution to bleaching and degradation of the coral reefs which are an essential element to the natural environment of Mauritius (Global Reef Alliance, 2005).Coral reefs, continue to suffer pressures from increasing populations coastal development and marine-transported litter. Mass tourism is thought to be damaging to reefs habitats by pollution from boats, hotels and other tourism activities or by anchor, trampling and removal of coral as souvenirs. (UNEP, 2008). Turner (2000) stated that the coral reefs in Mauritius were still healthy, but investigations showed some signs of degradation particularly from boat and anchor damage caused to coral reefs. Residential and tourist development are done but lack adequate sewage treatment systems, liquid and solid waste generated by tourists lead to chronic water pollution around urban and tourist areas (Wilkinson 2000).Moreover, wastes generated by tourists lead to the loss of marine life, destruction of coral reefs and coastal beaches. The tourists, and the local population of 1.3 million, make Mauritius one of the most densely populated countries of the region (Wilkinson 2004). One area that needs particular attention is the coast of Mauritius. The marine environment is suffering from overexploitation. For example, the coast of Grand Baie is particularly affected by too many divers and pleasure crafts transporting tourists concentrated in a few specific locations. Sand erosion also occurs due to tourism facilities and infrastructure built too close to the coast which contributes towards beach destruction and coastal degradation. Beach destruction caused by intensive sand mining for tourism related construction is also a feature of many coastal areas. Another coastal destruction is the removal of mangrove forests which are nesting places for birds and other animals. The fragile ecosystem of Mauritius is damaged because of tourism infrastructure and facilities. Deforestation occurs leading to the construction of tourism facilities, as a result causing sand erosion, loss of biodiversity and irreversible damage to wildlife (UNEP,2002).

Tourism also brings positive benefits to the environment. The island of Mauritius is known for its unique flora and fauna with high level of endemism. Moreover, Mauritius is known for having the third most endangered flora in the world by the IUCN (World Conservaton Union). A National Biodiversity Strategy plan has been proposed with the following sectors: forest biodiversity, terrestrial biodiversity, freshwater, coastal and marine aquatic biodiversity; biotechnology and sustainable ecotourism (National Biodiversity Strategy, 2007).Eight islets have been proclaimed as Islets National Park. There has also been the contribution of other stakeholders and local NGOs like the Mauritius Wildlife foundation and international partners including the World Bank, Global Equity Fund, UNEP and private donors. Several international organizations have been working together with the government to set up conservation areas in Mauritius. About 3.5% of land area in Mauritius has been declared as natural reserves mainly for recreational activities and for ecotourism activities. The natural reserves cover areas containing ecosystem or areas of particularly rich biodiversity which are particularly rich biodiversity and are convenient for ecotourism and educational purposes.The Mauritius Wildlife Foundation supports the creation of national parks and reserves and the monitoring of whales, dolphins and turtles. It has significant success in restoring the populations of several endangered bird species and endemic vegetation. The MWF is also heavily involved in raising awareness of conservation issues among locals and tourists. For example some of the parks found in Mauritius are: Black River Gorges National Park, Blue Bay Marine Park , Pamplemousses garden. Ile aux Aigrettes and Ile Ronde , are two of the most important nature reserves that have been set up endemic plants and native species. In 1997, two marine parks were proclaimed at Blue Bay near Mahebourg and Balaclava on the west coast. Tourism attractions like:Grand Baie, Flic-en-Flac,a and even Belle-Mare, has encouraged the government to spend on facilities and infrastructure which local community can benefit also. Facilities include: improvement on road, water treatment, solid waste disposal and telecommunications. For tourism to be successful in the long run in Mauritius there must be sustainable development.

2.9 Environmental Sustainability- “Maurice Ile Durable”

A large amount of research has been 1ade on sustainable tourism development in developed countries but less has been made on development in small island destinations (Bianchi, 2004; Choi & Sirakaya, 2005). When looking at small island developing states (SIDS), researchers have been concerned mostly with issues related to environment and the heavy economic reliance on the tourism sector (Croes, 2006; Giannoni & Maupertus, 2007; Momsen, 2008).Normally, island destination are characterised by small their small size and population, lack of resources, lack of revenue for imports, high transport costs and lack of infrastructure (Wilkinson, 1989).However, SIDS are blessed with a pristine environment, unique ecosystems and cultural aspects that make them unique from other destinations (Maupertus, 2007). Therefore, environmental management must be an important component in SIDS, especially in the island of Mauritius. As such the concept of “Maurice Ile Durable” was developed. Figure 4 can give a better illustration of this concept.

The government of Mauritius launched the project “Maurice Ile Durable” in 2008. The main aim of the project was to promote sustainable development in Mauritius. As such the main aim of “Maurice Ile Durable” is to make Mauritius worldly recognized for sustainable development particularly in the context of small island developing states. This includes : minimizing our dependency on fossil fuels by increasing utilization of renewable energy, the protection of the environment and social dimension of development are also crucial aspects of “Maurice Ile Durable” (Tourism Strategy, 2010).This approach to sustainable development can be seen in the United Nations (UN) as a framework for the sustainable development for SIDS, also known as the ‘Mauritius Strategy 05', which focuses on managing the environment, monitoring tourism impacts and setting guidelines for managing biodiversity. As a result, island tourism planners have been diversifying away from the sun-and-sand model of development, which targets mass tourism and are targetting high spending patterns and niche segments of the tourism market (Lockhart, 1997; Kokkranikal, 2003). That's why there is an element of suspicion whether these small island states can have determined sustainable futures and follows the UN plan (Scheynes & Momsen, 2008).  Since hotels are the main form of tourism development in Mauritius, stakeholders of the tourism sector must fomulate appropriate tourism policy and destination planning strategies. Before, the National Tourism Development Plan (NTDP), tourism development in Mauritius knew no formal long-term planning for the destination. There were no formal legal regulations that were followed by businesses in the tourism sector. The NTDP was followed in 2006 by the Tourism Authority Act, which was further amended in 2008, acted as regulatory body and made better provisions for regulating the operation of tourist enterprises and pleasure craft licences and enforcement notices. For hotel development projects, an act urged hotel developers to install eco-friendly and energy saving practices such as desalination plants and recycling plants.

