Stakeholders’ Perception on the Impacts of Tourism on Mass Destinations: The Case of Seville

Abstract

Stakeholders’ participation is critical to implementing sustainable development models at mass tourism destinations. Through the application of a mixed methodology focused on the collection, processing, and analysis of quantitative and qualitative data, this study analyzes the perception of residents, accommodation establishments, the academic community, and tourists in the city of Seville, since they are the possible agents of change in the current model. In addition, the study of perceptions provides information to extract a definition of mass tourism for these groups. Findings show that the majority of those surveyed affirm the presence of mass tourism in the city, and choose carrying capacity as an instrument to predict this type of tourism. We also show that, while mass tourism is not a sustainable model, its transformation is possible. As a consequence, the tourists’, destination’s and local population’s tolerance limits would determine the size and direction of the tourist impact.

Full text

sustainability
Article
Stakeholders’ Perception on the Impacts of Tourism on Mass
Destinations: The Case of Seville
Marina Haro Aragú*, Josefa García-Mestanza * and Lidia Caballero-Galeote *


Citation: Haro Aragú, M.;
García-Mestanza, J.;
Caballero-Galeote, L. Stakeholders’
Perception on the Impacts of Tourism
on Mass Destinations: The Case of
Seville. Sustainability 2021,13, 8768.
https://doi.org/10.3390/su13168768
Academic Editor: Nikolaos Boukas
Received: 30 June 2021
Accepted: 2 August 2021
Published: 5 August 2021
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral
with regard to jurisdictional claims in
published maps and institutional affil-
iations.
Copyright: © 2021 by the authors.
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
This article is an open access article
distributed under the terms and
conditions of the Creative Commons
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
4.0/).
University Institute for Research, Intelligence and Tourism Innovation, University of Malaga (i3t),
29071 Málaga, Spain
*Correspondence: marinaharo94@uma.es (M.H.A.); jgm@uma.es (J.G.-M.); lidia.caballero@uma.es (L.C.-G.);
Tel.: +34-630856977 (M.H.A.)
Abstract:
Stakeholders’ participation is critical to implementing sustainable development models
at mass tourism destinations. Through the application of a mixed methodology focused on the
collection, processing, and analysis of quantitative and qualitative data, this study analyzes the
perception of residents, accommodation establishments, the academic community, and tourists in
the city of Seville, since they are the possible agents of change in the current model. In addition, the
study of perceptions provides information to extract a definition of mass tourism for these groups.
Findings show that the majority of those surveyed affirm the presence of mass tourism in the city,
and choose carrying capacity as an instrument to predict this type of tourism. We also show that,
while mass tourism is not a sustainable model, its transformation is possible. As a consequence, the
tourists’, destination’s and local population’s tolerance limits would determine the size and direction
of the tourist impact.
Keywords:
tourism impact; mass destinations; stakeholders’ perception; tourism changes; sustainability
1. Introduction
Tourism began to grow as an economic activity after the Second World War, based
on four key elements: the presence of a greater economic surplus in the population;
changes in work systems (vacations); the landscape, natural and cultural resources of some
regions, and technological advances in means of transport and communication [
1
]. When
one of these key elements is weaker, there are a series of consequences. Tourism is not
a harmless activity, since its uncontrolled and massive development has had significant
repercussions for the natural environment, contributing to the degradation of the landscape
and environment in various areas, including cities. An increasing and massive influx of
visitors poses specific problems of tourist saturation, with all the negative effects that this
entails [
2
]. This is one of the reasons why Butler [
3
] argues that tourism should be linked to
sustainability, stating that if there is no equitable development of resources in a destination,
uncontrolled planning emerges, which eventually turns into mass tourism. The sustainable
model of tourism seeks to satisfy the needs of tourism, as well as those of the host regions;
that is, to make tourism an economic source, attempting to eliminate the negative effects
that tourists have on these areas without compromising the ability of future generations to
meet their own needs [4]. However, the concept of mass tourism has also been associated
with positive effects, since a major part of income from tourism in the world comes from
this type of tourism—in terms of income earned from tourist activities, mass tourism is one
of the most important factors [5].
For years, the Fordist Tourism Model, characterized by mass production and economy
of scale with high concentration, has been present in the management of many tourist
destinations [
6
]. In fact, despite the appearance of a new, more differentiated and flex-
ible development model in the 1980s [
7
], the model persists. Society started to use the
expression “mass tourism” as an indication of its concern with the increase in tourists,
Sustainability 2021,13, 8768. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13168768 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability

Sustainability 2021,13, 8768 2 of 27
which, paradoxically, it had contributed to feeding. Mass tourism is related to the carrying
capacity of a territory, that is, the reaction and resilience of an environment to a certain
occupational density, expressed in a limit occupation figure [8].
This leads us to reflect on the effects that mass tourism has in society (economic, social
and environmental). This is even more true given that the COVID-19 pandemic has placed
us in the context of a global health and economic crisis never before experienced. Tourism
has played a very important role in the recovery from the main crises experienced by Spain
(1981, 1993, and 2008) [
1
], which have all shown similar patterns. This means that existing
theories can often explain the phenomena observed today. The 2008 economic crisis, known
as the Great Recession, registered negative growth in the tourism sector, although at the
same time, new market models emerged [9].
Although we have mentioned four key elements that boosted tourism, the health
crisis due to coronavirus has brought us a fifth: health has entered the scene, taking center
stage. In another era, we might have accepted that if the economy works, tourism works.
However, without health, the economy does not work, and therefore, neither does tourism.
Despite this, the slowdown of tourist activity has not only alleviated CO
2
emissions,
but also reduced the overexploitation of natural and heritage resources in many tourist
destinations. Many historical and monumental cities are benefiting from this decrease in
the number of tourists, which has allowed the regeneration of natural resources [
10
]. The
arrival of the vaccine against COVID-19 is postulated as a definitive measure to stop the
pandemic, since natural immunity would mean a high number of deaths, especially among
individuals belonging to risk groups [
11
]. The current situation represents an opportunity
to consider the transformation of the global tourism system towards one that better aligns
with the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals for 2030, and a boom in this
market after the pandemic [12].
In addition to the above, there is the fact that in some urban spaces, mass tourism
is incompatible with residential use, since it profoundly affects aspects such as house
pricing [
13
], the nature of business, the use of public spaces, air quality, etc. Moreover, the
effects of these processes in the historic centers of cities are contradictory, since they damage
and can even destroy some of the intangible heritage value of cities and, therefore, their
attractiveness [
14
]. This is the case in the city of Seville, a city with a vast historical heritage
and potential; it is the fourth largest city in Spain, the capital, and the most populated
urban conurbation in Andalusia. It has nationwide interconnection with highways that
communicate with the rest of Spain, as well as an airport [15].
On the other hand, it became the focus of attention at national level with the
1992 Seville
International Exposition, which triggered major urban modification and promoted an
internal restructuring of the city [
14
]. After the 2008 crisis, the specialization of tourism
in Seville grew even faster, making it the fashionable destination it is today, and breaking
records with more than 3 million visitors in 2018 [
16
]. In the process of expanding tourism,
the insertion of services oriented towards the needs of visitors implies new businesses
oriented towards leisure [
17
]. This commercial transformation has a direct impact on the
public space, since, together with new bars and restaurants, the privatization of squares
and streets extends with the installing of tables, chairs, etc., which in turn has an impact on
the landscape [18].
Our research aims to analyze the perceptions of the different stakeholders involved,
who permanently coexist with tourists in the city of Seville, and who can therefore con-
tribute to changing the current model. These include residents, the academic community,
tourists, and accommodation establishments (henceforth, accommodations). The latter are
defined as those establishments whose main activity is to offer accommodation to people,
by price, on a regular and professional basis, with or without other complementary services,
through the generic name of a hotel, hostel, pension, or similar [
19
]. For the purposes of
this study, in addition to the above, tourist apartments have been added to this group.
The findings of this study can provide practical means of creating tourism that is
more sustainable, since the uncontrolled, massive development of tourism has negative

Sustainability 2021,13, 8768 3 of 27
repercussions for the natural environment [
2
], which is why sustainable tourism implies
not only economic profitability, but also social welfare and ecological balance [
20
]. After
this introduction, this paper proceeds as follows: Section 2introduces a complete review of
the literature, delving into the conceptual connotations of mass tourism. Section 3proposes
the research model through a mixed methodology. Finally, Section 4shows the results
obtained, and Sections 5and 6offer a discussion and final conclusions, limitations, and
potential topics for future research.
2. State of the Art
The democratization of tourism, part of the configuring of the welfare society [
21
–
23
],
led to mass tourism in the second half of the 20th century [
6
,
24
]. The number of tourists
worldwide grew uninterruptedly until 2020, as did the industry, from 25 million in the
1950s to 1500 million [25–29].
The previous literature (Table 1) has shown us that the definition of mass tourism
has been changing. However, there are elements that are repeated in the contextualiza-
tion of some authors. As [
30
] indicates, these concepts present in the literature derive
primarily from the experiences of destinations. Some, such as [
31
], relate it to the carrying
capacity of a territory, which may be related to the perception of [
32
], which considers it a
quantitative concept.
Others authors [
33
–
35
] point out that it is more related to the participation of a large
number of people, and to standardized, inflexible and rigidly packaged vacations. This can
generate, as mentioned in [
36
,
37
], a seasonal, concentrated form of tourism, mainly around
the modality of sun and sand, which incorporates the features of monoculture, single prod-
uct, coastline, seasonality, “residentiality”, domesticity, and urbanization
without urbanity.
On the other hand, some authors [
38
,
39
] refer to the scarce contact between residents
and tourists. This may be because, as mentioned in [
40
,
41
], many businesses dedicated
to this activity are not located in the territory. In fact, under this conceptualization, mass
tourism would be a product created by companies outside the destination who do not aim
to integrate themselves into the city.
Table 1. Conceptual connotations of mass tourism.
Conceptual Connotations of Mass Tourism Authors
Designed to be marketed to large numbers of tourists, offers minimal opportunities for contact and
understanding between hosts and tourists. [38]
Related to the carrying capacity of a territory. [31]
A quantitative concept. [32]
Refers more to the impact on the local environment than to the number of tourists. [24]
Is related to two main characteristics: (a) participation of a large number of people in tourism; and (b)
standardized, rigidly packaged, and inflexible vacations. [33]
Holidays are standardized and rigidly packaged (including transportation, accommodation and
sightseeing); mass-produced by a low number of bidders; marketed to an undifferentiated clientele;
consumed by tourists regardless of norms or local culture.
[34,35]
Generates a seasonal, concentrated tourism, mainly around the modality of sun and sand. [36,37]
Ownership of the companies that exploit this tourism is not usually local. [40]
Characterized by homogenization, chain production, theatrical authenticity, spatial concentration. [41,42]
Consists of: monoculture, single product, coastline, seasonality, “residentiality”, domesticity, and
urbanization without urbanity. [43]
Concepts present in the literature derive primarily from the experiences of destinations. [31]
Highlights the aspect of inappropriate or non-existent contacts among residents and tourists. [38,39]
Source: Authors.

