Abstract
At the outset, the purpose of this research was to establish a framework that, once in place, could identify and monitor changes in residents' opinions of tourism development in the cities of York, Bath and Chester in England. As well as establishing a framework, it was also anticipated that comparative analysis might well establish a basis for theory development regarding the social impacts of tourism on residents of historic cities in England. As the research developed, it became increasingly apparent that although the studies were providing an interesting benchmark of the social impacts of tourism in historic cities, they said little about residents' opinions regarding the planning actions taken by local government to manage tourism development. The three social impact studies proved interesting in that similarities and differences were found within and between the resident populations. Their most important contribution however is that they: 1) provided a response to the established need for more extensive longitudinal and comparative urban tourism research; 2) documented residents' opinions of tourism in three historic cities; 3) established a reliable sampling methodology for use in urban environments; 4) contributed a most important basis for the subsequent redirection of this doctoral research in that they led to the recognition that the social impacts of tourism should be investigated at the planning action level and not purely on a general level. In recognition of this observation, this research sought to develop a second framework that would enable residents to evaluate the specific tourism planning objectives and actions undertaken by local government. In order to achieve this, three further research phases were designed. The objectives of these phases were: 1) to establish the strategic tourism planning objectives and actions of local government in England (research phase II); 2) to develop a conceptual model which established a valid association of distinct planning actions with specific objectives (research phase II); 3) to investigate the commitment of local government to conducting resident tourism surveys (research phase III); 4) to utilise the information attained in the earlier research phases to develop a new methodology which is operationalised through the development of a computer model (research phase IV); 5) to involve the tourism officers in historic cities in the evaluation of this new methodology in terms of its potential to capture residents' opinions and improve the potential for more meaningful public consultation in the tourism environment (research phase IV). (Abstract shortened by ProQuest.).