The Beach Authority in Mauritius also participate in marine environmental conservation and most important act as a platform to sensitize the general public about safety at sea and the need to protect our marine environment and respect zoning systems (Marine Environmental  Education programme, 2008).

Since 2000 there has been no other national tourism planning document for the island. But, in 2008 the government revised the Hotel Development Strategy (HDS) asking hotel developers to strictly follow the requirements of the Planning Guidance (PPG) for coastal development. The document highlights the guidelines on land management, architectural design and eco-friendly practices and make a condition that there will be foreign direct investment in the hotel sector (Ministry of Tourism, Leisure & External Communication [MOTEC], and 2008:1)

The United Nations World Tourism Organization (UNWTO) states that sustainable tourism development should “meet the needs of the present tourists and host regions while protecting and enhancing opportunities for the future”. As such, local people should be given the chance for defining their own needs and planning towards sustainability. Sharpley (2002) believes that sustainable tourism must not be a means to compete for resources but it must rather seek the most efficient ways to share resources within an overall development strategy. In fact, sustainable tourism should reduce poverty, redistribute income, and give better standard of living to locals, conflict resolution (United Nations Environment Programme [UNEP], 1994). Moreover, it is also difficult to see how action plan proposed by the World Tourism Organisation Code of Ethics, Agenda 21 in Rio and Rio10+in Johanesburg, can be viewed at a practical local level (Dodds, 2007). For SIDS, taking in consideration the “Mauritius Strategy 05” and Local Agenda 21 (LA21)  on management of biodiversity  community involvement is important in planning decisions  to address the three-fold bottom line of sustainability which are: social, environmental and economic) and this helps to provide a holistic path towards sustainable development.

For instance, in Mauritius, the National Capacity Needs Self-Assessment report of 2005 focused that tourism development was putting pressure on scarce land in the coastal zone and on the fragile ecology of the lagoons (Ministry of Finance and Economic Development, Ministry of Environment & National Development Unit [MOFED, MOF &NDU, 2005). In addition, tourism policy has placed greater emphasis on the PPG for coastal development, while social concerns have been of lesser interest to the government. In Mauritius, the Environment Protection Act into force in September 2002 and was remanded in 2008 consolidate and reinforce the institutional and legal framework for the protection of environmental assets; this can be viewed at Annex B. It is for this reason that hotel developpers are now required to submit their Environmental Impact Assessment; this can be viewed at Annex B with their application for hotel development.

In Mauritius, new marine areas have been proclaimed, with supporting regulations and long-term monitoring of coral and fish communities and management of the coastal zone has become a priority (Western Indian Oceans and Marine environment, 2007).

The National Environment Strategy (NES) for the period 1999-2010 includes the policy and objectives aimed at minimising pollution, promoting eco-friendly technology, educating people to be environmentally conscious, conserving resources and protecting the local and global environment (National Environment Strategy, 2010).In accordance with the recommendations of the National Environmental Strategy, an Integrated Coastal Zone Management has been set up to address the increasing incidence of coastal problems and understand the intricate nature of the coastal environment. A new unit under the Ministry of Environment has been set up which is known as “Police de L'Environnement” with the aim of assisting the Ministry in protecting the environment.

To sum up, a shared role between members of the private sector, with some form of government intervention and direct control, tends to be the most appropriate for environmental protection (Briguglio & Briguglio, 1996). Environmental sustainability requires a holistic approach where for instance, land use, environmental management and broader tourism strategies are integrated (Sharpley, 2002).

CHAPTER THREE - METHODOLOGY

3.1 Introduction

This chapter deals with one of the fundamental area of any research work. It elaborates on the ways in which data were collected, the methods used, the sampling frame selected and the methods used for analysising data .It also gives an indication about the limitation of the study.

3.2 Research design

Research design refers to the outline or strategies used in answering research questions. Research design also shows the approach and amount of secondary based and primary research you undertake as well as the analysis.

3.2.1 Research Type: Quantitative and Qualitative Research

In research design, there exists both a quantitative and qualitative method. Qualitative research design is a subjective element as it depends on how the people feel and reflect upon certain issues and why they take certain decisions. Under this approach, the interpretive researcher tries “to develop an understanding of social life and discover how people construct meaning in natural settings” (Neuman, 2003:76). While quantitative research can be described as “a formal, objective, systematic process in which numerical data are utilized to obtain information about the world” (Burns and Grove cited) Quantitative research is considered to be more valid and accurate. So, for this study quantitative approach has been used where questionnaires were chosen as the tool for collecting data.

3.3 Sampling design

The sample frame illustrates the essential elements of the targeted population. For the purpose of the study, the selected samples were respondents who were the age of 18 were chosen so as to reduce the risk of getting biased information. Convenience sampling technique was applied for this survey, which is a non-probability sampling technique where subjects are selected because of their convenient accessibility and proximity to the researcher. Convenience sampling was applied because it was impossible to test the entire population as the population is too large and it is impossible to include every individual. Moreover, convenience sampling is fast, inexpensive, easy and the subjects are readily available. This was done with help of self-administered questionnaires that were given to local residents who were available on the streets, shops, beaches, restaurants.During the survey if an individual refused to participate another individual was intercepted and asked to participate. Another resident was thus chosen. The purpose of the survey was explained to the participant. A sample size of 300 questionnaires was distributed among the locals. This research is concerned mainly with people living in Mauritius. Questions were put in English as it is easy to understand.  However, during the survey the researcher came across locals who did not understand English as such the questions were translated verbally in Creole. The respondents were given much time to fill their questionnaires and help were provided to them.