Sustainability 2021,13, 8768 4 of 27
Tourism, which was first perceived as a social achievement, unlimited and harmless,
with wonderful economic effects in certain regions, began to show its negative conse-
quences, and voices spoke out against it, particularly in the crowded Mediterranean
destinations that hosted it [
44
]. Not surprisingly, the scientific publications addressing
the phenomenon since the early 1970s have mentioned its negative consequences, relating
it to health problems and pollution [
45
–
50
]. At an empirical level, various authors have
shown that residents care about the numbers and types of tourists who visit them [
51
], and
that tourists have economic [
52
,
53
], cultural [
54
], social [
55
], and sociocultural impacts [
56
]
on the sustainability of the environment [
3
,
57
,
58
], politics [
59
], urban planning [
60
], and
technology [
61
]. These consequences do, however, depend on an understanding of the
perceived impacts on employment and income, the development of infrastructures, and
care for the environment (degree of local development), as well as on the use of tourist
resources by residents [62,63].
The economic, social and environmental subsystems in the area of a tourist destination
have a certain load capacity. The tolerance limits of tourists, the destination and the local
population determine the magnitude and direction of the tourists’ impact. What does not
exceed these limits can be positive, but everything that exceeds the tolerance threshold will
be perceived as negative, with the resident feeling that the place no longer belongs to them,
and with the visitor believing that authenticity is nowhere to be found [64–74].
In fact, since the 1990s, a growing number of tourists and residents, the European
Council itself, and even the UNWTO have called for limits and a qualitative change to
mass tourism, which would harmonize the rights of tourists, present and future, with those
of the local population and respect for the environment. This commitment is not only
to reductionism, but to sustainable, complex adaptive systems that integrate human and
natural systems, as reflected in the scientific literature [75–98].
Numerous studies and a body of academic research exist that analyze the great tourist
potential of certain cities [
99
], such as Seville. This city enjoys a diversity of resources that
specialize in cultural tourism, which acts as an attraction factor [
14
,
100
–
102
]. However, the
rapid growth of a tourism economy in the urban area has caused certain economic, social,
spatial and environmental changes among local communities [
103
–
108
]. The objective
must consist of a firm commitment to sustainable territorial and tourist development,
integrated into the local economy and society, which is also respectful of cultural and
environmental heritage.
Under the assumption that it is possible to start, direct and change tourist flows, the
commitment should be to the development of sustainable mass tourism, as the desired
result for most of the destinations in which conventional tourism has reached the end of its
life cycle [
109
–
115
]. In this sense, although its development represents an acknowledged
difficulty, it is necessary to find an alternative mass tourism that is enlightened, viable and
credible, and in which carrying capacities gradually increase to adapt to higher levels of
visits [
60
,
72
,
115
–
118
]. In any case, such tourism constitutes an option to tackle the future
recovery of the sector after the global pandemic, conditioned by the success of vaccination
against COVID-19 and the ability to alleviate social distancing restrictions.
In order to understand mass tourism and redirect it towards sustainable mass tourism,
it is essential to know the perceptions and attitudes of the different agents operating in a
destination, as well as those of the tourists themselves [
119
–
122
]. The theories that analyze
these social perceptions derive chiefly from social psychology and sociology. Among others,
the theories of social representations [
123
,
124
], attachment to the community [
125
,
126
], the
growth machine [
127
,
128
] and social exchange are worthy of note. Furthermore, a common
thread between these theories is that they consider the dynamic and progressive nature
of changes in perceptions as tourism and its impacts change. Hence the importance of
conducting periodic empirical studies that assess the perceptions of different agents.
Freeman’s Stakeholder Theory (1984) suggests that an organization is characterized
by its relationships with various groups and individuals, including employees, clients,
suppliers, governments, and community members. In this sense, for the proper functioning

Sustainability 2021,13, 8768 5 of 27
of an organization, it is necessary that all the interests of each of the groups be taken into
account [
129
]. The so-called agents or strategic actors (stakeholders) constitute the interest
groups or parties concerned with the permanent and cooperative processes of tourism
governance [
130
]. The development of a destination in terms of the field of tourist activity
is largely determined by the relationships that exist between the actors that are included
in it [131].
The literature review has revealed the important role of local residents in the
development of tourism in their city. In fact, research such as that by Sdrali, Goussia-
Rizou, and Kiourtidou [
132
] highlights the importance that this stakeholder group can
have by becoming involved and feeling part of the development project. In this line, the
establishments not only contribute to economic development by providing employment,
but also become a stakeholder in the sustainability of the destination, as their activity will
depend on it [
133
]. For their part, policies need to bring together as many stakeholders as
possible, since the development of a tourist area may depend on the decisions made by
this group. Proof of this is given by the numerous studies on the impact of policies on the
tourism sector [134–137].
Thus, at a political level, the impact of tourism is one of the challenges when rethink-
ing the city and socio-spatial segregation, from the perspectives of both infrastructure,
which leads to new real estate bubbles, and the sociology of everyday life. Analyses of
the perceptions of the impact of mass tourism in the city of Seville must therefore be
comprehensive in order to reveal and understand the diverse perceptions of the different
actors and social groups affected by and/or involved in the rapid expansion of urban
tourism in the centers of many European cities [17,138].
In order to undertake this study adequately, we posed the following
research questions:
RQ1—What is understood by the term “mass tourism”?
RQ2—What are the positive and negative impacts of mass tourism, as perceived by stake-
holders individually?
RQ3—What are the positive and negative impacts of mass tourism, as perceived by stake-
holders in a certain destination?
RQ4—Does mass tourism exist in the city of Seville?
RQ5—Could mass tourism become a sustainable model?
3. Materials and Methods
3.1. Study Area
Seville is the capital of Andalusia (Figure 1). This province is the largest in the
autonomous community. It borders the provinces of Malaga and Cadiz to the south,
Huelva to the west, Badajoz to the north, and Cordoba to the east.
This city has experienced one of the biggest urban transformations. The continuity
of the same political party and, therefore, of the same strategy, the celebration of the fifth
centenary of the Discovery of America, and the success of the celebration of the Universal
Exposition in 1992 were the starting points for a favorable urban development [
139
].
Despite being an inland territory, the Guadalquivir River became the backbone of the city’s
urban plan. Its climate, its historical heritage, and its two great attractions, Easter Week
and the April Fair, have made the destination world famous. Its historic center, an area
of 2 square miles, has three monuments declared World Heritage Sites by UNESCO: the
Alcazar palace complex, the Cathedral, and the General Archive of the Indies. The study
area has been delimited to the municipality of Seville. This can be seen in Figure 2. This
city is also the most populated in Andalusia, with 691,395 inhabitants [140].
In 2017, tourism generated 17% of Seville’s total wealth [
141
]; in this area, 2019 was a
historic year. Seville had a record 3.12 million travelers staying in hotels and apartments,
6.7 million overnight stays, and an occupancy rate of 76.4% [
142
,
143
]. In relation to the
Spanish market, the community of Andalusia itself was the main attraction of Seville, with
435,911 tourists and a 0.91% increase. However, the crisis due to the worldwide pandemic
derived from COVID-19 meant a loss of 74% in overnight stays [144].

Sustainability 2021,13, 8768 6 of 27
Figure 1. Location under study. Source: Authors.
Figure 2.
Municipality of Seville. Source: Sigs GeoSevilla [
145
]. As can be seen in Figure 2, the different colors represent the
central districts of Seville.
3.2. Sampling, Data Collection, and Analysis
Studies involving qualitative methodology are still scarce in the academic litera-
ture [
146
]. However, as indicated by Tashakkori et al. [
147
], research questions coming
from social science studies are more adequately answered through a mixed methodology.
In fact, there are numerous investigations that have applied both quantitative and qualita-
tive methods in their research [
148
–
152
]. This is largely because, while quantitative analysis
quantifies the data, qualitative analysis interprets them [
153
], so it is necessary to attend
to the needs of the research in order to choose the most appropriate one. This research
proposes a mixed methodology since, as Mackey and Bryfonski [
154
] state, the combination

Sustainability 2021,13, 8768 7 of 27
of both approaches allows the researcher to examine a problem from complementary points
of view.
As such, the study design focused on the collection, processing, and analysis of
quantitative and qualitative data. This research analyzes the perceptions of residents,
tourists, accommodations, and academics regarding mass tourism in the city of Seville.
It also analyzes which of the definitions provided by the academic literature is the most
appropriate for each of the groups under study. From the study of perceptions, a definition
of mass tourism for residents, accommodations, academics, and tourists in the city of
Seville can be extracted. Despite the efforts made by the researchers, no response could be
obtained from the politicians.
The study was carried out in different phases. To ensure the relevance of the ques-
tionnaire, a pre-test was carried out with residents, academics, and accommodations. In
the residents’ pre-test, the questionnaire was distributed proportionally amongst genders,
ages, levels of study, and districts. In the particular case of tourists, pre-testing could not be
carried out due to confinement and perimeter closure. The pilot study of accommodations
was distributed based on category. No modification of the survey was necessary. Regarding
residents, the survey was conducted through a simple random sample. For the study on
accommodations, we extracted a list from the VisitaSevilla [
155
] website and telephone
surveys were conducted. Regarding academics, the questionnaires were sent by mail to
all the professors who teach Tourism at the university. Once the perimeter confinement
was cancelled, the tourist surveys could be conducted. We conducted questionnaires with
297 residents (sampling error 4.95%, reliability 91), 207 accommodations (sampling error
4.95%, reliability 95%), 25 tourists, and 10 tourism faculty professors from March 2021 to
June 2021. All the respondents participating in this study gave their consent to being a part
of this research. The interviews were imported, translated, and codified into NVivo 12 and
SPSS for data management and data analysis.
The questionnaire was structured into five sections (See Appendix A). The first section
includes a closed question about the existence of mass tourism in the city of Seville and
an examination of the definitions of mass tourism given by the academic literature. The
second section includes, for each of the groups, two open questions about perceptions
(either positive or negative) in relation to mass tourism. In the case of accommodation,
the two open questions deal with the positive or negative perceptions in relation to their
professional activity, while for tourists, these were related to the impacts they suffer, or
benefits they derive, from mass tourism. The third section concerns the positive or negative
perceptions of mass tourism in the municipality of Seville. The fourth section identifies
how mass tourism could contribute to the revitalization and recovery of tourism, as well
as whether the mass tourism model can be sustainable in case the respondent considers
that it is currently not. Since these are open-ended questions, the same answer may have
one or more different impacts. The fifth section incorporated social and demographic
characteristics; the variables analyzed were gender, age, occupation, and district. In the
case of accommodations, this last section analyzed the category of the accommodation, the
district, and years of professional activity.
4. Findings
This section outlines the findings of the study. They are shown for each group
of interest.
4.1. Mass Tourism: Existence and Definition
Mass tourism has been extensively studied in the academic literature. As a result,
there are numerous definitions of this phenomenon. The objective of this research was not
only to analyze the perceptions, but also to elaborate a definition, of this type of tourism.
To this end, all the interest groups were asked whether or not, based on their perceptions,
mass tourism exists in the city of Seville (See Table 2).

