<%BANNER%>

Nature-Based Tourism Impacts in I-Lan, Taiwan: Business Managers' Perceptions

xml version 1.0 encoding UTF-8
REPORT xmlns http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitss xmlns:xsi http:www.w3.org2001XMLSchema-instance xsi:schemaLocation http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitssdaitssReport.xsd
INGEST IEID E20110404_AAAAAA INGEST_TIME 2011-04-04T05:13:11Z PACKAGE UFE0013620_00001
AGREEMENT_INFO ACCOUNT UF PROJECT UFDC
FILES
FILE SIZE 42961 DFID F20110404_AAAAPM ORIGIN DEPOSITOR PATH yang_j_Page_059.pro GLOBAL false PRESERVATION BIT MESSAGE_DIGEST ALGORITHM MD5
63939f39927691354e9570962aca7bde
SHA-1
353b4cb41c65d245be8eda4f15cc5acd37f243b4
25037 F20110404_AAAAOY yang_j_Page_118.QC.jpg
90505e37f93f894618c608ea2eff7f5e
dd3d3e58661e1a8ef133f682af260b651d82ec55
5640 F20110404_AAAAQA yang_j_Page_076thm.jpg
e3fe7ea942229ccb0efb9552db5378e8
f2e81026b33c3d32a8992a125ce2ef9d52fa1be7
819 F20110404_AAAAPN yang_j_Page_075.txt
1fc136ffb2819396da51c1a816e3436a
78aeeba174fea4e2b7c785b9f6d070157fb46f8f
26003 F20110404_AAAAOZ yang_j_Page_146.QC.jpg
6009ba8405f0c33e7d9e8b69389987d3
cf41b3924f49365ef16fab27d26afea60c3850f7
81434 F20110404_AAAAQB yang_j_Page_100.jpg
4d6274af4a4c59796ffbae6250c8efa0
686c5a68a12615b953623401822d4da6bce688d4
23775 F20110404_AAAAPO yang_j_Page_112.jpg
79102ad3f4a63fb075722a11ecf2d470
0ff161185d135e5283ddffa42fe82a79660136f7
92710 F20110404_AAAAQC yang_j_Page_154.jpg
048bb3e0732555f087c7b49ca67c3d0d
962b06217a11c18ff8388d32f3e8c916a3eca553
1051976 F20110404_AAAAPP yang_j_Page_044.jp2
b8376e6257ed84f8f62cd52d74e452bf
b5d7c0519dfdb73630075ff44511f70893210082
1051985 F20110404_AAAAQD yang_j_Page_050.jp2
054541496a40f7de88cb91e05a88e71f
cb8a90d496b4e180094f1a19c2e7c2190094201b
87143 F20110404_AAAAPQ yang_j_Page_106.jpg
de8d5811e02de6da7ed4ab17f0faa728
71e4e1fcde9ca1715d92aa4abc695d3746bfe87c
59219 F20110404_AAAAQE yang_j_Page_155.pro
91895822af96de3afc223a824e3a2083
65daf2c0a82b3be42cf70956229926a823b1ff5d
16758 F20110404_AAAAPR yang_j_Page_158.pro
6444ee668cbcc673d09785b13f621f6f
583952876633291b9ca289b854ac499bb54ec2a1
8423998 F20110404_AAAAQF yang_j_Page_100.tif
0b3a635b4daed8f25c3d3992932e8cb1
dd449203d5fc5f754ebe13962c0c6dd6de2aa50a
68327 F20110404_AAAAPS yang_j_Page_107.jpg
2e8f1311c0af87cb7b02a9b9f0e97b6b
67c352d22662eebd5a23846fab33eb6182f92bbb
28183 F20110404_AAAAQG yang_j_Page_120.jpg
be7794639b50dd117de9c995600dc1a2
df8f93b253b980a7ea8d5ca2bd732b2e163d10dc
F20110404_AAAAPT yang_j_Page_113.tif
b9e381d24d728c2ef913d317313d6850
63bdf20f7628dc23f422b5e4f23233147aafdec7
45204 F20110404_AAAAQH yang_j_Page_095.pro
8a773aa9cfb20237f80bdf964706d72a
5d47fc5ba7f3d09d51c8605d2a665bdd9d96cee3
1984 F20110404_AAAAPU yang_j_Page_099.txt
1f6caf44fac557ebf68ca7f8de503d04
79ad22b334073fa26c17bc0a24cab42ba1bdf9c3
2151 F20110404_AAAAQI yang_j_Page_149.txt
f87e041ac48b3f6a1b142b3e7af2034b
0a1fd3c7bde37be626ccac44787f2965f26e844e
50122 F20110404_AAAAPV yang_j_Page_025.pro
8fd2e5dfb5a91f611407297ff6686d77
8677bb48c0e16a38ece091390964d05e820179ea
16757 F20110404_AAAAQJ yang_j_Page_007.QC.jpg
ec53eca042845c995a979b6b060cc897
f66c3e0394b52c6fea8861eee9f178a1e8a50248
75265 F20110404_AAAAPW yang_j_Page_095.jpg
4e983783c6c74c661c93f5c2e542a726
013e6ecbdec2d060f91b53c6c4029018d98754ca
30449 F20110404_AAAAQK yang_j_Page_073.pro
d4aa386d72be7f31f3f3c45eb13aa5d4