3.3.1 Study area

The sampling frame focused on locals living in tourism areas mainly where tourism development is expanding. As such the study areas for the survey were the coastal areas of Mauritius which attract large number of tourists. So, four strategic areas were identified in Mauritius mainly from four different parts one from the North, East, South and West. The study areas identified were: Grand Bay, Belle Mare, Flic en Flac and Bel Ombre. These coastal areas where identified because these areas attract large numbers of tourists and residents living in these areas perceive tourism impacts differently. The host-tourist interaction is greater in these areas as compared to other parts of Mauritius. Other areas in Mauritius were not chosen because residents in non-tourist zones view impacts of tourism differently compared to those living in the proximity of tourist attractions. It is believed that if resident's, in their daily lives have frequent contact with tourists, they are likely to report negative attitudes. Two measures of this interaction are resident proximity to major tourist attractions (Weaver and Lawton, 2001) and concentration of tourists in a given region (Madrgal, 1995).So, to better explore resident's perceptions towards environmental impacts of tourism these areas were chosen.

3.4 Data Collection design

For this study, the survey instrument used was a structured questionnaire. This method was chosen because it has better responses rates than other methods in previous studies (Andereck & Nickerson, 1997). The questionnaire was designed in a simple way and in a simple language so as to facilitate the respondent in answering it. The survey questionnaire designed for the local residents consisted of three parts. A covering note was put at the top of the questionnaire explaining the purpose of the study Part A contained questions relating to the demographic characteristics of the respondent but no names were collected, thus retaining the privacy of the respondents. The demographic characteristics included: respondent's age, gender, level of education, occupation and length of residency. Part B has 26 items to capture the resident's perceptions of the environmental impacts of tourism. These items relate to the positive and negative aspect of the environment. Thus, the respondent were asked to indicate their level of agreement on a five-point likert scale (strongly disagree to strongly agree). Maddox (1985) recommended the use of a Likert-scale in tourism impact research because of its superior validity. Futhermore, part C consisted of 4 close-ended questions. Closed-ended questions were mainly used since it is easier to collect, analyze and interpret data (Appendix A). As such, respondents find it less time consuming and easy to answer. In the close-ended questions, respondents were offered a range of answers to choose from and they were asked to tick boxes where they had a number of alternative answers to choose from and one question is in the simplest form with the answer with either ‘Yes' or ‘No'. Therefore, close-ended questions are popular because there is a set of answers known beforehand that are present in the questionnaire and which are quicker to answer.

3.4.1 Primary data collection

Data collection was carried out with the help of a colleague at different sites. The primary data collection in this research involved survey questionnaires. A questionnaire is regarded as a data instrument that each respondent fills out as part of participating in a research study (Johnson & Christensen, 2004). Primary data collection was done at the end of March 2011 and it lasted for a week. Overall 300 questionnaires were distributed but only 274 were filled which represents a response rate of 91%.

3.4.2 Secondary data collection

Secondary data which refer to existing data were also viewed. These included books, journals, and reports from the Ministry of Environment and documentation from Mauritius Wildlife Foundation.

3.5 Questionnaire pilot testing

After the completing the questionnaire, a pre-test was carried out to get an idea of the response that would be obtained before undertaking the main data collection exercise. During the pilot test ten people were chosen as sample to test the validity of the questionnaire. Consequently, it was noted that the questions wordings were not well defined and certain questions were difficult to understand for them. The questions were refined and simplified accordingly.

3.6 Ethical aspects

Ethical aspects of the respondents were taken into consideration during the survey. Respondents were ensured that information obtained from them would remain confidential and anonymous and would be used for academic purpose only. During the survey, “it is the concern for the negotiating access with the respondent that will enable the research to be carried out as deeply as emphasized” (Pring, 2000).So, to obtain good results of the survey respondents were explained about the purpose of the study. Thus, respondents developed a positive attitude about the survey and the questionnaires were filled very quickly. Respondents were not forced to participate in this survey and they got involved with their own consent.

3.7 Reliability and Validity

Reliability tests whether the results are consistent over time and it is synonymous with repeatability. Reliability also checks if respondents will give accurate answers that are free from random errors. The reliability of an instrument places an upper limit on its validity (Spector, 1981). A measurement that lacks reliability will necessarily be invalid.  On the other hand, validity determines whether the research truly measures what it was intended to measure or how truthful the research results are. It determines whether researcher has been able to meet his objectives. So, for this survey the researcher had ensured that data obtained was truthful and was obtained from good source because to obtain meaningful data the researcher took time to explain the questionnaire to respondents.

3.8 Data Analysis

After the survey was conducted, collection of data was analyzed by SPSS 16 Analytical Software. Data analysis was carried out by using descriptive statistics such as mean, percentages standard deviation, reliability testing, one independent t-test, correlation one way Anova and Chi-Square test.  The results were then illustrated by the use of tables, bar charts and graphical representations.

3.9 Limitation of the study

Several problems were faced by the researcher during the survey like: some people refused to participate while others feel annoyed when answering the questions. Some respondents were very difficult because they asked the researcher too many questions. Moreover, due to time constraint, the researcher was unable to take a larger sample size. Also, some questionnaires were discarded because they were wrongly filled.

CHAPTER FOUR - RESULTS

This chapter presents a description of the sample and analysis results based on the questionnaires distributed to liable residents in the area of Grand Bay, Belle Mare, Flic en Flac and Bel Ombre. It provides an analysis to assess the resident's perceptions of the environmental impacts of tourism in Mauritius.