Sustainability 2021,13, 8768 8 of 27
Table 2. Mass Tourism existence in the city of Seville.
A R P T
Yes 68.65% 96.97% 30% 67%
No 27.03% 2.02% 70% 32%
No answer 0 0 0 0
Do not know 4.32% 1.01% 0 1%
Note: (A = accommodations; R = residents; P = professors; T = tourists). Source: Authors from SPSS.
If we take into account the perceptions of all groups in general, we can observe that,
except for professors, the groups agree in affirming that mass tourism does exist in the
city of Seville. However, some aspects should be clarified. There is a very wide difference
among the perceptions of the different categories of accommodations. In this sense, the
highest-category hotels (5 stars and 4 stars = 33) affirm that mass tourism does not exist
in the city of Seville (18%, 39%, respectively). In fact, the responses reveal that, to avoid
oversaturation, they create new tourism products and other ways of approaching local
traditions. This perception is not shared by the rest of the accommodations (3 stars and
below = 174), which state that mass tourism does exist (81.61%) and define it in relation to
the carrying capacity, the impact on the environment, and the concentration of tourism in
certain periods. In order to better understand these findings, some transcripts representing
the majority perception are shown below.
Respondent 103—5-stars hotel:
We believe that mass tourism does not exist because although there is a pronounced
seasonality, the city does not reach its carrying capacity. In this sense, we try to provide
services that decentralize the tourist activity of the saturated spots and that can provide a
more exclusive and even private experience or service.
Respondent 4—4-stars hotel:
If we take into account that mass tourism is a massive tourism, a tourism that makes the
resources of the city useless, Seville does not suffer from this type of tourism.
Respondent 201—3-stars hotel:
Mass tourism does exist. Although on the one hand it improves our income, we must
recognize that we depend on what the city has to offer. Without our heritage, local
friendliness, and history we would do nothing
. . .
We do not have the economic capacity
to generate exclusive services and that is why we rely on many local businesses. We are
dependent on the tourism management capacity of public administrations.
Respondent 156—Hostel:
I don’t know if the term is mass tourism but there is a lot of tourism, much more than
the city can handle. This would be good for business if it did not have so many negative
repercussions for the environment.
Respondent 297—Tourist Apartment:
Yes, there is mass tourism and in fact the tourist apartments have shown that the city is
in great demand. Every year without counting the pandemic we have grown in number
and profitability. We hope to continue growing.
This was followed by a question in which the subjects had to choose the correct
definition or definitions for mass tourism. Table 3shows the responses of each of the
groups. The most cited definitions in the literature were chosen after conducting a study
employing Proknow-C methodology.
As can be seen in the table above, the respondents chose “It is a quantitative concept
associated with the spatial concentration and carrying capacity of a territory.” as the definition
that best defines mass tourism. This indicates that all groups in this study share the same
concept of mass tourism.

Sustainability 2021,13, 8768 9 of 27
Table 3. Most appropriate definitions of mass tourism according to study groups.
A R P T
It is a quantitative concept associated with the spatial concentration and
carrying capacity of a territory. (DEF1) 38.3% 40.70% 68% 48%
It refers more to the impact on the local environment than to the number of
tourists. (DEF2) 23.4% 20.10% 28% 16%
It relates to standardized and rigidly packaged vacations. (DEF3) 6.38% 13.57% 0 4%
It is a chain of production by a small number of companies that are not
usually locally owned. (DEF4) 0 7.04% 0 0
It generates seasonal and concentrated tourism, mainly around the sun and
beach modality. (DEF5) 21.28% 13.07% 4% 32%
It offers inappropriate or minimal opportunities for contact. There is no
understanding between hosts and tourists. (DEF6) 10.64% 14.82% 0 0
Note: (A = accommodations; R = residents; P = professors; T = tourists). Source: Authors from SPSS.
4.2. Residents’ Perceptions of Mass Tourism
A total of 297 questionnaires were completed. The sample is representative of the city
of Seville in relation to gender (363,382 women = 52.56% and 328,013 men = 47.44%); 55.6%
of respondents were women (168) and 44.4% (129 respondents) were men. In total, 91.92%
of the sample were born in the municipality of Seville or had lived there for more than
10 years. The age groups and levels of study are shown in Table 4.
Table 4. Socio-demographic data.
Age Count Total Level of Studies Count Total
18–24 41 13.80% Primary Studies 13 4.37%
25–34 47 15.82% Secondary Education 67 22.62%
35–44 76 25.59% Degree 122 41.02%
45–54 44 14.81% Doctorate 95 31.99%
55–65 71 23.91% No answer 0 0.00%
More than 65 18 6.1%
To explore residents’ perceptions about the impacts of mass tourism, they were asked
about two aspects. The first questions were in relation to the positive and negative impacts
of mass tourism on their lives as residents (Graphic 1). Secondly, the impacts on the city
were discussed (Graphic 2). To illustrate this analysis, two diagrams are presented.
As can be seen in Scheme 1, the residents state that the most important positive effect
is the “economic” (41.75%) aspect, followed by “employment” (37.71%). The most cited
answer after the two previous ones was “there are no positive aspects of mass tourism”
(codified as “No positive aspects”) (9.43%). This percentage may be related to the high
number of negative impacts that residents associate with mass tourism (4 positive vs. 10
negative impacts). Among them, we can highlight “overcrowding” (mentioned in 28% of
total responses = 83 residents), loss of purchasing power (20% = 60 residents), “insecurity”
(12% = 36 residents), “environmental impact” (11% = 32 residents) and “employment-
related” (10% = 30 residents) aspects. If we delve deeper into the latter, residents mentioned
the “precariousness of employment” associated with a massive, low-quality product that
needs to save costs in order to be competitive. It is interesting to note that the spread of
coronavirus appeared as a negative effect (code = “COVID”).

Sustainability 2021,13, 8768 10 of 27
Scheme 1.
Diagram of codification for the positive and negative impacts of mass tourism on local people. Note: Closer to
the core, higher percentage of responses. Source: Authors from NVivo 12.
Scheme 2shows the effects of mass tourism on the city of Seville. “Economy” and “gen-
eration of employment” are the two most cited impacts (250 and 243 mentions, respectively),
followed by “prestige” (63 mentions). In relation to the negative effects, “gentrification”
(67% of respondents refer to the process of displacing = 199 residents) and “precarious
jobs” (59.93% of respondents = 178 residents) stand out, followed by “insecurity” (57.91%
of respondents = 172 residents), “saturation” (42% of respondents = 124 residents), and
“pollution” (29.97% of respondents = 89 residents). It is interesting to note that in addition
to these aspects, residents believe that mass tourism causes excessive competition among
businesses in the city, which is related to the low quality of services. In addition, residents
are concerned about the “loss of cultural identity” (27.95% of respondents = 83 residents)
and the “bad reputation” (5.72% of respondents = 17 residents) that this type of tourism
may create for the city.
Scheme 2.
Diagram of codification for the positive and negative perceptions of residents regarding mass tourism in the city
of Seville (Impacts on the city). Note: Closer to the core, higher percentage of responses. Source: Authors from NVivo 12.

Sustainability 2021,13, 8768 11 of 27
Although there are no significant differences in relation to age or educational level,
there are significant differences in relation to gender. Most of the responses that included
“prestige” as a positive effect were contributed by women under 40 years of age. Employ-
ment was mentioned equally by both genders (137 men vs. 113 women mentioned it);
however, men mention “employment” and “economy” separately, while women related
both attributes in their answers.
4.3. Accommodations’ Perceptions about Mass Tourism
A total of 207 accommodations were surveyed. The sample was distributed among
5-stars hotels (2.41%), 4-stars hotel (13.53%), 3-stars hotels (7.73%), 2-stars hotels (6.28%),
1-star
hotels (3.86%), hostels and guesthouses (30.43%), and tourist accommodations
(35.76%). It should be mentioned that this investigation was carried out during the state of
alarm declared by the Spanish authorities. This brought tourism activity to a standstill. In
fact, even today (June 2021), a total of 173 accommodations remain closed [156].
In relation to the positive impacts of mass tourism on the tourism business activity
of Seville’s accommodations, only two aspects stand out (Scheme 3). On the one hand,
mass tourism helps the economy and its growth, and on the other hand, it provides
better investments for the city. In order to more easily understand their answers, two
transcriptions are given.
Scheme 3.
Diagram of codification for the positive and negative perceptions of accommodations regarding mass tourism
(impact on their business). Note: Closer to the core, higher percentage of responses. Source: Authors from NVivo 12.
Respondent 13—Hostel:
Mass tourism collaborates with the economy of the city of Seville. Thanks to the fact that
more tourists come and spend their income in the city, there is a movement that puts
millions of euros into circulation.
Respondent 199—3 stars Hotel:
Mass tourism needs infrastructures and therefore investments. The city is looking
for more tourism and the public authorities know that it is necessary to invest in the
improvement and sustainable development of the city.
The negative aspect most cited by the accommodations is the excessive competition
within the municipality (49.75%). This fact may be associated with the second element,
“low income” (31.40%). It should be noted that despite the fact that three negative aspects
are cited by this group, the coding diagram shows that 9% of accommodations perceive no
negative impacts of mass tourism on their business.
If we analyze Scheme 4(on the negative and positive impacts of mass tourism in the
city of Seville), we can observe that the aspects that most concern the accommodations
are the difficulties in progressively changing the tourism model (58.94%), the problems

Sustainability 2021,13, 8768 12 of 27
that the coexistence of tourists and residents generate in the city (40.57%), and the “loss
of natural resources” (32%). On the other hand, “social and cultural benefits”, economic
improvement, and “international recognition” are the aspects most mentioned as positive
impacts (49.76%, 45.89%, and 33.82%, respectively).
Scheme 4.
Diagram of codification for the positive and negative perceptions of accommodations
regarding mass tourism (impact on the city). Note: Closer to the core, higher percentage of responses.
Source: Authors from NVivo 12.
4.4. Academic Professors’ Perceptions about Mass Tourism
A total of 10 professors completed the survey. It should be noted that the academic
community expressed much more detailed opinions than the rest of the groups. No
differences were observed between individual impacts and impacts on the city. This is why
overall perceptions are presented in the same diagram (Scheme 5). As a positive aspect,
they highlighted the increase in income caused by mass tourism (80%). This is related to an
increase in employability in the sector (90%). In other words, if more tourists come, more
income is generated, more personnel are required, and there is therefore more employment.
However, concerning the negative impacts, the most important is the “deterioration of
natural resources” (70%). This is not only an impact on the city, but also on its residents.
The “deterioration of tourist resources” (60%) or becoming an ‘”artificial destination” (40%),
together with residents’ rejection of mass tourism (20%), are the elements that make up the
coding diagram of the negative impacts.
Scheme 5.
Coding diagram on professors’ perceptions of mass tourism. Note: Closer to the core, higher percentage of
responses. Source: Authors from NVivo 12.