9d6d9083e15b88b1d934efbc8649d3531ff20c32
5460 F20110404_AAAAPX yang_j_Page_059thm.jpg
f6a775aeb6501bd8ebad73d31935602e
2ab7a5f42b97d51bb578df2f236cb9d9ba91edb5
78960 F20110404_AAAAQL yang_j_Page_006.pro
caab0a580dda6bbd8accab85aa78cfb9
aa7da98735f871e43476e80245beba27bf2e7075
F20110404_AAAAPY yang_j_Page_084.tif
5164aec5cc94391aca941054383d2ca1
444ff74323957b6906317b6607ae5ec202c45989
52279 F20110404_AAAARA yang_j_Page_085.pro
432e98562b54fbe1360491203f427eb9
074cc05fa397eadc35b3ff36fa57f84366de4b65
25732 F20110404_AAAAQM yang_j_Page_050.QC.jpg
70eca439f20d749c19b7c15062b08986
6a67309f83327c9d89b336b0d633cbbbc83415f2
1051932 F20110404_AAAAPZ yang_j_Page_022.jp2
afc3de79f843f03bbb95dd9961ff0de7
50d13a66555d6aa55051ac1c5bbde26345fb8fbc
44305 F20110404_AAAARB yang_j_Page_057.pro
ce5c29ea2fbe69793bb0f904758a5446
a0a2664865b1933ec4c8c1a1e213ebd363d489dc
27451 F20110404_AAAAQN yang_j_Page_046.QC.jpg
9d7e09c8bae477b9c32c92dba3fbd047
0c88dbca96cf6f0508d724c8855a5bdb4ae4b897
2001 F20110404_AAAARC yang_j_Page_010.txt
6d6e5ecacb19f88029519d7d43c5f89f
d08b86a59296ad9074da8c49250410a2b579258d
8425398 F20110404_AAAAQO yang_j_Page_141.tif
393d01c11335820bd3582f67d5cfd5e2
f187a3a3bb9984a0ddd749eeecdadb1860020e73
6200 F20110404_AAAARD yang_j_Page_156thm.jpg
5b9928e9c6138673f3294e61ac1c1c0b
8adb66ac5a755cab1eff56e8f64bd6276e7ccc04
1051977 F20110404_AAAAQP yang_j_Page_088.jp2
bda6d8370b78ce57e51d1a672f33000a
971e3a9a2c6fe73c007835a316286c09d8ce8144
1922 F20110404_AAAARE yang_j_Page_048.txt
9f7f56b93c096c1f8b6b2f3cd5d9845f
ddc6cc03a765fa2e4a6b1ac410c3836120b04915
43718 F20110404_AAAAQQ yang_j_Page_137.jpg
25ab456f0fc481d364760c5f31b048f7
b1a2256e9352c1bbe2fed162c37f9892a4340310
1049315 F20110404_AAAARF yang_j_Page_085.jp2
1b5a84f81ed9911f3af23dbed810abc7
7e55ccbe1066e63a15d83711ec892957370f4af8
1051945 F20110404_AAAAQR yang_j_Page_114.jp2
255701421eec92ee93239b7febf77192
227fa83f07b5396942580aedf15c5702101cc6b3
77736 F20110404_AAAARG yang_j_Page_109.jpg
594217135e6733dfe431a17e98acf357
a86a6e5d167330b074beadc315b3fa61e7853640
56827 F20110404_AAAAQS yang_j_Page_123.jpg
9be5d4cd3f5bcb915d78988aadb622b8
1265957bd73e31ec7a76afe5ca5d7dff51301a32
F20110404_AAAARH yang_j_Page_155.tif
8c4927ef357129dc263808f4c1923d32
4c24e678358a5c6dbd811d5cd898f209225d3875
680788 F20110404_AAAAQT yang_j_Page_127.jp2
0e0841c375b69a5863e62ad643690e6c
647e2667d994507b660faa7084f2803efaf10057
19518 F20110404_AAAARI yang_j_Page_129.QC.jpg
2a451b543c9d275faf15edc58c640d71
433712c279d0a10be4cc5eb205fccc34daa46628
80551 F20110404_AAAAQU yang_j_Page_134.jpg
3bc5e8fbcfb7185df10624e6c3fb7df6
cfbe7c4d9a8472525a42ecab3b2e9f3621785dce
66505 F20110404_AAAARJ yang_j_Page_004.jpg
beab546e502fa46495e7986b130070bd
c589e060550f89f577cb7c870965ae46a1935092
88368 F20110404_AAAAQV yang_j_Page_045.jpg
bb9997707d0009652d15f623046d1e0a
becad30d529c77d7fe6ded1ad2d08720cf84fcd1
5602 F20110404_AAAARK yang_j_Page_052thm.jpg
68a61c5de173103acb5d73b2a34b998e
bc528546c1477e29c9e5a251fba4822c86fd1d1e
25790 F20110404_AAAAQW yang_j_Page_154.QC.jpg
206ba993e6a2dfef14bf3fd3ad0660ec
540bb3165849fc1dcb1b3e1cfe23831d73f43f97
616880 F20110404_AAAARL yang_j_Page_132.jp2
cd4cca972bcbc0c530626a73dd6edaa8
83722c21dc85c946e4f87e1ac99dc383c6f776ca
2031 F20110404_AAAAQX yang_j_Page_038.txt
0c2b6659a120aad6592232008f279b40
b8b48467f46d046d7319989e25423bff6e45fc03
30066 F20110404_AAAASA yang_j_Page_002.jp2