The data was organized and evaluated with the SPSS (Statistical Package of Social Sciences) software version 16 and for the evaluation; descriptive statistics (frequency distribution, percentages, means and standard deviation), chi-square test, correlations, independent sample t-test, ANOVA and reliability analysis were employed.

4.1 Population and Response rate

Punch (2003) stated that a low response rate can raise questions according to whether the response received were representative of the sample or were in some way biased. However the researcher should strive for a response rate of at least 60 percent. Therefore, as regards to this study, 300 questionnaires were distributed to the liable residents and 274 questionnaires were collected one week later. All the collected questionnaires were deemed good to be analyzed. Hence, a feedback of 91% in this research is therefore taken to be acceptable.

4.2 Demographic characteristics of respondents

The following section describes the demographics features of the sample being studied and the participants were asked to provide information about gender, age group, level of education, occupation, length of residency and salary. These variables were analysed as follows;

4.2.1 Gender

Table 4.2.1 show the composition of respondents by gender and the sample was distributed between the male (59.9%) and female (40.1%) staff.

Table 4.2.1: Gender

Gender
		Frequency	Percent	Valid Percent	Cumulative Percent
Valid	Male	164	59.9	59.9	59.9
	Female	110	40.1	40.1	100
	Total	274	100	100

4.2.2 Age group Distribution

The result from figure 4.2.2 indicates that 4.4% of respondents were more than 55 years of age. 16.8% of respondents were from 46 to 55 years old. 13.9% were from 36 to 45, 34.3% were from 26-36 and 30.7% of the sample was between 18 and 25 years of age. This statistical figure shows that most of the employees in the sample were of 18-35 years of age.

4.2.3 Occupation

Regarding occupation of respondents in this study, the results in (figure 4.2.3) show that 32.1% of respondents were from the professional grade. 8.8% of respondents were self-employed. 6.9% of respondents were college students and managers respectively, 4.7% were retired respondents and 4.4% of the sample was unemployed.

4.2.4 Level of Education

Figure 4.2.4 highlights the education level of the employees in this study. The highest level of education completed by the respondents was master degree (15.3%), 25.2% of respondents in the sample completed a bachelor's degree. 10.2% of the employees attended technical school, 43.4% were respondents attended secondary education and 4.4% of respondents attended primary education. Hence, this statistical figure shows that most of the respondents in the sample attended secondary education.

4.2.5 Length of residency

Figure 4.2.5 indicates the length of residency of the respondents in their respective areas. 56.9% of respondents had stayed in the respective region for more than 15 years, 19% had resided for 11-15 years in their respective area, 13.1% of respondents have 5-10 years of residency and 9.1% of respondents had resided in their area for less than five years. Hence, this statistical figure shows that most of the respondents in this sample have been resided in their respective region for a long time.

4.2.6 Salary Scale

As regards to salary scale, figure 4.2.6 indicate that 30.7% of respondents received a salary of more than Rs 25000, 20.4% of respondents received a salary between Rs 16000 and 25000. 20.8% between 11000 and 15000, 13.9% between 6000 and 10000 and 14.2% of respondents received a salary of less than 5000.

4.3 Reliability of data

Reliability in general means stability of response. This concerns whether the same respondents would answer the same questions in the same way if they were asked again. Reliability is the consistency or dependability of a measure. Therefore one of the ways to measure reliability is called internal consistency. This is the extent to which the questions were designed to measure the same attitude, in other words how well the questions correlate with one another. In this research, the reliability was measured using Cronbach's alpha as indicator and the Cronbach's alpha value of 0.70 or higher is usually considered acceptable in most research situations as a value lower than 0.7 might mean the data is multi-dimensional.

Hence, the result (table 2) reveals a value of 0.796 which is higher than 0.7 indicating a high reliability and internal consistency of data.

Table 4.3: Reliability Statistics
Cronbach's Alpha	N of Items
.796	38

4.4 Negative Environmental Impacts

The next issue examined in this study concerns the negative environmental impacts of tourism in Mauritius. Several statements regarding the resident's perceptions of the level of impacts based on five-point Likert scale of agreement level (where 1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree) have been measured and represented in a bar chart.

Figure 4.4 illustrates that 30.7% of respondents agreed that coral reefs suffer from coastal development and marine transported litter and they also agreed that tourism do cause littering. 32.5% of the sample agreed that marine environment is suffering from exploitation and 32.8% of respondents approved that tourism development depletes the natural resources. 31% of respondents agreed that the beaches and coastal regions have lost their natural beauty due to high flow of tourists in these areas.

Moreover, 25.5% of respondents agreed that tourists cause land degradation and 24.5% approved that tourists cause trampling in the natural resources. 23.4% of respondents also agreed that there is alteration of ecosystems by tourist activities, 29.9% of residents agreed that tourism contribute to a significant increase in solid waste and 26.6% of the sample approved that waste disposal is not properly maintained by the tourist industry. 26.3% of residents agreed that there is degradation of coral reefs from boat and its anchor and 22.6% of the sample approved that the construction of hotels and tourist facilities has destroyed the natural environment.

However, 25.9% of respondents disagreed that tourism contributes towards traffic congestion and 39.8% of the sample disapproved that overcrowding at beaches, natural parks and tourist attractions are merely caused by tourists. 24.1% of respondents also disagreed that tourism has massively contributed to pollution and 18.2% of the sample disapproved that wetlands are destroyed by tourists.

Figure 4.4.1: Response on statements related to negative environmental impacts

4.5 Most significant negative impact

Measuring for the most significant negative environmental impact, the responses were analyzed by using the mean to identify the rank of each impact.

