PERCEPTIONS
1. SHOPPING IN ARUBA (SUCH AS CHOICE OF SHOPS AND LONGER OPENING HOURS) IS BETTER
BECAUSE OF TOURISM:
• Completely agree: 7 respondents which represents 4%
of the participants ‘completely agree’ with the statement
• Somewhat agree: 68 respondents which represents 42%
of the participants ‘somewhat agree’ with the statement
• Neutral: 66 respondents which represents 41% of the participants were ‘neutral’ with the statement
• Somewhat disagree: 21 respondents which represents 13% of the participants ‘somewhat disagree’ with the statement
• Completely disagree: none of the respondents
‘completely disagree’ with the statement
In regards to the perceptions of the impact of tourism on the quality of products and services, it can be seen that the respondents mostly perceive this positively and largely agree that tourism has improved the quality of services in shops, restaurants and hotels. In literature such as “Tourism management” by Ryan C. & Page S. (2000) and “Tourism shopping” by Albayrak T., Caber M., & Çömen, N. (2016) it has been revealed that shopping in tourism has been cause for revitalizing traditional urban shopping centers and that destinations aim to maximize income by offering high
(shopping) value to tourists. This may explain why locals perceive an improved quality of service because of tourism.
When analyzing the open-ended questions from those who perceive that shopping is better because of tourism it was revealed that there exists a divide between those who
‘completely agree’/’somewhat agree’ and those who are
‘neutral’ and ‘somewhat disagree’. For respondents who agree that shopping is better, they mainly believe that because of the tourism industry there are many more opportunities for entrepreneurs to open up shops, and that tourism has enabled a greater variety of choice, thus increasing the number of high quality stores and encouraging many worldwide brands to penetrate the Aruban market.
On the other hand, those who were ‘neutral’ do believe that there are in fact more new stores and this creates opportunities for entrepreneurs; however, they also believe that because of the high level of quality that is being offered to tourists, this has caused for shopping to become more expensive in Aruba.
Lastly, for those who disagree with the statement that shopping on Aruba is better because of tourism, there is a perception that there are in fact many more stores/choices, which usually offer the same type of products, which from their perspective does not result in more options or choices.
Also, they consider that most of these stores are focusing on tourists rather than locals, which causes the goods being offered not to match the tastes of locals which also restricts options for locals. Additionally, they believe that Aruba has become ‘Americanized’ and that there are little to none authentic, locally-produced goods that are also not only directed to tourists. Once again it should be noted that the option of ‘completely disagree’ did not receive any responses. This may be due to the fact that locals do agree that shopping is better because of tourism in a way;
however, their perceptions of the different factors at play definitely varies.
UAUCUStudent Research Exchange Collected Papers 2018
72
Those who agreed that the tourism industry offers very good pay and working conditions and generates many well-paying jobs indicated that they believe this to be true due to personal experiences of having opportunities to transition to jobs with better pay and conditions.
These experiences vary from transitioning within the industry itself and from outside to inside the industry.
Additionally, a number of these respondents were immigrants who believe that the working conditions and pay in the tourism industry on Aruba are better compared to other countries in the region. Several respondents also indicated that with the Aruban tourism industry increasing its level of quality, the industry may generate higher levels of wages and work conditions to attract the best employees possible.
The respondents who were neutral regarding this issue of employment in the tourism industry mainly believed that the jobs generated and the pay and working conditions in this industry were decent and can be improved. Also, various respondent believed that the level of pay and work conditions in this industry is thanks to Aruba’s labor laws.
This may also indicate why the other respondents believe pay and work conditions are at acceptable levels, due to the labor laws.
As for the disagreeing respondents, they mostly believe that because most immigrants from the region perceive the jobs being generated and work conditions are better compared to their native countries, this causes for a high influx of immigrants that want to work in this industry.
This causes for the demand for jobs to be higher than the supply and results in lower wages according to Katz L. F.
& Murphy, K. M. (1992) for both locals and immigrants.
Additionally, these respondents believe that the industry does not do much on its own to mitigate this situation to be able to keep importing “cheap labor” which results in locals not receiving many opportunities to receive employment.