a2d0cf624683e8ddce2bf2ce9650999b
e675732ac66f81a60159804427d75deadecfc0bd
17128 F20110404_AAAARM yang_j_Page_075.jpg
f898f6e11bf5d331971ee1a0085b02f6
7ace76277d893470de87d22af8ce6064369b1759
1051966 F20110404_AAAAQY yang_j_Page_111.jp2
4e58c4c0f9bcf4b49c7e495d22bc8a89
909678b3e6757467a2eefead3c6fc4daec28169e
51915 F20110404_AAAASB yang_j_Page_149.pro
b590792deb23000cf9d0281b562375b7
36dde0408af8c90f9546f799f45fd2b4b2d2ab52
6285 F20110404_AAAARN yang_j_Page_028thm.jpg
1e07d24202619a78a33dac66757dbb05
594d7e85a8b3db146f262e7f4d7ec86b2a5705ea
5825 F20110404_AAAAQZ yang_j_Page_086thm.jpg
c7c17e118d47862e7c48a384c3c20c61
cec63137d18b60cecfe98f1e7bebc3ea7aede154
1051963 F20110404_AAAASC yang_j_Page_020.jp2
1d43502a0eb5934c73b501ce8f750744
9b1f950505c79b7b301afdf75e37f58069b5225c
1917 F20110404_AAAARO yang_j_Page_024.txt
941951b18aa17e0dac7cb47ea64a63bd
9d01524a7cf0937f41f57bc3d84df30cb08a98dc
5910 F20110404_AAAASD yang_j_Page_082thm.jpg
0e6877339496353858cc032d5c4f81f8
3c47840943589bdadba83d97d804a672e1e5ec11
1450 F20110404_AAAARP yang_j_Page_002.QC.jpg
f931d7fcc6f7daea2a7e74f4e780d293
b63643490aa02bdf73b9c5a7dc4534624ef85240
64446 F20110404_AAAASE yang_j_Page_063.jpg
a1e21271a0477e2b99d5e93796a213a9
c9a1ae2dadc4cf88fbcf9b8684aef7b91225b220
80056 F20110404_AAAARQ yang_j_Page_085.jpg
65b26fc3987ac2630f9facfd3ad27a3a
0dec5186a431929a26049a9bb7c3a1401c496d72
67556 F20110404_AAAASF yang_j_Page_064.jpg
b5b231dce01f7dbafb7a5b586e2fc583
7a1ea959850810b7a2b2883df7c8b78b5290e8d2
6133 F20110404_AAAARR yang_j_Page_047thm.jpg
d9354718e7dcc8131f06dd36a5ad4ab7
d3214a3a8535a8dadfdd814f458ed3e14bcbe5c3
1051892 F20110404_AAAASG yang_j_Page_052.jp2
716b13d805aa9e3b9ff5b2f2b0ca02e7
567319ca5345bc8c2cd77575d2cc947dc9f5d2a6
5972 F20110404_AAAARS yang_j_Page_104thm.jpg
0544b95c9077e41d1db92e94ac3c9a38
3ae1225fbe462919e1a26f7d22866b31e7041ee0
F20110404_AAAASH yang_j_Page_156.tif
07c5b099e25f327d9950b042be34eb81
5152ae3d1b1aa1d4d2657c5f4b9af4bd8d2c0ba8
5949 F20110404_AAAART yang_j_Page_098thm.jpg
0af4e8c386f0ce6e8c39fc7ce29f5a3f
1705149acb11773ba5d318ada9cd480f4b7cbe3b
5199 F20110404_AAAASI yang_j_Page_014thm.jpg
4f0c31282d2b57be31bc229e9f98614f
3ad716439c597dd8e636fac7dc3549e225016067
2261 F20110404_AAAARU yang_j_Page_003.QC.jpg
c6c5231bc2ab70a5d2b65091d0ef0ecc
cb46938ab68cf2edf28157a3896e98a456135598
50635 F20110404_AAAASJ yang_j_Page_111.pro
a8e3ef0455bb8778b97bf565d74177a7
4eb155132b2e2df88b9d6e67e4e2d4c53bd45104
68669 F20110404_AAAARV yang_j_Page_069.jpg
3fc6cffa40b95182ca09f1ad2bb34f73
d51cabaa288e1c807669c965798ad1c18152250b
32449 F20110404_AAAASK yang_j_Page_113.pro
2e09dd813c8c0bda409af3717dd296e8
904d313ea5885094d8a084ea9dc7e70d14915bb7
648849 F20110404_AAAARW yang_j_Page_125.jp2
e5e770803aaee5d6338ba7ee23f0dcfe
3ebf37e396f9d21e3b42d79fa23c672578849e06
47369 F20110404_AAAASL yang_j_Page_063.pro
697d3d89bbf4ccb377dfe320afca1312
f257ae3f7b07794fcf2566e354f9153990aefb50
47072 F20110404_AAAARX yang_j_Page_071.pro
639d60ded4a20c524e7365eb641fa62c
3dc70d083a32ebd927ce4a03620ab52bd5d1e59e
22050 F20110404_AAAASM yang_j_Page_094.QC.jpg
efc34fe6e9f29604fe05a4f6a8bbefad
d0e8870f42dbf51dceefbae8b630a24afb5166f8
54819 F20110404_AAAARY yang_j_Page_080.pro
005cf93f741ed718657428b7de8bcbbb
fadbebfbc4fd1acb1c9f7e0c3b265759f2a6d8fe
16134 F20110404_AAAATA yang_j_Page_125.QC.jpg
4e3c2aea9d4c087073b751e9649612bd
ede5beacc53ecfa9b3e98c70d890e4507f1b1b49