Based on the result of table 3, “Coral reefs suffer from coastal development and marine transported litter” was ranked first (3.19), “Beaches and coastal regions have lost their natural beauty due to high flow of tourists in these areas” was ranked second (3.18), “Construction of hotels and tourist facilities have destroyed the natural environment” was ranked third (3.18), “marine environment is suffering from exploitation: too many divers and pleasure crafts transporting tourists” was ranked fourth (3.17) and “There is degradation of coral reefs from boat and its anchor” was ranked fifth (3.08). “Tourism development depletes the natural resources” was ranked sixth (3.00), “Tourism cause littering” was ranked seventh (2.99), “There is alteration of ecosystems by tourist activities” was ranked eighth (2.96), “Tourists cause trampling in natural attractions” was ranked ninth (2.95) and “Waste disposal is not properly maintained by the tourism industry” was ranked tenth (2.93).

Table 4.5.1: Most significant negative environmental impact

Descriptive Statistics
	N	Mean	Std. Deviation	Rank
Coral reefs suffer from coastal development and marine transported litter	274	3.19	1.178	1
Beaches and coastal regions have lost their natural beauty due to high flow of tourists in these areas	274	3.18	1.230	2
Construction of hotels and tourist facilities have destroyed the natural environment	274	3.18	1.457	3
marine environment is suffering from exploitation: too many divers and pleasure crafts transporting tourists	274	3.17	1.256	4
There is degradation of coral reefs from boat and its anchor	274	3.08	1.379	5
Tourism development depletes the natural resources	274	3.00	1.234	6
Tourism cause littering	274	2.99	1.295	7
There is alteration of ecosystems by tourist activities	274	2.96	1.145	8
Tourists cause trampling in natural attractions	274	2.95	1.202	9
Waste disposal is not properly maintained by the tourism industry	274	2.93	1.193	10
Tourists cause land degradation	274	2.89	1.173	11
Tourism contribute to a significant increase in solid waste	274	2.89	1.222	12
Wetlands are destroyed because of tourists	274	2.85	1.222	13
Tourism has massively contributed to pollution such as: air, water, visual and noise	274	2.81	1.261	14
Tourism contributes towards traffic congestion	274	2.64	1.163	15
Overcrowding occurs because of tourists particularly at beaches, natural parks and tourist attractions	274	2.55	1.225	16
Valid N (listwise)	274

4.6 Positive Environmental Impacts

The next determinant explored in this study was the positive environmental impacts of tourism in Mauritius and several opinions about the resident's perceptions based on five-point Likert scale of agreement level (where 1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree) have been measured and represented in a bar chart.

Figure 7 depicts that 32.5% of the respondents agreed that tourism helps to converse marine areas in forms of marine parks and 41.2% of the sample approved that tourism improves the quality of infrastructure. 36.9% of respondents have even agreed that there is an increase in environmental awareness among locals and 42.3% of the sample approved that recycling programs such as waste mangement have been established.

Moreover, 35% of respondents also agreed that coastal zones are managed and maitained and 38% also approved that the diversity of nature is valued and protected due to tourism. 39.8% or residents agreed that tourists mainly ecotourists help to protect wildlife and natural resources and in addition to this 40.5% of the sample approved that tourim brings revenue through nature based activities. Furthermore, 43.1% of respondents agreed that local residents benefit from more natural parks and recreational facilities from tourist development and 47.8% of the sample also approved that the tourist developement supports the conservation of natural areas.

Figure 4.6.1: Response on statements related to positive environmental impacts

4.6.2 Most significant positive impact

Similarly, measuring for the most significant positive impact, the responses were analyzed by using the mean to identify the rank of each impact.

Based on the result of table 4, “Coastal zones are managed and maintained” was ranked first (3.61), “The diversity of nature is valued and protected due to tourism” was ranked second (3.60), “Tourists mainly ecotourists help to protect wildlife and natural resources” was ranked third (3.58), “Tourism improves the quality of infrastructure” was ranked fourth (3.58) and “Tourism development supports the conservation of natural areas” was ranked fifth (3.58). “Tourism brings revenue in terms of :park entrance fees and other nature-based activities” was ranked sixth (3.58), “Local residents benefit from more natural parks and recreational facilities from tourism development” was ranked seventh (3.54), “Recycling programs have been established such as: wastes are managed and recycled” was ranked eighth (3.51), “There is an increase in environmental awareness among locals” was ranked ninth (3.45) and “Tourism also helps to conserve marine  areas in forms of marine parks” was ranked tenth (3.38).

Table 4.6.3 Most significant positive environmental impact

Descriptive Statistics
	N	Mean	Std. Deviation	Rank
Coastal zones are managed and maintained	274	3.61	1.084	1
The diversity of nature is valued and protected due to tourism	274	3.60	1.037	2
Tourists mainly ecotourists help to protect wildlife and natural resources	274	3.58	1.053	3
Tourism improves the quality of infrastructure	274	3.58	.988	4
Tourism development supports the conservation of natural areas	274	3.58	1.043	5
Tourism brings revenue in terms of :park entrance fees and other nature-based activities	274	3.58	1.050	6
Local residents benefit from more natural parks and recreational facilities from tourism development	274	3.54	1.049	7
Recycling programs have been established such as: wastes are managed and recycled	274	3.51	1.087	8
There is an increase in environmental awareness among locals	274	3.45	1.030	9
Tourism also helps to conserve marine  areas in forms of marine parks	274	3.38	1.126	10
Valid N (listwise)	274

4.7 Knowledge of Global warming and sustainability of environment

Figure 4.7.1 depicts that 87% of the respondents in the sample stated that they know the meaning of global warming, climate change. Moreover, figure 4.7.2 demonstrates that only 6.6% of respondents rated the invovlement of locals on this issue to be excellent. 17.9% rated it to very good, 37.2% rated it to be good while 38.3% of respondents rate this issue to be poor.