Sustainability 2021,13, 8768 13 of 27
4.5. Tourists’ Perceptions of Mass Tourism
Regarding the perceptions of tourists, the surveys were carried out in the center of
Seville. A total of 25 questionnaires were completed. It was not possible to obtain a
larger number of respondents due to the perimeter closures imposed by the Andalusian
Government. The responses provided by this group are shown in the following Scheme 6:
Scheme 6.
Diagram of codification for the positive perceptions of tourists regarding mass tourism in
the city of Seville (impact on tourists as individuals). Note: Closer to the core, higher percentage of
responses. Source: Authors from NVivo 12.
The tourists stated that, thanks to mass tourism in the city, there is greater investment
in infrastructure, and they cited this as a positive impact on themselves, since they benefit
from these improvements (Scheme 7). In this sense, they stated that mass tourism increases
the available supply, so that prices are lower and they have an exponentially increasing
number of possibilities and opportunities to choose from. However, in relation to the
impacts on the city, tourists recognize that mass tourism provides greater employment,
external recognition, and more business opportunities.
Scheme 7.
Diagram of codification for the positive perceptions of tourists regarding mass tourism
in the city of Seville (Impact on the city of Seville). Note: Closer to the core, higher percentage of
responses. Source: Authors from NVivo 12.

Sustainability 2021,13, 8768 14 of 27
In the analysis of the negative effects, important results came to light. Tourists do not
differentiate between the negative impacts they suffer and those that the city may suffer.
According to their perceptions, overcrowding or loss of cultural identity are impacts that
both they and the city suffer. On the one hand, they affirmed that sometimes it is not easy
to visit a monument when thousands of other people are also contemplating it at the same
time. As such, they are sometimes forced to finish their visit earlier, something they would
tell their friends about. This would then have repercussions for the city. Despite this, as
it can be seen in Scheme 8a quarter of the tourists surveyed indicated that this type of
tourism has no negative effects on them or on the city.
Scheme 8.
Diagram of codification for the negative perceptions of tourists regarding mass tourism in
the city of Seville. Note: Closer to the core, higher percentage of responses. Source: Authors from
NVivo 12.
4.6. Sustainable Mass Tourism
This section explores whether mass tourism is a sustainable type of tourism, and, if
it is not, what measures could be taken to make it sustainable in the city of Seville. For a
visual representation of the results, the reader is referred to Scheme 9.
Scheme 9.
Overall findings regarding mass tourism and sustainability. Note: Existence and sustainability of mass tourism
in the city of Seville according to the groups under study. Source: Authors.

Sustainability 2021,13, 8768 15 of 27
5. Discussion
This research aims to explore the existence and impacts of mass tourism in the city of
Seville via the perceptions of residents, accommodation, academic professors and tourists,
as well as the most accepted definitions among these stakeholders. In line with tourism
impact studies, it is possible to classify mass tourism impacts. In this case, the categories
are employment, economic, environmental, cultural and urban planning, which cohere
with the findings of other authors in the literature [
52
–
60
], who established that tourism
generates impacts in terms of economic, cultural, social, environmental and urban planning.
The results demonstrate two things. Firstly, related to the first and fourth research
questions, the majority of those surveyed affirmed that mass tourism is present in the
city of Seville. Despite the fact that the academy has conceptualized mass tourism in
different ways [
24
,
30
–
43
], the findings reveal that the key definition concerns the carrying
capacity [
31
], which indicates that the agents do not consider whether the tourism is
seasonal or is related to the sun and the beach, as stated by some authors [
36
,
37
]. In line
with previous studies [
8
,
54
,
64
–
74
], the economic, social and environmental subsystems of
an area that is a tourist destination have a certain carrying capacity. It is clearly shown that
everything that does not exceed these limits can be positive, but everything that exceeds a
tolerance threshold will be perceived as negative, causing residents to feel that the place
no longer belongs to them, and leaving the visitor with the impression that authenticity is
nowhere to be found. The consequence of this is that the magnitude and tolerance limits
of tourists, the destination, and the area’s local population determine the direction of the
impact of tourism.
Secondly, for the second and third research questions, the stakeholders took different
approaches. Regarding residents’ perceptions, and in line with previous studies [
52
,
53
],
we can state that each impact can be perceived from both a negative and a positive point
of view. Employment or the improvement of the economy seem to be the key, and are
related to the economic impact. The economy is an issue of concern to all stakeholders,
as is shown in previous studies [
52
,
53
], and this is supported by the high percentage
of mentions per case under study. However, they are also concerned about low-quality
and qualification employment, which also bring about poor conditions and therefore
low salaries. As other studies have noted [
36
,
37
], little training exists, and there are no
possibilities for advancement.
From these results, it is clear that, for the residents of the city of Seville, mass tourism
is that which benefits the economy, but at the same time overcrowds their city, increases
competitiveness among their businesses, lowers prices, and offers low-quality employment.
This result links well with previous studies, which state that mass tourism has impacts on
employment and income, the development of infrastructures, and care for the environment
(degree of local development), as well as the use of tourist resources by residents [
62
,
63
].
The members of this group are the ones who are most in contact with tourists, since they
are the ones who live with them. The rest of the stakeholders gave their opinions based on
their knowledge in this regard, but not on what they had experienced in the first person.
As for accommodation, mass tourism produces economic benefits, but reduces the
possibility of changing the model. In addition, this group affirmed that mass tourism
can generate serious conflicts with the inhabitants and losses of natural resources, as the
literature has already indicated [
24
,
30
,
34
,
35
,
43
]. These authors state that mass tourism
is a model designed for marketing to a large number of tourists, which offers minimal
opportunities for contact and understanding between visitors and hosts, with more refer-
ence to the impact on the local environment than to the number of visitors. This generates
inappropriate or non-existent contact with residents, but does not take into account local
rules or culture.
However, mass tourism is responsible for international recognition, and the cultural
and social enrichment that comes from being in contact with people from other parts of the
world, an important issue asserted by [
54
–
56
], who state that tourism generates cultural,
social and sociocultural impacts.

Sustainability 2021,13, 8768 16 of 27
In their responses, professors related impacts from different perspectives. However,
although they offered the same definitions as the other groups, they considered that
tourism in the city of Seville has not reached a sufficient level to be called mass tourism.
This academic community stated that mass tourism is associated with carrying capacity,
an opinion shared with other stakeholders, but they also stated that in Seville, it has not
yet been overcome, so that for them, there is no mass tourism in the city. This opinion is
similar to that of some of the accommodations, such as 4- and 5-star hotels. However, this
differs from the opinions of residents, who do perceive mass tourism, just as it is perceived
by 1-, 2- and 3-star accommodations, as well as tourist hostels and apartments. These
results support the idea that this model generates seasonal, concentrated tourism [
36
,
37
].
In spite of this, they recognize that the city is progressing towards saturation, and propose
alternatives that, as an initial step, include a new tourism development plan in which all
groups are involved.
Despite the efforts made by the authors on several occasions, it was not possible to
obtain a response from the political group. This fact implies that political groups are not
playing their role, since they are generating policies without taking others into account,
which breaks with the stakeholders’ theory. Something that all stakeholders agree on is that
this concept is associated with carrying capacity, and regardless of whether they consider
it to exist or not, to prevent it, we need less quantity and more quality—that is, new
policies focused on innovation (as indicated by tourists) and on seeking new destinations
(as indicated by teachers). For mass tourism to be sustainable, there does not have to be
quantity, competition or insecurity, but rather new technologies and new policies.
Tourists, for their part, state that mass tourism forces the city’s infrastructure to
improve, as [
62
,
63
] pointed out. They take advantage of this, just as they benefit from the
competition that exists in the sector. In this sense, they recognize that the city of Seville has
a large availability accommodation, especially in the most central neighborhoods.
Regarding the fifth research question, mass tourism is not a sustainable model, but
it could become one. Tourism remains unquestionably a social achievement, and proof
of this is given not only by the economic impacts it has in the communities. Additionally,
as Bramwell [
44
] stated, some agents claim negative effects that a good use of resources
could remedy. This is also mentioned by other studies [
109
–
115
], who stated that sustain-
ability was an objective that could allow the continuity of the mass model, and it is also
emphasized that this type of tourism does not lose pace. The results indicate that this type
of tourism could continue if planning is imposed that takes into account the perceptions
and attitudes of the different agents involved [
119
–
121
]. To this end, several solutions have
been proposed, outstanding among which are the improvement of tourism policies, more
attention to residents, the decentralization of tourism, control of tourist licenses, new source
markets, and the elimination of seasonality through the enhancement of
historical heritage.
6. Conclusions
Mass tourism has become a main economic driving force in Spain [
6
]. It is also a
model that does not have to decline inexorably, and it can continue to be competitive
and is even recommendable in certain circumstances [
44
,
157
–
159
]. Likewise, it has acted
as a window on the outside world and become part of the modernization process, as it
accompanied social and cultural changes towards the spheres of capitalist, democratic
countries [160–162].
The main objective of this study was to analyze, by means of a mixed methodology, the
perceptions of the different stakeholders who coexist with tourists in Seville. In addition,
we studied the presence of mass tourism in the city, the impacts that it has generated, and
the commitment to a model of sustainable mass tourism. Although tourism has positive
effects, it requires the environment not be degraded, since tourism cannot be separated from
the environment, or from the residents or the rest of the agents involved. As reflected in the
literature on this topic [
58
,
75
–
98
], reductionism is not a single undertaking—it also involves
complex adaptive systems that are sustainable; that is, an enlightened, viable, credible