31655 F20110404_AAAARZ yang_j_Page_091.pro
f8deb2ed59dc56919b371eb357491e79
9e20dc2989f8d487dadb469690903c5a77bd8c0b
667930 F20110404_AAAATB yang_j_Page_074.jp2
c69d7f7c9d8e0b07f499ec62157555a2
dbaf1989ce975c943ef3f804162ea338e5a7da47
871741 F20110404_AAAASN yang_j_Page_143.jp2
a694833f155f49661661c2da35cb0e71
88dd3ae80a71b7b38980d162fc209aa09822b8c6
52394 F20110404_AAAATC yang_j_Page_106.pro
b86ebd4162189d5e95539b9f2b24ce8a
a4728757e7961b45d8b3143c0c58c9b85c9463e4
81952 F20110404_AAAASO yang_j_Page_024.jpg
4c50494a9edc046b30ffa02fa67e2815
ae0b494f0113f6bdf44741d854eb8c9ea8a5bf6e
5421 F20110404_AAAATD yang_j_Page_094thm.jpg
4eb0c51fbdf1247dcc421b701dd026bf
4f443f39fd14c8e07772ea8b589b9366f8dfb6e5
956573 F20110404_AAAASP yang_j_Page_079.jp2
d1d71530b5b8b88d182c5bea216234e0
079cd6198b9609886484b61897368572a3b1380a
24234 F20110404_AAAATE yang_j_Page_088.QC.jpg
d606ce6200c0ca77c9d8eb2f03fd2994
3947d4655001e1a5288d29ea5e513fc990864955
22143 F20110404_AAAASQ yang_j_Page_077.QC.jpg
a58daba870d1a51965ea03bb5601ed84
e34e682671dec8de95e63bb2de0c3a56d769f70d
6079 F20110404_AAAATF yang_j_Page_043thm.jpg
c9e10bfaf6627a7ab6cea846fcb96766
70a85a8f0d529441b307c856d3bd6b54bed65bc4
41789 F20110404_AAAASR yang_j_Page_142.pro
8cea084076114a397b11c6d471185baa
65a855281001f6bee92452d6b4fbb8a0c0154e66
31486 F20110404_AAAATG yang_j_Page_158.jpg
629cd5e7a2a7d02cb5b0421469c3a3f1
223b54617963d1731691c1279bfa09bcd8986d3a
1430 F20110404_AAAASS yang_j_Page_122.txt
dd29394cff99a58e56be0c5117f3e0ca
fd31a693ca3426b5392e270d91ff0da7ac7924c3
8440 F20110404_AAAATH yang_j_Page_005.QC.jpg
7c7cf98121578a1d6abc906d2e90c169
f3723159df1083997e72243479946c49579ef983
4570 F20110404_AAAAST yang_j_Page_093.txt
b9653ac508a700198ed8e7fe097a86fd
be80c01abe21895d7175ef7e5b2496a223c305cd
1037240 F20110404_AAAATI yang_j_Page_043.jp2
3ab6140d9e4433c4a3979160cd78c66f
b2415777771bd9e3b34dc124c972151d4fdb297d
24954 F20110404_AAAASU yang_j_Page_032.QC.jpg
8f9358e354ac22c0eb155034e7b32dc3
bfc8ea8aca520d9ba9762ec2529bc83e3969fd8e
51292 F20110404_AAAATJ yang_j_Page_087.pro
e2e5a84af0ed2e7a31605bb0f1dd7acb
ed2631faf286f0374f64a411101f09b6db96eafa
8579 F20110404_AAAASV yang_j_Page_072.pro
94132fe05ee4ff1e77e29abafb5b9f2a
67f0c6289fc0c86e30ae3cd1f60a523bd4416842
5973 F20110404_AAAATK yang_j_Page_103thm.jpg
206a6aca020c556c3bda4577da8b32a2
2efb08a8f0fc90016572290bed327c5e54064e57
1051974 F20110404_AAAASW yang_j_Page_049.jp2
ffc8914ecaf82fc74a426db0febd8b0e
f47e7368589443e3e0b9596ee049e411b1150f3b
F20110404_AAAAUA yang_j_Page_120.tif
cd89306faa10dd589bc31bc291eeb564
1163d6c8a17f5ed277eb09b8b24e666dbf949338
25780 F20110404_AAAATL yang_j_Page_036.QC.jpg
769287c1c4f484d6f82f16480485502a
b40a421ed35687b486d51f527a3cfd99aa3c6a5a
F20110404_AAAASX yang_j_Page_034.tif
d4e02748b3b07b630fb8a4f91e467897
3baacd3f0c080b513b298e863714219307cfcf95
35121 F20110404_AAAATM yang_j_Page_062.pro
3c13c39d7e464ef0b0840d7954536f2d
eba176aaea5c80b8e21c9a6f630fc32b5aa2f574
89359 F20110404_AAAASY yang_j_Page_156.jpg
f91b029c8a70b7578086ada7982bbad3
7d4c0a0c935706a0dd87dad9ab6278fa1217a733
2094 F20110404_AAAAUB yang_j_Page_106.txt
91dc30376f34cb3d79873718374daafb
c37b0f263769ca2ae5170a57cddf9b5c8d199cf2
51518 F20110404_AAAATN yang_j_Page_055.pro
dd72925ac55c222fffbc29f47ccfc673
eebee1381c33a328f0c771e38caf2b2039fde2c2
2210 F20110404_AAAASZ yang_j_Page_067.txt
59189ec7dc8fde40b329264592dfc2f2