Perception of employment in the industry (percentages are rounded up)
PAY AND WORKING CONDITIONS IN THE TOURISM INDUSTRY ARE GENERALLY VERY GOOD:
• Completely agree: 2 respondents which represents 1% of the participants ‘completely agree’ with the statement
• Somewhat agree: 53 respondents which represents 33%
of the participants ‘somewhat agree’ with the statement
• Neutral: 80 respondents which represents 49% of the participants were ‘neutral’ with the statement
• Somewhat disagree: 27 respondents which represents 17% of the participants ‘somewhat disagree’ with the statement
• Completely disagree: none of the respondents
‘completely disagree’ with the statement
THE TOURISM INDUSTRY ON ARUBA GENERATES MANY WELL-PAYING JOBS:
• Completely agree: 2 respondents which represents 1%
of the participants ‘completely agree’ with the statement
• Somewhat agree: 33 respondents which represents 20%
of the participants ‘somewhat agree’ with the statement
• Neutral: 73 respondents which represents 45% of the participants were ‘neutral’ with the statement
• Somewhat disagree: 54 respondents which represents 33% of the participants ‘somewhat disagree’ with the statement
• Completely disagree: none of the respondents
‘completely disagree’ with the statement
Here, a shift in perceptions can be observed, when compared to the previous examination of perceptions of approval for the tourism industry. We can see that the perceptions between those who have high approval for the tourism industry and those with lower approval for the industry begin to overlap each other in regards to the perceptions of employment in this industry.
• Neutral: 16 respondents which represents 10% of the participants were ‘neutral’ with the statement
• Somewhat disagree: 7 respondents which represents 4% of the participants ‘somewhat disagree’ with the statement
• Completely disagree: 61 respondents which represents 38% of the participants ‘completely disagree’ with the statement
THE BENEFITS FROM TOURISM ARE DISTRIBUTED FAIRLY THROUGHOUT OUR COMMUNITY:
• Completely agree: none of the respondents ‘completely agree’ with the statement
• Somewhat agree: 42 respondents which represents 26%
of the participants ‘somewhat agree’ with the statement
• Neutral: 48 respondents which represents 30% of the participants were ‘neutral’ with the statement
• Somewhat disagree: 66 respondents which represents 41% of the participants ‘somewhat disagree’ with the statement
• Completely disagree: none of the respondents 6 respondents which represents 4% of the participants
‘completely disagree’ with the statement
Regarding the perception of the impact of the tourism industry on a personal level, we can see that perceptions shift more to the disapproving side. This can be seen by the fact that the majority of the respondents are ‘neutral’,
‘somewhat disagree’ or ‘completely disagree’ in regards to being better off because of tourism, having more money to spend because of tourism and having the benefits of tourism fairly distributed throughout the community.
These respondents strongly believe that one is better off, benefited by the industry and have more money to spend only if one is related to the industry. In contrast, those who agreed manifested that tourism impacts the whole island one way or another, and results in a distribution of benefits, being better off and having more money to spend.
Perception of the industry impact on a personal level (percentages are rounded up)
MOST PEOPLE ON ARUBA ARE BETTER OFF BECAUSE OF TOURISM:
• Completely agree: 9 respondents which represents 6%
of the participants ‘completely agree’ with the statement
• Somewhat agree: 28 respondents which represents 17%
of the participants ‘somewhat agree’ with the statement
• Neutral: 68 respondents which represents 42% of the participants were ‘neutral’ with the statement
• Somewhat disagree: 50 respondents which represents 31% of the participants ‘somewhat disagree’ with the statement
• Completely disagree: 7 respondents which represents 4% of the participants ‘completely disagree’ with the statement
ARUBA WOULD BE A DULL PLACE IF TOURISTS DID NOT VISIT:
• Completely agree: 67 respondents which represents 41% of the participants ‘completely agree’ with the statement
• Somewhat agree: 76 respondents which represents 47%
of the participants ‘somewhat agree’ with the statement
• Neutral: 19 respondents which represents 12% of the participants were ‘neutral’ with the statement
• Somewhat disagree: none of the participants ‘somewhat disagree’ with the statement
• Completely disagree: none of the respondents
‘completely disagree’ with the statement
I HAVE MORE MONEY TO SPEND BECAUSE OF TOURISM ON ARUBA:
• Completely agree: 29 respondents which represents 18% of the participants ‘completely agree’ with the statement
• Somewhat agree: 49 respondents which represents 30%
of the participants ‘somewhat agree’ with the statement
UAUCUStudent Research Exchange Collected Papers 2018
74
agree; with the statement
• Somewhat agree: 32 respondents which represents 20%
of the participants ‘somewhat agree’ with the statement
• Neutral: 46 respondents which represents 28% of the participants were ‘neutral’ with the statement
• Somewhat disagree: 64 respondents which represents 40% of the participants ‘somewhat disagree’ with the statement
• Completely disagree: 20 respondents which represents 12% of the participants ‘completely disagree’ with the statement
When analyzing the results on perception of impact on prices and costs there was a clear difference. Regarding the rise in prices in certain areas, the majority of respondents agreed that there are indeed areas in Aruba where prices are noticeably higher than other areas. Notably, these areas are the two districts with the highest concentration of tourism activities. Also notable was, that majority of the respondents believed that the higher prices were caused by increased quality of service and products being offered which relates to them agreeing that tourism raises quality. Additionally, as mentioned before, tourism leads to urban shopping centers to be revitalized (Ryan C. & Page S. 2000) as destinations strive to offer high value to tourists in order to maximize income (Albayrak T., Caber M., & Çömen, N. 2016).
