10.1177/0047287504265501 ARTICLE AUGUST 2004 JOURNAL OF TRAVEL RESEARCH Factions and Enclaves: Small Towns and Socially Unsustainable Tourism Development JEFFREY SASHA DAVIS AND DUARTE B. MORAIS Pressured by the decline of extractive industries and ag- riculture, many small towns are trying to acquire a share of the tourism industry. While some communities decide to de- velop tourism from within their towns, often rural places turn to large-scale privately owned tourism enterprises to act as engines of economic development. While many studies have examined how tourism can have negative social impacts in rural communities, few studies detail how rural communi- ties’ attitudes toward tourism can suffer when locals feel alienated from planning/development decisions. In this study, the authors examined data from participant observa- tion and semistructured interviews in Williams, Arizona, to determine whether changes in community attitudes toward tourism followed patterns suggested by the established theo- retical models of social carrying capacity and community adaptation to a social disruption. We found that Williams is a case where the fast pace of tourism development causes community attitudes toward tourism to decline over time. Keywords: rural tourism; community attitudes; sus- tainable development; Arizona; Grand Canyon Tourism is considered an important tool for economic development in rural America, and many small towns are trying to acquire a share of this growing industry (Galston and Baehler 1995). Rural areas look to tourism as a means of community development and economic diversification. While some community leaders in small towns may often focus on the positive aspects of tourism development, many authors stress that both positive and negative consequences are involved with increased tourism activity and dependence (Allen et al. 1993; Lankford 1994; Long and Nuckolls 1992; Long, Perdue, and Allen 1990; Matsuoka 1991; Rothman 1998). Many approaches can be taken by small towns to develop their tourist industries. Frequently, towns seek to increase visitation by developing existing heritage resources. This is exemplified by the many towns that have taken advantage of the National Main Street Program to restore historic build- ings in aging downtowns (Francaviglia 1996; Skelcher 1991). The impetus for this kind of tourism development often comes from within the community. Conversely, a town may choose to develop tourism in partnership with an out- side company. Ski resorts, theme parks, casinos, golf resorts, and tourist railroads all fall into the category of corporate- owned attractions located in and around rural towns. In this article, we will examine the impact of this kind of tourism development on rural towns. These corporate tourism enterprises differ from locally created ones in important ways. First, they often have more capital resources than can be marshaled by community groups. Second, the decision- making process regarding the development may not be easily influenced by people in the community (Rothman 1998). Most of the important decisions may be made at an office that may be located in a distant metropolitan area. This can seriously compromise tourism development strategies that are based on community involvement. For some observers, tourism in rural areas is seen as a clean industry that can help towns recover from economic depression. Some authors have stressed, however, that the economic development aspects of tourism in rural areas needs to be balanced against the social and environmental impacts that can also arise (Holden 2000; Long and Lane 2000). Still other studies have shown that attitudes toward rural tourism development differ depending on whether the people are business owners, planners, politicians, develop- ers, workers, residents, or members of certain ethnic groups (Allen et al. 1993; King, Pizam, and Milman 1993; Lankford 1994; Lew 1989; Matsuoka 1991; Pearce 1994). A particular focus of tourism researchers has been mea- suring attitudes toward tourism based on the level of tourism activity in the town. Two general theories have developed concerning community acceptance of tourism development in rural towns. The first centers on Butler’s (1980) idea of the resort cycle. This perspective posits that tourism develop- ment starts off slowly in a community and builds through time. The quality of life in the community is said to decrease as tourism development increases past the community’s tol- erance level. Others have shown how community members’ acceptance of tourism activity drops sharply when the nega- tive consequences of tourism development (crime, parking problems, traffic, loss of a local “sense of place”) engulf a community overwhelmed with tourists. Like biological sys- tems, communities are said to have a “social carrying capac- ity” for tourist activities above which irritation occurs (Doxey 1976; Long, Perdue, and Allen 1990). The second theory is concerned with the effects of “boomtown” tourism (Perdue, Long, and Kang 1999). This Jeffrey Sasha Davis is an assistant professor in the Department of Geography at the University of Vermont in Burlington. Duarte B. Morais is an assistant professor in the School of Hotel, Restaurant, and Recreation Management, Pennsylvania State University in University Park. Journal of Travel Research, Vol. 43, August 2004, 3-10 DOI: 10.1177/0047287504265501 © 2004 Sage Publications