88a1711085cc2b7fc29d545932589fcf2dba18f0
654820 F20110404_AAAAUC yang_j_Page_131.jp2
0141d8b955bcdea4d72b0025d28dd6ab
80c6dc872fef64b47c3233694ed44b8fef54fc62
23149 F20110404_AAAATO yang_j_Page_052.QC.jpg
8776d6741c801081e4ad0604beeffce5
136f9558d39a7ec6a368cbfaecaedf8dfb2917d7
4084 F20110404_AAAAUD yang_j_Page_092.txt
046beb0ebf2e81273ba81ae5fbf9b1e7
1cb68db41784bb94c74fd691ab247cb6c4748392
5537 F20110404_AAAATP yang_j_Page_105thm.jpg
38dcb3f500a9ce1edd4fd689326fbfd3
b6c2378922110691d4f200fda3d03f1d2693bf09
5163 F20110404_AAAAUE yang_j_Page_129thm.jpg
b0e153ebe406fcc57244df80b5a00347
6dc66d6266147c2fbc05c6fc14ea9a0cb4f0fc30
F20110404_AAAATQ yang_j_Page_046.tif
addd3ba03e48ad0d31e200c5de144dee
fcc382a6266701aaa77379363e9b50cb075261b4
388420 F20110404_AAAAUF yang_j_Page_158.jp2
07d6e8a3c0420f726a1d4405b3d889d4
e3b96e60a1c95f09000d047c2986d8d60bd854be
2342 F20110404_AAAATR yang_j_Page_148.txt
09c4fc52b777773027c077ddb24f2658
939cec46ad114a3526cd3e540e2bdc432a325e02
2282 F20110404_AAABAA yang_j_Page_005thm.jpg
edf46bb18b1cd6ec9bf0e49361e4dc3c
a690bc9b9a1dc31e3d1949507f434de87e8ab03c
4607 F20110404_AAAAUG yang_j_Page_065thm.jpg
3f8d66955094392bc65aab3b0bbc1bbc
0c0518b81e2f08103f769ac230b9bdab9ac8bde9
4081 F20110404_AAAATS yang_j_Page_127thm.jpg
8ac3eb1ce222f49e9a0b17cd4fd9c5b7
4579bc23918ba8e57874c992caea8687bc5ff110
6097 F20110404_AAABAB yang_j_Page_031thm.jpg
6f11ad912866abdac755cfad11024f7d
c8aab195da4d6f9f1fb34632a9bcca72cb8205f3
5999 F20110404_AAAAUH yang_j_Page_023thm.jpg
8745e39e9a802f5b4a4d96758b93860b
63784233b9cb051ce3c2517dd63ebf1e443e86a8
4639 F20110404_AAAATT yang_j_Page_128thm.jpg
699e5ae6211e76472aab72a6313a5ce3
b0c1a104d84669740d76e80f4750309de4c9e3a5
81892 F20110404_AAABAC yang_j_Page_088.jpg
230a8baec7009bc4bc037e961f5f0717
2ad5e5c8f18a5b3f8b0fe7b42f31525620325c15
F20110404_AAAAUI yang_j_Page_004.tif
24dcd3917adbc73473df1658457bb04a
0e174f8103272cca7e2b5f97ef2f5f2f1dd1083c
79990 F20110404_AAAATU yang_j_Page_033.jpg
e086f08f6ba516a2f559ed845181710d
cb1f045c6a93aeae92707e69f8ef37aaf82de4dc
793907 F20110404_AAABAD yang_j_Page_065.jp2
5514a1fc8071bcc2c58c893a9f34007d
1fb26b5f93d0fb86adb23d4d3c61e8337e9d29fc
F20110404_AAAAUJ yang_j_Page_044.tif
7e87d048d46384324d956f8192c6c454
bb4387dd5a213fce2510ccd1f93ac0931def9f78
81716 F20110404_AAAATV yang_j_Page_071.jpg
acb504f554f68cf3c70fc9c62c2b4955
093f4cc1feab5eb7638739ef12276f54e349f89a
37602 F20110404_AAABAE yang_j_Page_019.pro
3362fa95d2e93b15b2d75e394b6aa601
bf3776679494263b9ed405017c7a47f4c4a4abe7
1999 F20110404_AAAAUK yang_j_Page_050.txt
91eae1268ccdcd734c8770b1e96313e5
dc6bebe134c2258aceec3729743861dba01524bb
18355 F20110404_AAAATW yang_j_Page_065.QC.jpg
94cfae6a7c91daddbcdc7e2cdcc80414
4f3bf9e0ecf4580025049f4cb883464ee7e3c3e4
1051937 F20110404_AAABAF yang_j_Page_102.jp2
e644d6781348687dbe530166f3e2e475
78c95404f8f7697bb435bc0c1fe57b6527a95302
2582 F20110404_AAAAUL yang_j_Page_080.txt
3ccf70d1df74e05342082314848fac4b
5618987fc11474f6fce08517d087d294db06427d
1051938 F20110404_AAAATX yang_j_Page_152.jp2
edeee0c2925b928b8c5737666216b454
65202bc2abbb760efd45aa946a51e57e88a174b4
F20110404_AAABAG yang_j_Page_025.tif
5623b406fa86bbfdae9705a1f3ae8ab4
45a6b7a11d48a43f730b995ffcd9b8657aaf4ca0
660057 F20110404_AAAAVA yang_j_Page_122.jp2
8e9277e6acd50a5f65f637131928e975
c70447f2420de54c2f090db5607233244ed9a605
4220 F20110404_AAAAUM yang_j_Page_066thm.jpg