Sustainability 2021,13, 8768 17 of 27
alternative mass tourism that integrates human and natural systems, in which carrying
capacities gradually increase to accommodate higher levels of visits [60,72,115–118].
One of the limitations found was the lack of tourist subjects due to mobility restrictions
not only in Seville, but also worldwide, at the time this study was carried out, and so
future research should increase the sample size. There were also limitations in the sample
corresponding to the group of politicians, as they did not agree to participate in the survey.
The separation of political power from the other groups derives from this, since if com-
munication does not exist between them, the policies implemented will lack the sufficient
knowledge of the needs and expectations of the other groups, and their involvement in the
life of their town.
The group of university professors contributed more concrete opinions. However,
despite the fact that all of the subjects were offered the same definition, unlike the other
stakeholders, the teachers did not consider that mass tourism exists in the city of Seville.
This proposes another possible line of research that would use existing definitions to
implement more studies in real contexts with the participation of all interest groups.
Another future line of research could be to study the sporadic peaks in tourism that the
city experiences at designated times, to which the academic community refers. These lead
to the implementation of planning measures that allow anticipating and decentralizing this
kind of tourism, which, in a city like Seville, is responsible for ensuring that the destination
has international recognition, and is therefore culturally and socially enriched. We propose
a joint, comprehensive analysis of all the costs and effects created, since the long-term
competitiveness of tourism requires the generation of alternative, adapted models that
are more differentiated, flexible, and respectful of the environment and local populations,
while being economically feasible [37].
Finally, tourism has many other aspects that can influence the attitudes of the differ-
ent stakeholders involved in its development. It is important that studies use the same
definition, as otherwise validity would be reduced. Therefore, future studies would benefit
from the inclusion of more participants and from conducting a comparative study with
another city of similar characteristics, which would allow us to extract perceptions and
explore characteristics, other environments and cultures, deepening our understanding of
the attitudes of these agents in other contexts.
Author Contributions:
Conceptualization, M.H.A., J.G.-M. and L.C.-G.; Data curation, L.C.-G.;
Formal analysis, J.G.-M. and L.C.-G.; Investigation, M.H.A., J.G.-M. and L.C.-G.; Methodology,
M.H.A., J.G.-M. and L.C.-G.; Project administration, M.H.A., J.G.-M. and L.C.-G.; Resources, M.H.A.,
J.G.-M. and L.C.-G.; Software, L.C.-G.; Supervision, M.H.A., J.G.-M. and L.C.-G.; Writing—original
draft, M.H.A., J.G.-M. and L.C.-G.; Writing—review & editing, M.H.A., J.G.-M. and L.C.-G. All
authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding:
The research in this paper was funded by the project, “Overtourism in Spanish coastal
destinations. Tourism degrowth strategies an approach from the social dimension.” (RTI2018–094844-B-C33)
financed by the Spanish Ministry of Science, Innovation and Universities (National Plan for I+D+i),
the Spanish State Research Agency, and the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF).
Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement:
Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in
the study
.
Data Availability Statement: Not applicable.
Acknowledgments:
We would like to thank all the participants for having dedicated their time,
making it possible to carry out this project.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Sustainability 2021,13, 8768 18 of 27
Appendix A Questionnaire
Block 1 Definition of Mass Tourism
Mass tourism in the city of Seville . . .
DEF 1 has been present.
DEF 2 is beneficial.
DEF 3 can help the tourism sector recover.
DEF 4 is sustainable.
Indicate according to your perception which definition or definitions would be the most
consistent to define Mass Tourism
DEFINI 1 It is a quantitative concept associated with spatial concentration, which is why it
is related to the carrying capacity of a territory.
DEFINI 2 It is the one that refers more to the impact on the local environment than to the
number of tourists.
DEFINI 3 It is the one that relates to standardized and rigidly packed vacations.
DEFINI 4 It is one in which it is produced in a chain by a small number of companies that
are not usually locally owned.
DEFINI 5 It is the one that generates a seasonal and concentrated tourism, mainly around
the modality of sun and beach.
DEFINI 6 It is the one that offers inappropriate or minimal opportunities for contact and
understanding between the hosts and the tourists or these contacts.
Blocks 2–3 Perceptions of Mass Tourism for Your Business
List the positive aspects of mass tourism for your business.
List the negative aspects of mass tourism for your business.
Indicate the positive aspects of mass tourism for the city of Seville.
Indicate the negative aspects of mass tourism for the city of Seville.
Sociodemographic
Please, now we need to know general information about your activity. Indicate the type
of accommodation:
Hotel *
Hotel **
Hotel ***
Hotel ****

Sustainability 2021,13, 8768 19 of 27
Hotel *****
Pensions
Tourist apartments
Hostels
How many years has this accommodation been in business for you?
More than 10
From 5 to 10
From 3 to 5
Recently opened (up to 3 years inclusive)
Select the district where your accommodation is located:
Alfalfa
Arenal
Encarnacion-Regina
fair
Museum
San Bartolome
San Gil
Saint Julian
San Lorenzo
Saint vincent
Santa Catalina
Santa Cruz
Appendix B Word Code
Word Length Count Weighted
Percentage (%) Similar Words
work 4 54 006
bring, brings, employed, employment, going, influences,
make, makes, run, work, works
job 3 34 005 business, businesses, job, jobs
city 4 26 004 city, municipality, Seville
none 4 24 003 none, no
economic 8 20 003 economic
economy 7 20 003 economy

Sustainability 2021,13, 8768 20 of 27
Word Length Count Weighted
Percentage (%) Similar Words
tourism 7 18 003 tourism, tourists, tourist,
people 6 15 002 people
think 5 15 002 believe, consider, means, think
cultural 8 12 002 cultural, culture, cultures
increase 8 12 002 addition, increase, increased, increases, increasing,
progress, progresses
many 4 12 002 many
generates 9 14 002 generate, generates, generation, get, give, gives, créate,
creating
lot 3 11 002 lot, much, more
sector 6 11 002 sector, sectors field, fields
positive 8 13 002 favorable, place, positions, positive, positively, situation,
good, well
created 7 13 001 create, created, creates, make, makes, produces
employment 10 19 001 employed, employment, useful, job, jobs
opportunities 13 10 001 opportunities, opportunity
benefits 8 9 001 benefit, benefiting, benefits
impact 6 10 001 affect, impact, impacts
beneficial 10 11 001 beneficial, good
creation 8 9 001 creation, exists, origins, world
greater 7 8 001 greater
income 6 8 001 Income, benefits
see 3 12 001 consider, find, finding, meet, meeting, see, visit
case 4 8 001 case, causes, example
new 3 7 001 new, young
activity 8 7 001 activated, activation, activity, alive
aspect 6 6 001 aspect, aspects
directly 8 8 001 directly, managed, now, place, ways
especially 10 6 001 especially
good 4 11 001 depend, depends, full, good, just
therefore 9 6 001 therefore, thus
high 4 6 001 high, richness, rich
wealth 6 6 001 richness, wealth
like 4 5 001 like, as
money 5 5 001 money
although 8 5 001 although
gives 5 10 001 contribution, give, gives, hand, leave, make, makes
atmosphere 10 4 001 atmosphere
contact 7 6 001 contact, meet, meeting
different 9 4 001 different
helps 5 4 001 help, helps
hospitality 11 4 001 hospitality
hotel 5 4 001 hotel, hotels
large 5 4 001 great, large
tourists 8 4 001 tourists
part 4 6 001 contribution, leave, part, share, starting
keeps 5 5 001 keeps, livelihood, living, observed, sustenance
depends 7 5 001 depend, depends, true
flow 4 4 000 flow, run
number 6 4 000 coming, number
areas 5 3 000 areas, countries, country
companies 9 3 000 companies, enterprise, enterprises, company
diversity 9 3 000 diversity
exchange 8 3 000 exchange, exchanges, exchanging
highlight 9 3 000 highlight
nothing 7 3 000 nothing
personally 10 3 000 personally
possibility 11 3 000 possibility
promote 7 3 000 promote
residents 9 3 000 resident, residents

Sustainability 2021,13, 8768 21 of 27
Word Length Count Weighted
Percentage (%) Similar Words
seville 7 3 000 Seville, city, municipality
sometimes 9 3 000 sometimes
life 4 4 000 alive, life, living
local 5 4 000 local, place
offers 6 3 000 going, offers
find 4 5 000 find, finding, get, happens, observed
affect 6 4 000 affect, impressions, moves
also 4 2 000 also
better 6 2 000 better
citizens 8 2 000 citizens
environment 11 2 000 environment
etc 3 2 000 etc
even 4 2 000 even
farmers 7 2 000 farmers
friends 7 2 000 friends
indirectly 10 2 000 indirectly
industry 8 2 000 industry
leisure 7 2 000 leisure
main 4 2 000 main, principal, the most
miss 4 2 000 miss, want
multiculturalism 16 2 000 multiculturalism
negative 8 2 000 negative
options 7 2 000 options
power 5 2 000 power
precarious 10 2 000 precarious
purchasing 10 2 000 purchasing
related 7 2 000 related, associated
restaurant 10 2 000 restaurant, restaurants
thanks 6 2 000 thanks, thank, due to, because of
usually 7 2 000 usually
everything 10 2 000 everything, all
since 5 2 000 since
brings 6 5 000 bring, brings, contribution, get
causes 6 6 000 causes, get, make, makes
going 5 6 000 going, leave, living, moves, run, starting
become 6 4 000 become, coming, get, going
favorable 9 2 000 favorable, prefer
visit 5 2 000 visit, visitor
arrive 6 3 000 arrive, coming, get
family 6 2 000 family, home
home 4 2 000 home, international
important 9 2 000 important, means
place 5 4 000 home, place, situation
full 4 3 000 full, richness
leave 5 2 000 leave, results
know 4 2 000 know, living
living 6 2 000 living, population
able 4 1 000 able
accommodation 13 1 000 accommodation
added 5 1 000 added
agree 5 1 000 agree
airport 7 1 000 airport
alone 5 1 000 alone
always 6 1 000 always
arranged 8 1 000 arranged
back 4 1 000 back
beautiful 9 1 000 beautiful
certain 7 1 000 certain
commerce 8 1 000 commerce
council 7 1 000 council

Sustainability 2021,13, 8768 22 of 27
Word Length Count Weighted
Percentage (%) Similar Words
daughter 8 1 000 daughter
end 3 1 000 end
entrepreneurs 13 1 000 entrepreneurs
fact 4 1 000 fact
fees 4 1 000 fees
financially 11 1 000 financially
flights 7 1 000 flights
forth 5 1 000 forth
happens 7 2 000 happens, occurs
happy 5 1 000 happy
inbred 6 1 000 inbred
indifferent 11 1 000 indifferent
infrastructures 15 1 000 infrastructures
internationalization
20 1 000 internationalization
known 5 1 000 known
language 8 1 000 language
little 6 1 000 little
livestock 9 1 000 livestock
long 4 1 000 long
monthly 7 1 000 monthly
neither 7 1 000 neither
nice 4 1 000 nice
obviously 9 1 000 obviously
one 3 1 000 one
opposite 8 1 000 opposite
others 6 1 000 others
partner 7 1 000 partner
prestige 8 1 000 prestige
raisin 6 1 000 raisin
ranchers 8 1 000 ranchers
really 6 1 000 really
relationship 12 1 000 relationship
reverts 7 1 000 reverts
sales 5 1 000 sales
saw 3 1 000 saw
son 3 1 000 son
specifically 12 1 000 specifically
springboard 11 1 000 springboard
suppliers 9 1 000 suppliers
taxes 5 1 000 taxes
terms 5 1 000 terms
third 5 1 000 third
town 4 1 000 town
traditional 11 1 000 traditional
value 5 1 000 value
varied 6 1 000 varied
yes 3 1 000 yes
among 5 1 000 among
anything 8 1 000 anything
everyone 8 1 000 everyone
sevillian 9 1 000 sevillian
something 9 1 000 something
get 3 3 000 get, produces, starting
means 5 2 000 means, ways
coming 6 2 000 coming, occurs
impressions 11 2 000 impressions, richness
origins 7 2 000 origins, starting
exists 6 2 000 exists, living