4.8 Concept of “Maurice Ile Durable”

Figure 4.8.1 Shows that 85% of the respondents were aware of the concept of “Maurice Ile Durable” and among them, 47.5% stated that the contribution towards this concept include the change of personal attitudes towards the environment. 22.7% of respondents stated that encouragement of growth of green consumer in the market would contribute to this concept. 17.6% of respondents stated “planing energy saving strategies” and 12.6% of respondents stated that limiting the use of packaging and natural resources may contribute towards this concept.

4.9 Involvement in environment related activities

Figure 4.9.1 shows that 54.2% of the sample replied that they are involved in environment related activities and among them, 49.3% of respondents stated that they are involved in energy conservation, 21.9% are involved in water conservation, 12.3% are involved in composting and 11.6% of the respondents are involved in reduction sorting and waste recycling.

Figure 4.9.1: Responses related to involvement in environment oriented activities

4.10 Significance testing between global warming knowledge and awareness of the concept “Maurice Ile Durable”.

Measuring for any significance between global warming knowledge and awareness of the concept of "Maurice Ile Durable", a chi square test was carried out. Based on the output (table 6), the result shows a chi-square value (65.774) with a value of 0.000 which is less than the significance level (0.05) indicating that there is statistically a significant association between global warming knowledge and awareness of the concept of "Maurice Ile Durable".

Table 4.10.1: Chi-Square Tests on global warming knowledge and concept of "Maurice Ile Durable"
	Value	df	Asymp. Sig. (2-sided)
Pearson Chi-Square	65.774a	8	.000
Likelihood Ratio	50.155	8	.000
Linear-by-Linear Association	9.584	1	.002
N of Valid Cases	274

4.11 Significance testingbetween concept “Maurice Ile Durable” and the factors contributing to this concept.

Measuring for any significance between concept of "Maurice Ile Durable" and the factors contributing to this concept, a correlation analysis was performed. Based on the ouput (table 4.10.1), the result reveals a correlation coefficient of 0.068 which falls in the range 0-0.3 indicating a very weak relationship between the two variables examined. The result shows a value of 0.297 which is greater than the significant level (0.05), signifying that there is statistically no significant relationship between concept of "Maurice Ile Durable" and the contributing factors described in this study.

Table 4.11: Correlations between  concept of "Maurice Ile Durable" and the contributing factors   Are you aware of the concept of "Maurice Ile Durable" Contribution towards this concept Are you aware of the concept of "Maurice Ile Durable" Pearson Correlation 1 .068 Sig. (2-tailed)   .297 N 274 238 Contribution towards this concept Pearson Correlation .068 1 Sig. (2-tailed) .297   N 238 238

4.12 Difference between the level of education and the contribution towards the concept of “Maurice Ile Durable”

Evaluating for any difference between the level of education and the contribution towards the concept of “Maurice Ile Durable”, an ANOVA test was performed. The result (Table 4.12) reveals a value of 0.371 which is greater the significant level (0.05), indicating that there is no significant difference between the level of education and the contribution towards the concept of “Maurice Ile Durable”

Table 4.12: ANOVA test on level of education v/s concept of “Maurice Ile Durable”
	Sum of Squares	df	Mean Square	F	Sig.
Between Groups	5.511	6	.919	1.087	.371
Within Groups	195.279	231	.845
Total	200.790	237

4.12 Difference between occupation and involvement in environment oriented activities

Measuring for any difference between occupation and involvement in environment oriented activities, an ANOVA test was performed. The result (Table 4.13) reveals a value of 0.414 which is greater the significant level (0.05), indicating that there is no significant difference between occupation and involvement in environment oriented activities.

Table 4.13: ANOVA test on occupation v/s involvement in environment oriented activities
	Sum of Squares	df	Mean Square	F	Sig.
Between Groups	1.615	6	.269	1.018	.414
Within Groups	69.802	264	.264
Total	71.417	270

4.13 Hypothesis Testing

In line with the objectives and research questions set in this study, the following hypotheses were developed and tested.

Hypothesis 1

H0: There is no relationship between length of residency and positive impacts of tourism

H1: There is a significant relationship between length of residency and positive impacts of tourism

Evaluating for any significant relationship between length of residency and positive impacts of tourism, a one way Anova test (table 10) was carried out. The result shows values greater than the significant level, 0.05, signifying that we do not reject the null hypothesis, and we conclude that there is not enough evidence to infer that the alternative hypothesis is true. Hence, we can suggest that there is statistically no significant association between length of residency and positive impacts of tourism.

Table 4.13: One way ANOVA on length of residency and positive impacts of tourism   Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. Tourism development supports the conservation of natural areas Between Groups 3.523 4 .881 .808 0.52 Within Groups 293.367 269 1.091     Total 296.891 273       Local residents benefit from more natural parks and recreational facilities from tourism development Between Groups 3.909 4 .977 .887 0.47 Within Groups 296.226 269 1.101     Total 300.135 273       Tourists mainly ecotourists help to protect wildlife and natural reosurces Between Groups 8.099 4 2.025 1.850 0.12 Within Groups 294.471 269 1.095     Total 302.569 273       The diversity of nature is valued and protected due to tourism Between Groups 4.627 4 1.157 1.077 0.37 Within Groups 289.012 269 1.074     Total 293.639 273       Tourism brings revenue in terms of :park entrance fees and other nature-based activities Between Groups 18.852 4 4.713 4.495 0.16 Within Groups 282.039 269 1.048     Total 300.891 273       Coastal zones are managed and maintained Between Groups 13.319 4 3.330 2.911 0.06 Within Groups 307.673 269 1.144     Total 320.993 273       There is an increase in environmental awareness among locals Between Groups 2.832 4 .708 .664 0.62 Within Groups 286.953 269 1.067     Total 289.785 273       Tourism improves the quality of infrastructure Between Groups 7.178 4 1.794 1.860 0.12 Within Groups 259.556 269 .965     Total 266.734 273       Recycling progrmas have been established such as:wastes are managed and recycled Between Groups 5.699 4 1.425 1.210 0.31 Within Groups 316.787 269 1.178     Total 322.485 273       Tourism also helps to conserve marine  areas in forms of marine parks Between Groups 3.694 4 .923 .725 0.58 Within Groups 342.587 269 1.274     Total 346.281 273