be363f6607d1edbe9d79d25afb9285e6
1513cdcfb29e9515625227c3e5a54a1f31d9400b
46044 F20110404_AAAATY yang_j_Page_134.pro
b5717908fe7e7737808c8db84f8ed437
843279d62c5f1a4de9ed40863db0d052e382c027
52725 F20110404_AAABAH yang_j_Page_084.pro
6548c953eea6895f0d0a6a88c009605a
690772936db3813eba1bb3c87f02dd0a9ddeb38d
2494 F20110404_AAAAVB yang_j_Page_158thm.jpg
63bcce6619e3daf3fe2bef2a7c8e44da
9223380310e6cb7eee8e0a14be6f7d2727ffe029
5932 F20110404_AAAAUN yang_j_Page_026thm.jpg
2a7a05a428c744c2e56d3d4d541618b0
52ae491df3cf930a4d5c7c3f7ad03d0ac7bb4b74
16955 F20110404_AAAATZ yang_j_Page_072.jpg
a1d9e6429e1d8d7ed1d03f13058b716b
fd3034142d6da7b455a93df5998afc550d87a3da
55165 F20110404_AAABAI yang_j_Page_157.jpg
692fade5024338ddd001a3c6a9eec489
e05e3c3972d70dbaa0c69401bdfbf9d341b18893
83534 F20110404_AAAAUO yang_j_Page_096.jpg
1d8354aa877116cc5d43cbdf608e4f89
5eb51539bbc033b297c95d30f1dc55c97dac7071
6184 F20110404_AAABAJ yang_j_Page_034thm.jpg
262b1ed61b52f9a68ea1f2985c9974cf
91380d5fcf15c46bf5ad7feb3ce082218667face
F20110404_AAAAVC yang_j_Page_003.tif
63e5ab2c616f9f1bf8c2d06075955355
1b8ed952171c3cf272635cc17fb5e9f3e4acbd70
6244 F20110404_AAAAUP yang_j_Page_029thm.jpg
5e6d7d68f407a808e1ebd2db1d2d2fd1
2a0b4e08ff8ebc2b3512fe27feb2254ebbcc8a12
5201 F20110404_AAABAK yang_j_Page_020thm.jpg
988a6ffc3a96d2263470150ac9c2d25d
0152c903773f4cc4f192c3c0bcbb9a9eeb5ed071
1758 F20110404_AAAAVD yang_j_Page_057.txt
c96b93b00cb7f7320ef89fbaad08d6cc
c09fbffe9b33b1adc3c000de19d475f7156e6235
24184 F20110404_AAAAUQ yang_j_Page_089.QC.jpg
9bafe84c457b336d836db47beefe143e
fa396ca192757a4ff8010293ba2c21d851bee701
8634 F20110404_AAABAL yang_j_Page_116.QC.jpg
283750b09dde878fd4163274e41b094d
c75029db258d8d6e65fa37788a297e91e1885893
F20110404_AAAAVE yang_j_Page_041.tif
1a42d8f532ca7b8ba2b6f273d8bd72e1
40fbd5d1a91162486666d0fee0df82f532c45315
3241 F20110404_AAAAUR yang_j_Page_124thm.jpg
710f02ebc81cfc00e13303fee86b425e
63cc222fd6610c933b5f420e52e3344dc37794ac
6036 F20110404_AAABBA yang_j_Page_015thm.jpg
949332483c48be40ec8f7948a2b3c6e0
37092bde0eb7211d8b26f88a6ccca588681f52a9
F20110404_AAAAVF yang_j_Page_138.jp2
2c054fa6765f2600dd3b51615a9e7ce5
f39e1cee0bcf8b0dffed4b0ea33ea9548b0db79e
1051982 F20110404_AAAAUS yang_j_Page_032.jp2
dd0d3a3ada7fe58e020b29c6cb1f3bd4
a405e617118f322ba84f8ff1d225c14fc7eccd94
2776 F20110404_AAABBB yang_j_Page_073thm.jpg
409c9c62a75d509e1d7a5e55d64b0f71
7797f21fe5ba8de96cb296f388e374b2bce2de09
25380 F20110404_AAABAM yang_j_Page_101.QC.jpg
5708ace46d9f12ce4a23a0ddd4922390
636039ee8b18f5959f8658cc3645d9b8d5f3445a
F20110404_AAAAVG yang_j_Page_149.jp2
909169fcc38795635f2a55cea03f606f
7c3545d40aee20765192d3a90185ccffaa6ed781
28257 F20110404_AAAAUT yang_j_Page_147.QC.jpg
ffc570a3d6e22691400f87c26d05a431
5a3d6cc2f95f1dac29b5606c1f3c4cea837d4960
1519 F20110404_AAABBC yang_j_Page_141.txt
c5a6e084e0574d4477e0dbcd6d77fab6
32d4042e903d07a650e8b75ea721ad80384db20e
F20110404_AAABAN yang_j_Page_030.tif
91b742cc4dd919756169cdc64d182897
dc2c7fac3c7c5f4885dfc1bcd02cff6e0be7b073
67170 F20110404_AAAAVH yang_j_Page_019.jpg
160da7cd924099f737f44717f3d63cf2
437127252949482edc70c857892f91d3859b1a5a
24344 F20110404_AAAAUU yang_j_Page_105.QC.jpg
f10e60cd4e1c0da4c73a1c7334422d0f
c227b2776a7baf89c42075bbf06f84fbdc6d50c2
F20110404_AAABBD yang_j_Page_029.tif
f7cea3491d65608c741f5c74c36c139d
c5df9fae4060dc50d34a03a9d9c9f60b300f5215