Another factor that may contribute to higher prices is supply and demand. Research conducted by the Aruba Tourism Authority revealed that on average, in a given year, for every 1 local, there are approximately 9.5 tourists. That being said, the demand in areas with high concentration of tourists will be much higher than non-tourist areas, and may impact the prices in those areas only. Additionally, the various restaurants in those areas offer unique services and specialties, which allows them to set their own prices and differentiate themselves, causing monopolistic competition.
This may also be a reason for the higher prices (Principles of Economics, 2014). For those respondents who did not Additionally, the respondents were ‘neutral’, ‘somewhat agreed’
and ‘completely agreed’ with the statement of ‘Aruba would be a dull place if tourists did not visit’. None of the respondents disagreed with this statement, thus lending some support to respondents who said that tourism impacts the entire island one way or another. However, despite the fact that the respondents do believe this to be true, most do not feel better off, benefited or have more money because of tourism which indicates that personally they do not experience any impact.
Important to note is, that the percentage for those respondents who did not agree to be better off, having more money to spend and experience fairly distributed benefits of tourism, closely resembles the percentage of respondents who identified their employment to be unrelated to the tourism industry.
Perception of impact on prices and costs (percentages are rounded up)
TOURISM MAKES PRICES RISE, SO LOCALS CAN NO LONGER AFFORD TO ENJOY AMENITIES IN CERTAIN AREAS OF ARUBA:
• Completely agree: 40 respondents which represents 25% of the participants ‘completely agree’ with the statement
• Somewhat agree: 109 respondents which represents 67% of the participants ‘somewhat agree’ with the statement
• Neutral: 10 respondents which represents 6% of the participants were ‘neutral’ with the statement
• Somewhat disagree: 3 respondents which represents 2% of the participants ‘somewhat disagree’ with the statement
• Completely disagree: none of the respondents
‘completely disagree’ with the statement
TOURISM HAS INCREASED THE COST OF LIVING IN ARUBA:
• Completely agree: none of the respondents ‘completely
that the Aruban community is currently tolerant of the current situation, but that improvements can be made so that the economic impact can be much more positive than at current levels.
Additionally, it was noted that the main problems that locals experience because of tourism from their perspectives were the following: higher prices, not many shopping options, too ‘Americanized’, no Aruban authenticity, wages not high enough, immigrants dominating the industry, an economy that is highly vulnerable to changes in the tourism industry, and most do not feel any personal economic benefit from tourism.
To help mitigate these problems, it would be advised that the government and other stakeholders take note of the following: high prices are believed to be caused by high import duties and high quality of the products and services being offered. A suggestion might be to create policies to stimulate and increase locally produced items by the means recycling. Not only can this reduce the need to import and reduce the costs of import duties, but also by making use of recycling, this may also contribute to solving the current challenges the island faces with its dumpsite. Additionally, it may result in higher authenticity.
Another recommendation would be to stimulate and increase locally-grown produce and cattle breeding. Having seen that Aruba offers a large variety of restaurants that operate in a monopolistic competition market, it would be beneficial to locally produce the raw materials that these restaurants need to operate. This may result in fewer imports and therefore lower costs to produce and operate, while giving the restaurants the chance to offer tourists fresh and high-quality ‘products’ (food/cuisine/cooking).
At the same time, more locals can benefit by expanding the agriculture industry to keep up with this demand. This may also lower prices and raise the contribution of local expenditure in restaurants.
agree, they believed that the high prices are not caused by tourism but by inflation and high import duties.
The majority of respondents disagreed that tourism has increased the cost of living. The ones that were neutral stated that cost of housing, utilities, etc., did not rise because of tourism; however, as mentioned before, shopping and dining expenses have. For this reason, they are neutral, as they feel tourism has increased part of their costs, but not the majority.
It is important to note that for those who agreed, their motivation was that house/properties, supermarkets and rental apartments closer to the tourist areas were more expensive and therefor raised the cost of living.
It was also notable that the percentage of respondents who agreed had a close correlation with the respondents who identified themselves as residents in the district of Noord.