4.14 Hypothesis 2:

H0: There is no association between gender and environment oriented activities

H1: There is a significant relationship between gender and environment oriented activities

As regards to this hypothesis, an independent sample t-test (table 11) was carried out. Examining the Levene's Test for Equality of Variances, the result reveals an f-test (0.008) with a significant value of 0.928 which is greater than 0.05 indicating no significant difference in the variances of the two group. Therefore, the “Equal Variances assumed” row has been used for the t-test for equality of Means. The result shows a t-test (0.634) with a value of 0.527 which is greater than the significant level, 0.05, signifying that we do not reject the null hypothesis, and we conclude that there is not enough evidence to infer that the alternative hypothesis is true. Hence, we can suggest that there is statistically no significant association between gender and environment oriented activities.

Table 4.14: Independent Samples Test on gender v/s environment oriented activities
		Levene's Test for Equality of Variances		t-test for Equality of Means
		F	Sig.	t	df	Sig. (2-tailed)	Mean Difference	Std. Error Difference	95% Confidence Interval of the Difference
									Lower	Upper
Environment oriented activities	Equal variances assumed	0.008	0.928	0.634	144	0.527	0.108	0.17	-0.228	0.444
	Equal variances not assumed			0.641	134.422	0.523	0.108	0.168	-0.225	0.44

CHAPTER 5 - DISCUSSIONS

5.1 Residents perceived environmental impacts of tourism

Table 3 and table 4 present the resident's responses to each of the impact statements mainly the means and the standard deviation. The mean responses also confirm that respondents were in higher agreement with the positive environmental impact statements than the negative elements .The highest mean obtained from the positive environmental impact is 3.61 as compared to the highest negative environmental impact mean which is 3.19.Among the positive environmental impact the highest mean obtained was for “coastal zones are managed and maintained.”The residents of Mauritius seem to agree more all the positive environmental-related items of tourism. The findings that the environmental impacts of tourism are perceived most favourably by local residents tends to support the view that tourism is regarded as a major source of income for the country and residents see tourism in the form of economic benefits and they associate tourism less with environmental costs. This pattern of thinking can be linked to euphoria from Doxey's irritation index (1975) meaning residents in Mauritius are still at the euphoria stage. It can be concluded that residents lack real experience of tourism and its possible environmental costs. Often, it is when the carrying capacity is exceeded that some of the problems become visible and observable. It is evident from the results that residents support tourism development in Mauritius. Residents are in doubt about tourism leading to serious negative environmental impacts. There were past findings that were done that link resident's attitudes to the level of tourism development (Doxey, 1975. Martin & Uysal, 1990).These studies indicate there is an inverse relationship between the level of tourism development and the perceived environmental impacts on the community. Evidence from findings suggests that they tend to overestimate the potential environmental benefits of tourism and understate the environmental costs.

5.2 Hypothesis 1: Length of residency and positive impacts of tourism

The result in table 10 shows that there is statistically no significant relationship between length of residency and positive impacts of tourism. Major research factors in the demographic variables have been that of length of residency. From the findings, it is clear that length of residency does not affect positive environmental impacts of tourism. Despite that residents have been living in tourism zones like: Grand Baie, Flic en Flac, Bel Ombre and Belle Mare for more than 15 years it does not affect their attitudes towards tourism. Again there are inconsistent findings that have been reported suggesting that there is no relationship between length of residence and attitudes towards tourism (Clements, 1993), others reported a negative relationship. That is, the longer residents have lived in the community, the more they are likely to have negative attitudes towards tourism (Mansfield, 1992).By increasing the level of contact with tourists residents increase the degree of negative attitudes towards tourism, if residents have frequent contacts with tourists they develop negative attitudes towards tourists. Two variables affecting length of residency are resident proximity to tourist zones and the concentration of tourists in a given region (Fredline and Faulkner, 2000).

5.3 Hypothesis 2: There is a significant relationship between gender and environment oriented activities

Empirical findings from hypothesis 2 show that demographical variable such as: gender does not have a relationship with environment oriented activities. Researchers regarding gender differences in environmental behaviour have been largely inconsistent. In Mauritius, neither males nor females seem to have an inclination towards environment oriented practices. One widely used theoretic perspective regarding the relationship between gender and environmental concern processes is the socialization theory. And according to this theory, females across cultures are socialized, to have more experience and to have a stronger “ethic of care” towards  culture and the environment. On the other hand, males are socialized to be more independent and competitive. Theoretically, gender differences in environmentalism imply links between socialization and values. Environmental oriented activities may include: recycling, purchasing organic products all of which are typically private environmental behaviours. Residents in Mauritius have to be made more concerned about environment oriented activities and this can be done through: sensitization campaigns.

5.4 Difference between level of education and the contribution towards the concept of “Maurice Ile Durable”

The study findings in (Table 8) reveal that there is no significant difference between level of education and the contribution towards the concept of “Maurice Ile Durable”. Level of education of residents does not affect their contribution towards the concept “Maurice Ile Durable”. The WTO, WTTC jointly promulgated “21st century agenda about tourism, which holds that “sustainable tourism product is the product that keeps itself with local environment, community and culture.” Resident participation is one of the most important factors of tourism sustainable development. Resident's awareness of participation and environmental protection must be done and this could be achieved only through training and education. At times, residents in Mauritius happen to be local villagers whose education level are very low and there exist certain disorders among residents contribution towards sustainable development. Due to the limits of education level, residents cannot understand tourism activities and their impacts and moreover they lack the enthusiasm to participate in tourism development. Therefore, we should develop widespread resident education among the community, cultivate the community resident's sense and ability of participation and improve their improve their positive recognition of tourism development and environmental awareness rights and obligations.