61125 F20110404_AAABAO yang_j_Page_006.jpg
46d2de5e5a202601908384da789e3c87
7bc79c924d5e2ea46ba69d95e8ed4e68c2847c9d
842435 F20110404_AAAAVI yang_j_Page_041.jp2
be352764bf1cc6fff2b8a57630a64fa8
280a4475fb1860aaf9a8db1d373dcd91f572c5a8
F20110404_AAAAUV yang_j_Page_117.tif
5f87031a20ac9594acef979f7cb51c98
cdc8e6f44c484920672b56819112f6895f0f21ce
1051916 F20110404_AAABBE yang_j_Page_148.jp2
2fb8d8d9950f922292fc3bc55b4f901b
260bfbaf4eea4c9830aa9b725c655f3425c01148
25062 F20110404_AAABAP yang_j_Page_034.QC.jpg
1620ea928d648b2f3114725aeabea06f
813ab035288da88c329924ed01226f10d64fa02b
5712 F20110404_AAAAVJ yang_j_Page_078thm.jpg
f2a45dfa4b3cf4c63481aecd0eb498b4
80d82eb3adde9372faff200a85bc2285c81ff0cb
894 F20110404_AAAAUW yang_j_Page_054.txt
0802d3b72cf99a680c4f4d508e47a344
454b00bcd094f0af0ddd16839b3a7fdf3d0b041f
40693 F20110404_AAABBF yang_j_Page_107.pro
3977e02db1546315d36ffbab7515b2b0
d3002173b321498e3da0b1f784de15b84a983c38
819856 F20110404_AAABAQ yang_j_Page_040.jp2
1b4bdd577d5828151ca4ce8e945a807e
3e07b421a2225b3a1630955a9a7c2c1dc8424d48
2295 F20110404_AAAAVK yang_j_Page_154.txt
bb630aea024ca03fcb77653fffdc77ab
6b2caa831e24b97b13776e76e9f598ab270caa33
F20110404_AAAAUX yang_j_Page_002.tif
59ae697cf6c3079771a94560474df14c
ef7ca75753352781794ea775fdf87d31e7ae0e09
F20110404_AAABBG yang_j_Page_045.tif
f446d8071966da4c3505d933a74f068c
04872e28ddcedecbb3aae46090bce7bf56639b7e
13197 F20110404_AAAAWA yang_j_Page_120.pro
0711037d4bc23801fd7fd6c5b95bd964
865eec1ae9fd422523fa45b53823a69f1ad8003e
99813 F20110404_AAABAR yang_j_Page_150.jpg
4ef8431674bd4af2ddfc5b215f2af713
e2ac974d426db564e39c086e6efc020dbf460848
470 F20110404_AAAAVL yang_j_Page_140thm.jpg
46467154c370e6b126b826b249db5a6d
2972915ab2eb620a9339adfc5312a58ee614e1d8
63307 F20110404_AAAAUY yang_j_Page_040.jpg
a37e9d581f6b4e91c0d872a547c72ed6
a69a1772e5eba0326066c2f2de4dd1c78689cf3f
743635 F20110404_AAABBH yang_j_Page_128.jp2
64e2ffd34e097f51ee523007b3c74725
2a53c99a098cf13d8ab1eb4f50f109ed9278f0d2
193410 F20110404_AAAAWB yang_j_Page_072.jp2
3eb5fa108615528b617365dac33235a1
de0370da0fd819ab23ae211d55533b4685c24874
654040 F20110404_AAABAS yang_j_Page_130.jp2
913e0ecfee2f41ac5b003981cd95e25b
7147626b0d1758d9c5cb7ed2a03790c224c72347
4687 F20110404_AAAAVM yang_j_Page_140.jpg
11affdfc29385762697edf389797c89b
31876673fcebec382f80318fa11ac3a4efe4f43e
50715 F20110404_AAAAUZ yang_j_Page_054.jpg
8d15e3c1143a8281b47625c6ce11594a
9752e7de6a974108a107fdaa5bb7d7fbc915981b
987943 F20110404_AAABBI yang_j_Page_094.jp2
a3a0a10dd89dfe136bb379c2188e7d6a
2541b3e8552e602779ac503ccf8dba51b5b8d35a
1876 F20110404_AAAAWC yang_j_Page_060.txt
980d7f4d81b734684f90b60fa91e1ef1
419ed1e3d5cefdc338446ef54476d02ccbc915db
1736 F20110404_AAABAT yang_j_Page_142.txt
54988860f6ca14f025c6029b5bc8a4b7
acdd2e21c8905200c92f9b3f5e064c7df53c60be
19845 F20110404_AAAAVN yang_j_Page_064.QC.jpg
1242ab48b74b65ee8ec25e35e40cf2cf
8a221bc5e81b7ae8af5102e84446916db7fe7504
92479 F20110404_AAABBJ yang_j_Page_118.jpg
ac30ca17ca8e6e64f25372c71457bfcb
819f6fdbc046d12b2706d00319195a2199b8421c
23026 F20110404_AAABAU yang_j_Page_059.QC.jpg
2bc383745e79fa33b929da3640a52bd3
4df1563a24b7e6a3e9f4e121e9d4951046b132a8
21112 F20110404_AAAAVO yang_j_Page_019.QC.jpg
8b8f53e56cb7a917e72dbd50057c8a0f
e2902d5567a745dda9c353c9b8d8c49a5225aafe
F20110404_AAABBK yang_j_Page_140.tif
27787ca24cdf50f3e482c4c134222258
da3423a251ceee726e2310ceea9594b4251e10aa