Sustainability 2021,13, 8768 23 of 27
References
1.
Benito, R.M. El turismo como sector estratégico en las etapas de crisis y desarrollo de la Economía Española. Int. J. Sci. Manag.
Tour. 2016,2, 81–115.
2.
Hernandez, M.G. Turismo y medio ambiente en ciudades históricas. De la capacidad de acogida turística a la gestión de los flujos
de visitantes. An. Geogr. Univ. Complut. 2000,2000, 131–148.
3. Butler, R.W. Tourism, environment, and sustainable development. Environ. Conserv. 1991,18, 201–209. [CrossRef]
4. Swarbrooke, J. Sustainable Tourism Management; CAB International: Wallingford, UK, 2000.
5.
Akis, A. The effects of mass tourism: A case study from Manavgat (Antalya-Turkey). Proc. Soci. Behav. Sci.
2011
,19, 289–296.
[CrossRef]
6. Anguló, E.; Catalina, S. Tourist expenditure for mass tourism markets. Anna. Tour. Res. 2000,27, 624–637. [CrossRef]
7.
Ioannides, D.; Debbage, K. Post-Fordism and flexibility: The travel industry polyglot. Tour. Manag.
1997
,18, 229–241. [CrossRef]
8.
Gonzalez, F. Del Turismo de Masas al Turismo Masivo; Blog d’Economia i Empresa; 5 October 2015. Available online: https:
//economia-empresa.blogs.uoc.edu/es/del-turismo-de-masas-al-turismo-masivo/ (accessed on 28 March 2021).
9.
Zenker, S.; Kock, F. The coronavirus pandemic–A critical discussion of a tourism research agenda. Tour. Manag.
2020
,81, 104164.
[CrossRef] [PubMed]
10.
González, E.I. La Pandemia Como Oportunidad de Mejora en el Modelo Turístico; Blog Eco-Razon; 18 March 2021. Available online:
https://eco-razon.es/la-pandemia-oportunidad-de-mejora-en-el-modelo-turistico/ (accessed on 28 March 2021).
11.
Cruz, M.; Hortal, J.; Padilla, J. Vísteme despacio que tengo prisa. Un análisis ético de la vacuna del COVID-19: Fabricación,
distribución y reticencia. Enrahonar. Int. J. Theor. Pract. Reason 2020,65, 57–73. [CrossRef]
12.
Rivera García, J.; Pastor Ruíz, R. ¿Hacia un turismo más sostenible tras el COVID-19? Percepción de las agencias de viajes
españolas. Gran Tour Rev. Investig. Turísticas 2020,21, 206–229.
13.
Garcia-Ayllon, S. Urban transformations as an indicator of unsustainability in the P2P mass tourism phenomenon: The Airbnb
case in Spain through three case studies. Sustainability 2018,10, 2933. [CrossRef]
14.
Jover, J.; Díaz-Parra, I. Gentrification, transnational gentrification and touristification in Seville, Spain. Urban Stud.
2020
,57,
3044–3059. [CrossRef]
15.
Martos, E. Todo el Año es ya Temporada Alta en Sevilla; ABC; 23rd January 2018. Available online: http://sevilla.abc.es/sevilla/sevi-
todo-temporadaalta-sevilla-201801232335_noticia.html (accessed on 28 March 2021).
16.
Díaz-Parra, I.; Jover, J. Overtourism, place alienation and the right to the city: Insights from the historic centre of Seville, Spain. J.
Sustain. Tour. 2021,29, 158–175. [CrossRef]
17.
Barrero, M.; Jover, J. Paisajes de la turistificación: Una aproximación metodológica a través del caso de Sevilla. Cuad. Geográficos
Univ. Granada 2021,60, 13–34. [CrossRef]
18.
Fernández, A.; Santos, E. La difícil convivencia entre paisaje urbano y turismo: Clasificación de conflictos y propuestas de
regulación a partir del análisis comparativo de normativas locales. Boletín Asoc. Geógrafos Españoles
2018
,78, 180–211. [CrossRef]
19.
Instituto Vasco de Estadística. Definición de Establecimiento Hotelero. 2021. Available online: https://www.eustat.eus/
documentos/opt_1/tema_141/elem_4814/definicion.html (accessed on 20 July 2021).
20.
Pons, G.X.; Blanco-Romero, A.; Navalón-García, R.; Troitiño-Torralba, L.; Blázquez-Salom, M. Sostenibilidad Turística: Over-
tourism vs undertourism. Monogr. Soc. D’història Nat. Balear. 2020,31, 1–146.
21. Ivars, B. Tourism planning in Spain-evolution and perspectives. Ann. Tour. Res. 2004,31, 313–333. [CrossRef]
22. Almeida, F. La política turística en España y Portugal. Cuad. Tur. 2012,30, 9–34.
23.
Batle, J.; Garau-Vadell, J.B.; Orfila-Sintes, F. Are locals ready to cross a new frontier in tourism? Factors of experiential P2P
orientation in tourism. Curr. Issues Tour. 2020,23, 1277–1290. [CrossRef]
24. Gordon, B.M. El turismo de masas: Un concepto problemático en la historia del siglo XX. Hist. Contemp. 2002,25, 125–156.
25. Nieto, J.L.; Román, I.M.; Bonillo, D.; Paulova, N. El turismo a nivel mundial. Int. J. Sci. Manag. Tour. 2016,2, 129–144.
26.
UNTWO. Soluciones Para Devolver la Salud al Turismo. 2021. Available online: https://www.unwto.org/es/healing-solutions-
tourism-challenge (accessed on 14 March 2021).
27.
UNTWO. 2020: El Peor Año de la Historia del Turismo, Con Millones Menos de Llegadas Internacionales. 2021. Available
online: https://webunwto.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/s3fs-public/2021-01/210128-barometer-es.pdf?afhE7NpuFgX_3avC5
b8GTiE2T7Ptcw9J (accessed on 28 March 2021).
28.
Bianchi, R.V.; de Man, F. Tourism, inclusive growth and decent work: A political economy critique. J. Sustain. Tour.
2021
,29,
353–371. [CrossRef]
29.
Croes, R.; Ridderstaat, J.; B ˛ak, M.; Zientara, P. Tourism specialization, economic growth, human development and transition
economies: The case of Poland. Tour. Manag. 2021,82, 104181. [CrossRef]
30.
Cacciutto, M.; Castellucci, D.I.; Roldán, N.G.; Cruz, G.; Corbo, Y.A.; Barbini, B. Reflexiones a propósito del turismo masivo y
alternativo. Aportes para el abordaje local. Aportes Transf. 2020,18, 103–119.
31.
González, F. Del Turismo de Masas al Turismo masivo. Trib. Libre2015. Available online: https://economia-empresa.blogs.uoc.
edu/es/del-turismo-de-masas-al-turismo-masivo/ (accessed on 28 March 2021).
32. Jenkins, C.L. Mass Tourism’is an Out-dated Concept—A Misnomer? Tour. Recreat. Res. 2007,32, 112–113. [CrossRef]
33.
Vanhove, N. Mass Tourism: Benefits and Costs. In Tourism, Development and Growth: The Challenge of Sustainability; Pigram, J.J.,
Wahab, S., Eds.; Routledge: London, UK, 1997; pp. 50–68.

Sustainability 2021,13, 8768 24 of 27
34. Vainikka, V. Rethinking mass tourism. Tour. Stud. 2013,13, 268–286. [CrossRef]
35.
Nunkoo, R.; Gursoy, D. Political trust and residents’ support for alternative and mass tourism: An improved structural model.
Tour. Geograp. 2017,19, 318–339. [CrossRef]
36. Torres, R. Cancun´s tourism development from a Fordist spectrum of analysis. Tour. Stud. 2002,2, 87–116. [CrossRef]
37. Osorio, M. Turismo masivo y alternativo. Distinciones de la sociedad moderna/posmoderna. Convergencia 2010,17, 235–260.
38.
Gursoy, D.; Chi, C.G.; Dyer, P. Locals’ attitudes toward mass and alternative tourism: The case of Sunshine Coast, Australia. J.
Trav. Res. 2010,49, 381–394. [CrossRef]
39.
Sanz Blas, S.; Buzova, D.; Garrigós Simón, F.J.; Narangajavana Kaosiri, Y. Implicaciones del turismo masivo en un destino
de cruceros. In Proceedings of the INNODOCT/20, International Conference on Innovation, Documentation and Education,
Valencia, Spain, 11–13 November 2021; Universitat Politècnica de València: València, Spain, 2021; pp. 757–763.
40.
Casillas Bueno, J.C.; Moreno Menéndez, A.M.; Oviedo García, M.D.L.Á. El turismo alternativo como un sistema integrado:
Consideraciones sobre el caso andaluz. Estud. Turísticos 1995,125, 53–75.
41.
Donaire, J.A. La reconstrucción de los espacios turísticos. La geografía del turismo después del fordismo. Soc. Territ.
1998
,
28, 1–34.
42.
Theng, S.; Qiong, X.; Tatar, C. Mass tourism vs alternative tourism? Challenges and new positionings. Études Caribéennes
2015
,
31–32. [CrossRef]
43. Mantero, J.C. Urbanizaciones turísticas del litoral atlántico. Aportes Transf. 2001,5, 11–54.
44.
Bramwell, B. Mass tourism, diversification and sustainability in Southern Europe’s coastal regions. Coastal Mass Tourism:
Diversification and Sustainable Development in Southern Europe; Channel View Publications: Clevedon, UK, 2004; pp. 1–31.
45.
Hittmair, A.M. Gefahren des Massentourismus und Tourismusforschung aus volks-gesundheitlicher Sicht. Internist
1971
,12,
266–268.
46.
Bellan, G.; Pérès, J.M. La pollution dans le bassin méditerranéen (quelques aspects en Méditerranée nord-occidentale et en
Haute-Adriatique: Leurs enseignements). In Marine Pollution and Sea Life; Ruibo, M., Ed.; Fishing News Ltd.: Surrey, UK; FAO:
Rome, Italy, 1972; pp. 32–35.
47. Braun, P. Mass tourism—From the medical viewpoint. Orvosi Hetilap 1972,113, 2117–2118. [PubMed]
48.
Velimirovic, B. Mass travel and health problems (with particular reference to Asia and the Pacific Region). J. Trop. Med. Hyg.
1973
,
76, 2–7. [PubMed]
49. Goldsmith, E. Pollution by tourism. Ecologist 1974,48, 47–48.
50.
Guntern, G. Social change and mental health. The change of a mountain village in the Alps from an agricultural community to
tourist attraction. Psychiatr. Clin. 1974,7, 287–313.
51.
Mantero, J.G.; Barbini, B.; Bertoni, M. Turistas y Residentes en Destinos de Sol y Playa. Gestión Turística
1999
,4, 7–25. [CrossRef]
52.
Brida, J.G.; Pereyra, J.S.; Devesa, M.J.S.; Aguirre, S.Z. La contribución del turismo al crecimiento económico. Cuad. Tur.
2008
,22,
35–46.
53.
Hutsaliuk, O.; Smutchak, Z.; Sytnyk, O.; Krasnozhon, N.; Puhachenko, O.; Zarubina, A. Mass labour migration in the vector of
international tourism a determinant sign of modern globalization. Rev. Tur. Estud. Práticas 2020,3, 1–16.
54.
Archer, B.; Cooper, C.; Ruhanen, L. The positive and negative impacts of tourism. In Global Tourism; Theobald, W.F., Ed.;
Butterworth-Heinemann Ltd.: Boston, MA, USA, 2005; Chapter 5, pp. 79–102.
55.
Almirón, A.; Bertoncello, R.; Troncoso, C.A. Turismo, patrimonio y territorio: Una discusión de sus relaciones a partir de casos de
Argentina. Estud. Perspect. Tur. 2006,15, 101–124.
56. Costa, A.; Barretto, M. Los cambios socioculturales y el turismo rural: El caso de una posada familiar. Rev. Pasos 2007,5, 45–52.
57. Palazuelo, F.P. Sostenibilidad y turismo, una simbiosis imprescindible. Estud. Turísticos 2007,172, 13–62.
58. Buckley, R. Sustainable tourism: Research and reality. Ann. Tour. Res. 2012,39, 528–546. [CrossRef]
59. Schenkel, E. Turismo y política turística. Un análisis teórico desde la ciencia política. Rev. Reflex. 2019,98, 129–140. [CrossRef]
60.
Nolasco Cirugeda, A.; Martí, P.; Ponce, G. Keeping mass tourism destinations sustainable via urban design: The case of Benidorm.
Sustain. Dev. 2020,28, 1289–1303. [CrossRef]
61.
Bravo, R.; Catalán, S.; Pina, J.M. Understanding How Customers Engage with Social Tourism Websites. J. Hosp. Tour. Technol.
2021. Available online: https://www.emerald.com/insight/1757-9880.htm (accessed on 28 March 2021).
62.
Royo, M.; Ruiz, M.E. Actitud del residente hacia el turismo y el visitante: Factores determinantes en el turismo y excursionismo
rural-cultural. Cuad. Tur.
2009
,23, 217–236. Available online: https://revistas.um.es/turismo/article/view/70111 (accessed on
28 March 2021).
63.
González, M.; Iglesias, G. Impactos del turismo sobre los procesos de cohesión social y las políticas mitigantes para el caso de
Caibarién-Cuba. Estud. Perspect. Tur. 2009,18, 53–68.
64. Mathieson, A.; Wall, G. Tourism, Economic, Physical and Social Impacts; Longman: London, UK, 1982.
65. Ap, J. Residents’ perceptions on tourism impacts. Ann. Tour. Res. 1992,19, 665–690. [CrossRef]
66. Richards, G. (Ed.) Cultural Attractions and European Tourism; Cabi: London, UK, 2001.
67.
Gursoy, D.; Jurowski, C.; Uysal, M. Resident attitudes: A structural modeling approach. Ann. Tour. Res.
2002
,29, 79–105.
[CrossRef]
68. Torres, E. El turismo residenciado y sus efectos en los destinos turísticos. Estud. Turísticos 2003,2003, 45–70.