5.5 Difference between occupation and involvement in environment oriented activities

The study findings at (table 9) that there is no significant relationship between occupation and involvement of residents in environment oriented activities. Consistent evidence of associations between age, education and environmental attitudes are not supported in relation to environmental practices of residents in Mauritius. Despite that 32.1 % of residents are from professional grade they are not involved in environmental activities and they are not motivated to get involve also. This is an indication that locals lack the responsibility towards the environment. The observation of associations involving income contrasts with results reported by Brechin and Kempton (1994), who concluded that research within industrialized nations, does not support the idea that occupational level affects involvement towards environmental practices. These observations can be concluded that as a whole,sociodemographic factors are not strong predictors of environmental concern. It might also be logical to expect greater participation in environmental practices from women as well because

5.6 Significance between global warming and awareness of the concept “Maurice Ile Durable”

The chi square test performed between global warming knowledge and awareness of the concept of “Maurice Ile Durable” shows a value of 0.000 which is less than the significance level (0.05) indicating that there is statistically a significant association between global warming knowledge and awareness of the concept of “Maurice Ile Durable”. This shows that respondents that are aware about global environmental issues are also aware of the local concept of “Maurice Ile Durable” and they are contributing towards this concept. The significant relationship between residents knowledge of environmental issues may inhibit favourable environmental attitudes of residents to engage in responsible environmental behaviour. This implies that without the contribution of residents responsible environmental practices may not improve. Residents must share the benefits brought by tourism so that they are encouraged to participate in tourism development. The results also show that residents in Mauritius are conscious about global warming which is a threat to the environment. Regarding this, residents must construct a whole network of environmental protection which can supervise negative environmental impacts occurring to the environment.

CHAPTER SIX - Conclusion and Recommendation

This research has gone through an analysis of studying host perceptions towards the environmental impacts of tourism industry in Mauritius. Every tourist destination wants a better interaction between tourists and the hosts of the country. The findings of our study show that the host community has more positive perceptions of tourists than negative ones. According to this study, the hosts have perceived tourism as being very beneficial to Mauritius. Host populations are of the opinion that tourists contributes towards the preservation and conservation of our natural areas, beaches and natural resources. This is accepted because the tourist industry happens to be main pillar of our economy. On the other hand, one must not forget about the negative environmental impacts of tourism. The tourist industry causes lots of damages to the environment through: disposal of waste, air, water, noise and visual pollution, littering, land degradation, traffic congestion, overcrowding and depletion of natural resources. The government of Mauritius together with non-governmental organizations must work towards mitigating the negative environmental impacts of tourism.

The research has started with an abstract reference to the actual case on which the study is based. The first chapter; Introduction, has talked about the aim of the research. A more extensive secondary data was researched and exposed in the literature review, i.e. the second chapter. In the methodology, the methods used were explained and this being followed by the results and discussions. Thus, we finally conclude the research and suggest some recommendations.

Mauritius is regarded as one of the most popular tourists' destination where local community has a positive impact of tourism. The reason for this may be that locals benefit lots of facilities from the tourism industry. It may conclude that most residents lack the real experience of tourism and its possible environmental costs. It is an agreed fact that when residents perceive benefits from the tourist industry they support it. Very often, it is when the carrying capacity is exceeded that some of the problems become visible and crop. For instance, Mauritius is expecting to have 2 million tourists by year 2015.This is quite evident that Mauritius as a tourist destination is not well prepared to accommodate 2 million tourists by year 2015.

So, in order to achieve this, the study has set implications for both policymakers and researchers. Firstly, residents seem to underestimate the potential environmental costs of tourism in Mauritius. Underestimation of negative impacts could generate intense frustration as residents as they may not be prepared enough to cope with the environmental costs. The Ministry of Tourism and Leisure in collaboration with other agencies including tertiary institutions like need to educate residents on the benefits and potential costs of tourism so as to maximize the positive impact and minimize the costs. It would probably be most appropriate to educate the host population to take the possible tourism-related environment challenges seriously and undertake preventive action so as to avoid these environmental problems in the future. So, to protect the natural resources from the negative impacts of tourism activities, there is a need for concerted by residents, the central government and non-governmental organizations to ensure that tourism development does not cause irreversible damages to the environment.

Moreover, locals must be encouraged to participate more in environmental-oriented activities like: composting, energy conservation, water conservation and recycling programs. This can be done by organizing environmental sensitization campaign in the community. Through this, locals behaviour and personal attitudes towards the environment is changed and they become more responsible. The host population must also be encouraged to contribute towards environmental sustainability. This leads to a two way benefit for both host and the tourist. To promote environmental sustainability in Mauritius therefore require the association of public, private companies and initiative, the sharing of best practices among hotels and tourism sectors in Mauritius. The government emphasis on the Environmental Impact Assessment is a must for all businesses operating in the tourism sector. Social impact assessment also is becoming a popular tool measuring social impacts on local communities.The involvement of locals and participation in decision-making is suggested by “Mauritius Strategy 05”.Another approach that can lead environmental sustainability is through the cooperation of Corporate Social Responsibility bodies. These institutions must be encouraged to contribute financially in launching environmental awareness campaigns in the community.

To conclude, for Mauritius to achieve sustainability, it will require the involvement of host population in decision-making process of tourism related activities, it will require collaboration from tourism authorities in the long-run, monitoring of visitor levels in regards to carrying capacity of the country and market-based incentives so that the negative environmental impacts are mitigated. There is also the need of further collaboration between government and hoteliers to set new strategies in issues regarding environment damage control and environmental protection.