Sustainability 2021,13, 8768 25 of 27
69.
Andereck, K.L.; Valentine, K.M.; Knopf, R.C.; Vogt, C.A. Percepciones de los residentes sobre los impactos del turismo comunitario.
An. Investig. Turística 2005,32, 1056–1076. [CrossRef]
70. Wall, G.; Mathieson, A. Tourism: Change, Impacts, and Opportunities; Pearson Education: Harlow, UK, 2006.
71. Picornell, C. Los impactos del turismo. Pap. Tur. 2015,11, 65–91.
72. Kroes, R. Present-Day Mass Tourism: Its Imaginaries and Nightmare Scenarios. Society 2020,57, 385–391. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
73.
Ranwa, R. Impact of tourism on intangible culture heritage: Case of Kalbeliyas from Rajasthan, India. J. Tour. Cult. Chan.
2021
,
1–17. [CrossRef]
74.
Sokhanvar, A.; Jenkins, G.P. Impact of foreign direct investment and international tourism on long-run economic growth of
Estonia. J. Econ. Stud. 2021. [CrossRef]
75.
Dixon, J.A.; Fallon Scura, L.; van’t Hof, T. Meeting ecological and economic goals: Marine parks in the Caribbean. Ambio
1993
,
22, 117.
76.
Khan, M.M. Tourism development and dependency theory: Mass tourism vs. ecotourism. Ann. Tour. Res.
1997
,24, 988–991.
[CrossRef]
77.
McCool, S.F.; Lime, D.W. Tourism carrying capacity: Tempting fantasy or useful reality? J. Sustain. Tour.
2001
,9, 372–388.
[CrossRef]
78.
Hardy, A.; Beeton, R.J.; Pearson, L. Sustainable tourism: An overview of the concept and its position in relation to conceptualisa-
tions of tourism. J. Sustain. Tour. 2002,10, 475–496. [CrossRef]
79. Liu, Z. Sustainable tourism development: A critique. J. Sustain. Tour. 2003,11, 459–475. [CrossRef]
80. Farrell, B.H.; Twining-Ward, L. Reconceptualizing tourism. Ann. Tour. Res. 2004,31, 274–295. [CrossRef]
81.
Gössling, S.; Peeters, P.; Ceron, J.P.; Dubois, G.; Patterson, T.; Richardson, R.B. La ecoeficiencia del turismo. Econ. Ecológica
2005
,
54, 417–434. [CrossRef]
82.
Dwyer, L.; Edwards, D.; Mistilis, N.; Roman, C.; Scott, N. Destination and enterprise management for a tourism future. Tour.
Manag. 2009,30, 63–74. [CrossRef]
83.
Barr, S.; Shaw, G.; Coles, T.; Prillwitz, J. ‘A holiday is a holiday’: Practicing sustainability, home and away. J. Transp. Geogr.
2010
,
18, 474–481. [CrossRef]
84. Scott, D.; Hall, C.M.; Stefan, G. Tourism and Climate Change: Impacts, Adaptation and Mitigation; Routledge: London, UK, 2012.
85.
Mustapha, N.A.; Azman, I. Barriers to community participation in tourism development in island destination. J. Tour. Hosp. Culin.
Arts 2013,5, 102–124.
86.
Hall, C.M.; Scott, D.; Gössling, S. The primacy of climate change for sustainable international tourism. Sustain. Dev.
2013
,21,
112–121. [CrossRef]
87.
Opaschowski, H.W. ¿Turismo de masas o turismo a medida? Límites económicos, ecológicos y psicológicos. Pap. Tur.
2015
,4,
68–80.
88.
Sinclair-Maragh, G.; Gursoy, D.; Vieregge, M. Residents’ perceptions toward tourism development: A factor-cluster approach. J.
Destin. Market. Manag. 2015,4, 36–45. [CrossRef]
89.
Sinclair-Maragh, G.; Gursoy, D. A conceptual model of residents’ support for tourism development in developing countries. Tour.
Plann. Dev. 2016,13, 1–22. [CrossRef]
90.
Sinclair-Maragh, G.; Gursoy, D. Residents’ identity and tourism development: The Jamaican perspective. Int. J. Tour. Sci.
2017
,17,
107–125. [CrossRef]
91.
Boonsiritomachai, W.; Phonthanukitithaworn, C. Residents’ support for sports events tourism development in Beach City: The
role of community’s participation and tourism impacts. Sage Open 2019,9. [CrossRef]
92.
Hadinejad, A.; Moyle, B.D.; Scott, N.; Kralj, A.; Nunkoo, R. Residents’ attitudes to tourism: A review. Tour. Rev.
2019
,74, 150–165.
[CrossRef]
93.
Hadinejad, A.; Noghan, N.; Moyle, B.D.; Scott, N.; Kralj, A. Future research on visitors’ attitudes to tourism destinations. Tour.
Manag. 2021, 104215. [CrossRef]
94. Dolnicar, S. Designing for more environmentally friendly tourism. Ann. Tour. Res. 2020,84, 102933. [CrossRef]
95.
Sesini, G.; Castiglioni, C.; Lozza, E. New trends and patterns in sustainable consumption: A systematic review and research
agenda. Sustainability 2020,12, 5935. [CrossRef]
96.
Arbolino, R.; Boffardi, R.; de Simone, L.; Loppolo, G. Multi-objective optimization technique: A novel approach in tourism
sustainability planning. J. Environ. Manag. 2021,285, 112016. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
97.
Durán Román, J.L.; Cárdenas García, P.J.; Pulido Fernández, J.I. Tourist Tax to Improve Sustainability and the Experience in Mass
Tourism Destinations: The Case of Andalusia (Spain). Sustainability 2021,13, 42. [CrossRef]
98.
Hofman, K.; Hughes, K.; Walters, G. The effectiveness of virtual vs real-life marine tourism experiences in encouraging
conservation behaviour. J. Sustain. Tour. 2021, 1–25. [CrossRef]
99. Ashworth, G. Do we understand urban tourism? Tourism Hospit. 2012,1, 1–2. [CrossRef]
100.
Hernández, M.G.; de la Calle Vaquero, M.; García, M.D.C.M. Capacidad de carga turística y espacios patrimoniales. Aproximación
a la estimación de la capacidad de carga del conjunto arqueológico de Carmona (Sevilla, España). Boletín Asoc. Geógrafos Españoles
2011. Available online: https://bage.age-geografia.es/ojs/index.php/bage/article/view/1382 (accessed on 28 March 2021).
101.
Jover, J.; Díaz Parra, I. Who is the city for? Overtourism, lifestyle migration and social sustainability. Tour. Geograph.
2020
, 1–24.
[CrossRef]

Sustainability 2021,13, 8768 26 of 27
102.
Toro Sánchez, F.; López Bonilla, J.M.; López Bonilla, L.M. Early purchase in tourist activities: Evidence from a UNESCO world
heritage site. Rev. Tur. Estud. Práticas 2021,10, 1–16.
103.
Sanchez, M.E.; Rodriguez Rad, C.J.; Revilla Camacho, M.A. Relevance of social, economic, and environmental impacts on
residents’ satisfaction with the public administration of tourism. Sustainability 2019,11, 6380. [CrossRef]
104.
Mínguez, C.; Piñeira, M.J.; Fernández-Tabales, A. Social vulnerability and touristification of historic centers. Sustainability
2019
,
11, 4478. [CrossRef]
105.
Rodríguez, D.M.; Hidalgo, B.D.E.; Cano, M.T.P. Distrito central de destino: La representación del conflicto. Rev. Int. De Ciudad.
Turísticas 2020. [CrossRef]
106.
Jover Báez, J.; Berraquero Díaz, L. ¿Habitantes o visitantes? El impacto del alquiler vacacional en el mercado de vivienda en
Sevilla. Ciudad. Territ. Estud. Territ. 2020,LII, 823–840. [CrossRef]
107. Chica Olmo, J. Effect of monumental heritage sites on hotel room pricing. Int. J. Hospit. Manag. 2020,90, 102640. [CrossRef]
108.
Parra, I.D.; Sequera, J. Introducción al número especial “Turistificación y transformación urbana. Debates sobre la especialización
turística y sus consecuencias socioespaciales”. Cuad. Geográficos Univ. Granada 2021,60, 6–12. [CrossRef]
109.
Butler, R. Tourism in the twenty-first century: Reflections on experience. In The Resort Cycle Two Decades on; Faulkner, B., Moscardo,
G., Laws, E., Eds.; Continuum: London, UK, 2001; pp. 284–299.
110.
Hoerner, J.M. L’évolution de l’industrie touristique française. In Deux Sciècles de Tourisme en France; Sagnes, J., Ed.; Actes du
Colloque Tenu au Centre Duguesclin; UniversitéPaul Valéry, 30 septiembre 2000; Presses Universitaires de Perpignan: Perpignan,
France, 2001; pp. 85–99.
111.
Dodds, R.; Butler, R. Barriers to implementing sustainable tourism policy in mass tourism destinations. Tour. Int. Multidiscip. J.
Tour. 2009,5, 35–53.
112. Sörensson, A. Sustainable mass tourism: Fantasy or reality? Int. J. Environ. Cult. Econ. Soc. Sustain. 2011,7, 325–334. [CrossRef]
113.
Peeters, P. A clear path towards sustainable mass tourism? Rejoinder to the paper ‘Organic, incremental and induced paths to
sustainable mass tourism convergence’ by David B. Weaver. Tour. Manag. 2012,33, 1038–1041. [CrossRef]
114.
Weaver, D.B. Organic, incremental and induced paths to sustainable mass tourism convergence. Tour. Manag.
2012
,33, 1030–1037.
[CrossRef]
115.
Weaver, D.B. Asymmetrical di alectics of sustainable tourism: Toward enlightened mass tourism. J. Trav. Res.
2014
,53, 131–140.
[CrossRef]
116.
Zlatar Gamberoži´c, J.; Tonkovi´c, Ž. From mass tourism to sustainable tourism: A comparative case study of the island of Braˇc.
Soc. Ekol. ˇ
Casopis Ekološku Misao Sociol. Istraživanja Okoline 2015,24, 85–102. [CrossRef]
117.
Lopez Sanchez, Y.; Pulido Fernández, J.I. Factors influencing the willingness to pay for sustainable tourism: A case of mass
tourism destinations. Int. J. Sustain. Dev. World Ecol. 2017,24, 262–275. [CrossRef]
118.
Pereira, P.; Martins, J. Gestión sostenible del patrimonio hacia el impacto del turismo de masas: El proyecto HERIT-DATA. In
Proceedings of the International Conference on Intelligent Systems (IS), Madeira, Portugal, 25–27 September 2018; pp. 801–806.
119. Nogué, J. Turismo, percepción del paisaje y planificación del territorio. Estud. Turísticos 1992,115, 45–54.
120. Timón, D.A.B. El concepto de destino turístico. Una aproximación geográfico-territorial. Estud. Turísticos 2004,160, 45–68.
121.
Garau Vadell, J.B.; Gutierrez Taño, D.; Diaz Armas, R. Economic crisis and residents’ perception of the impacts of tourism in mass
tourism destinations. J. Destinat. Market. Manag. 2018,7, 68–75. [CrossRef]
122.
Gutiérrez Taño, D.; Garau Vadell, J.B.; Díaz Armas, R.J. The influence of knowledge on residents’ perceptions of the impacts of
overtourism in P2P accommodation rental. Sustainability 2019,11, 1043. [CrossRef]
123. Moscovici, S. El Psicoanálisis, su Imagen y su Público; Huemul: Buenos Aires, Argentina, 1961.
124.
Mora, M. La teoría de las representaciones sociales de Serge Moscovici. Athenea Digital. Rev. Pensam. Investig. Soc.
2002
,1.
[CrossRef]
125.
Bowlby, J. Attachment and loss: Volume II: Separation, anxiety and anger. In Attachment and Loss; Bowlby, J., Ed.; Separation,
Anxiety and Anger; The Hogarth Press and the Institute of Psycho-Analysis: London, UK, 1973; Volume II, pp. 1–429.
126.
Jurowski, C.; Uysal, M.; Williams, D.R. A theoretical analysis of host community resident reactions to tourism. J. Trav. Res.
1997
,
36, 3–11. [CrossRef]
127.
Martin, B.S. The efficacy of growth machine theory in explaining resident perceptions of community tourism development. Tour.
Anal. 1999,4, 47–55.
128. Doˇ
gan, H.Z. Forms of adjustment: Sociocultural impacts of tourism. Ann. Tour. Res. 1989,16, 216–236. [CrossRef]
129.
Parmar, B.L.; Freeman, R.E.; Harrison, J.S.; Wicks, A.C.; Purnell, L.; de Colle, S. Stakeholder theory: The state of the art. Acad.
Manag. Ann. 2010,4, 403–445. [CrossRef]
130.
Simancas, M.; Ledesma, O. The role of stakeholders in the process of governance and renovation of tourist coastal areas. Estud.
Perspect. Tur. 2017,26, 348–369.
131.
Merinero, R.; Pulido, J.I. Desarrollo turístico y dinámica relacional. Metodología de análisis para la gestión activa de destinos
turísticos. Cuad. Tur. 2009,23, 173–193.
132.
Sdrali, D.; Goussia-Rizou, M.; Kiourtidou, P. Residents’ perception of tourism development as a vital step for participatory
tourism plan: A research in a Greek protected area. Environ. Dev. Sustain. 2015,17, 923–939. [CrossRef]
133.
Hassan, T.H.; Shehata, H.S.; El-Dief, M.; Salem, A.E. The social responsibility of tourism and hotel establishments and their role
in sustainable tourism development in al-Ahsa, Saudi Arabia. GeoJ. Tour. Geosiitt. 2020,33, 1564–1570. [CrossRef]

Sustainability 2021,13, 8768 27 of 27
134.
Mei, X.Y.; Arcodia, C.; Ruhanen, L. Towards tourism innovation: A critical review of public polices at the national level. Tour.
Manag. Perspect. 2012,4, 92–105. [CrossRef]
135.
Foris, D. The Tourism Activities and the Impact of Public Policies. SIJ Trans. Ind. Finan. Bus. Manag.
2014
,2, 199–202. [CrossRef]
136. Jenkins, C.L. Tourism policies in developing countries: A critique. Int. J. Tour. Manag. 1980,1, 22–29. [CrossRef]
137.
Bagur-Femenías, L.; Martí, J.; Rocafort, A. Impact of sustainable management policies on tourism companies’ performance: The
case of the metropolitan region of Madrid. Curr. Iss. Tour. 2015,18, 376–390. [CrossRef]
138.
Alonso, I.M.; Tabales, A.F. Social perceptions and evaluations of the landscape at tourist destinations. Analysis of the city of
Seville by means of qualitative research techniques. Cuad. Tur. 2018,42, 651.
139.
Pérez Escolano, V.; Sevilla al Final del Siglo XX. La Transformación de la Ciudad. Available online: https://idus.us.es/bitstream/
handle/11441/33478/Sevilla%20al%20final%20del%20siglo%20xx.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y (accessed on 2 May 2021).
140.
INE. Poblaciónpor Comunidadesy Ciudades Autónomasy Tamañodelos Municipios. 2021. Available online: https://www.ine.
es/dyngs/INEbase/es/operacion.htm?c=Estadistica_C&cid=1254736177015&menu=ultiDatos&idp=1254735576863 (accessed on
10 May 2021).
141.
ABC Sevilla. 2021. Available online: https://sevilla.abc.es/sevilla/sevi-turismo-genera-17-por-ciento-riqueza-sevilla-cinco-
puntos-mas-espana-201708122121_noticia.html (accessed on 5 May 2021).
142.
Sevillaorg. 2021. Available online: https://www.sevilla.org/actualidad/noticias/el-ano-turistico-2019-cerro-en-sevilla-con-
un-record-de-3-12-millones-viajeros-alojados-en-hoteles-y-apartamentos-6-7-millones-de-pernoctaciones-y-una-ocupacion-
media-del-76-4 (accessed on 7 May 2021).
143.
VisitaSevilla. 2021. Available online: https://www.visitasevilla.es/profesionales/datos-estadisticos-2020 (accessed on 10
May 2021).
144.
Junta de Andalucía. Instituto de Estadística y Cartografía. 2021. Available online: http://www.juntadeandalucia.es/
institutodeestadisticaycartografia/sima/ficha.htm?mun=41091 (accessed on 5 May 2021).
145.
Urbanismo Sevilla. 2021. Available online: https://sig.urbanismosevilla.org/visorgis/geoSevilla.asp?Layers=IDES&Selected=01
(accessed on 5 May 2021).
146. Lee, T.; Lee, T. Using Qualitative Methods in Organizational Research; Sage: London, UK, 1999.
147.
Tashakkori, A.; Teddlie, C.; Teddlie, C.B. Mixed Methodology: Combining Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches; Sage: London, UK,
1998; Volume 46.
148. Clark, V.L.P.; Creswell, J.W. The Mixed Methods Reader; Sage: London, UK, 2008.
149.
Ivankova, N.V.; Creswell, J.W.; Stick, S.L. Using mixed-methods sequential explanatory design: From theory to practice. Field
Methods 2006,18, 3–20. [CrossRef]
150.
Cramer, E.; Nevin, A. A mixed methodology analysis of co-teacher assessments. Teach. Educ. Spec. Educ.
2006
,29, 261–274.
[CrossRef]
151.
Allen, H.W.; Herron, C. A mixed-methodology investigation of the linguistic and affective outcomes of summer study abroad.
Foreign Lang. Ann. 2003,36, 370–385. [CrossRef]
152.
Fernandes, G.; Ward, S.; Araújo, M. Identifying useful project management practices: A mixed methodology approach. Int. J.
Inform. Syst. Project Manag. 2013,1, 5–21.
153. Cassel, C.; Symon, G. Qualitative methods in organizational research. In A Practical Guide; Sage: London, UK, 1994.
154.
Mackey, A.; Bryfonski, L. Mixed methodology. In The Palgrave Handbook of Applied Linguistics Research Methodology; Phakiti, A., de
Costa, P., Plonsky, L., Starfield, S., Eds.; Palgrave Macmillan: London, UK, 2018; pp. 103–121.
155.
VisitaSevilla. 2021. Available online: https://www.visitasevilla.es/sites/default/files/professionals/files/HOTELES%20%2
02018.pdf (accessed on 2 March 2021).
156.
Sevilla Turismo. 2021. Available online: https://www.visitasevilla.es/sites/default/files/inline-files/HOTELES%20
CERRADOS%20%20%281%29.pdf (accessed on 21 June 2021).
157.
Claver-Cortés, E.; Molina-Azorı, J.F.; Pereira-Moliner, J. Competitiveness in mass tourism. Ann. Tour. Res.
2007
,34, 727–745.
[CrossRef]
158.
Cortes Jimenez, I.; Nowak, J.J.; Sahli, M. Mass beach tourism and economic growth: Lessons from Tunisia. Tour. Econom.
2011
,17,
531–547. [CrossRef]
159.
Ivars Baidal, J.; Rodriguez Sanchez, I.; Vera Rebollo, J.F. The evolution of mass tourism destinations: New approaches beyond
deterministic models in Benidorm (Spain). Tour. Manag. 2013,34, 184–195. [CrossRef]
160. Tomé, I.V. El turismo de masas en España. Estud. Turísticos 1983,80, 3–14.
161. Sánchez, E.M. El auge del turismo europeo en la España de los años sesenta. Arbor 2001,170, 201–224. [CrossRef]
162.
Aramberri, J. Turismo de Masas y Modernidad: Un Enfoque Sociológico; Centro de Investigaciones Sociológicas (CIS): Madrid,
Spain, 2011.