F20110404_AAAAWD yang_j_Page_023.tif
59eb3947ee5d8c7a1e8252482a193fb5
7e1b92234b52a0a3608b9d0a2ce2b07d3c5df914
1696 F20110404_AAABAV yang_j_Page_135.txt
1ece843bde9a3424567dc80cecde1fe1
df6c8cce842108c4690970eae4201fd093cce1b9
74182 F20110404_AAAAVP yang_j_Page_057.jpg
757c8716b2195c2765d5bf450e739e89
d7289fc4d92446956b1ee112b728bda192ff5e32
1051942 F20110404_AAABBL yang_j_Page_028.jp2
fc38901260cdaaaadbbe63c1e1e3d2b7
d8ab0230d9ed8b67f8b6ac359432e5a95e3fd277
81014 F20110404_AAAAWE yang_j_Page_036.jpg
ccfac34616368ee07850ed165cac995c
333a2bbbccc44c7dec9701e122afcbde47049e35
50300 F20110404_AAABAW yang_j_Page_047.pro
ad4415bc21f599ee4b85ec13ca66b3ad
04eb88f1ecaec482524ce772e149ae285e455ef9
3801 F20110404_AAAAVQ yang_j_Page_007.txt
c1908d049265e8a3a3b9b89375b9b038
59d6afeccc966ea958af17ae1831029b87c2a813
50310 F20110404_AAABBM yang_j_Page_082.pro
f56ed263020436a4fcae3cfc404ba7af
8b444bcad0d6462e6781879e8a089a79a69dd4bd
1528 F20110404_AAAAWF yang_j_Page_072thm.jpg
0b91afe0d688c7e97bb9cfe45b06200d
3a7b23fcf03c85be7ee4ef79b97eb9443bcaaba6
2026 F20110404_AAABAX yang_j_Page_116thm.jpg
bc498ed7f3155ff17f1d8d519321bf89
d7b262978db66acb6bf0209926a98bd38ddb82c1
F20110404_AAAAVR yang_j_Page_075.tif
33b218442b5108ffae2c5987a9bea9e4
fcd58ab85373a09967ee5c7794862684bfbf9bf6
83905 F20110404_AAABCA yang_j_Page_111.jpg
5f4df2fe34ff171fa7dcc27bf1717f1e
277cb0fe82a38ef962244d75a53c44c785778345
1949 F20110404_AAAAWG yang_j_Page_015.txt
65dce76c9d3bdbe0d964c2e5d21506de
84bf9b028ce1e9dad7842ba8d4a7a43a29f29435
1894 F20110404_AAABAY yang_j_Page_114.txt
085c6c30b0141f1b10b74d15104e5e44
6de234ec082df4eec9c46ffd00472699c2d8abb2
18489 F20110404_AAAAVS yang_j_Page_062.QC.jpg
bc02567eb8721436a21f4d4e79fbc4ec
5c52ef65f88477b434421f565bda17fb39a406d0
1051986 F20110404_AAABCB yang_j_Page_147.jp2
af658e29be756b189746b415a3de9e1d
549b201f5f29b5714bd472611769ce74113e0bf7
5343 F20110404_AAABBN yang_j_Page_068thm.jpg
3b4747ee1cd7798b0515bf561656f9eb
01391457c7881349cc49b204df07722721543c75
62668 F20110404_AAAAWH yang_j_Page_021.jpg
d11a059fc04f1373a9506260fa77c01f
7a91d799acf245e1ef37ea43d6bbc96cc8c747cc
F20110404_AAABAZ yang_j_Page_069.tif
0352644ba53d6b438175a7d9c18f8e13
6934fcbfd56e17cf8e5a6c523ee9a42f38776378
F20110404_AAAAVT yang_j_Page_011.tif
c74aee14db1224e81b04203ed764f044
1807766390ba281935a432fcabd851305bd17624
38654 F20110404_AAABCC yang_j_Page_127.pro
81b44a1d9c8315f91ec4024337d0fefc
6086ee6c705984d3a6d8c9535197fdd980b0aa58
5653 F20110404_AAABBO yang_j_Page_090thm.jpg
715bda5aea8a4b1e82a46ab6366c628b
4ad5a304d06a3d1eaf5e56b33023fbcb7b7a5ef1
2229 F20110404_AAAAWI yang_j_Page_084.txt
6df8388696105c579d4f51ffa6698368
f234334726642238a4de0c1c1929dc0ffc4704c1
2041 F20110404_AAAAVU yang_j_Page_055.txt
6a418501fe88111a29fc9011c23eb10f
86026648502820c9cb3d4f638b5f6c2993b2acd8
2245 F20110404_AAABCD yang_j_Page_061.txt
b23bdd9a1714aac12fd38eb8e56a2688
ba48057940bca512457076cd43ba147db003da53
100214 F20110404_AAABBP yang_j_Page_155.jpg
238236a4782f4741f17866df20feabe0
0e37a4f683f0e15c202a8baea3b05422476fa09d
1854 F20110404_AAAAWJ yang_j_Page_095.txt
13d7dbeb45d86a2b0e3dd5f2966e60f5
9a9142a308c82211177044af5d047f715a4445a7
F20110404_AAAAVV yang_j_Page_079.tif
f56ada794bb7321c1907b06818b229e9
72c739099de144bba604f1569f374adbdf18e4bc
2294 F20110404_AAABCE yang_j_Page_126.txt
e5334d9a507a751815aa18884e8a11af
340d3ea4ec21f0b04896268c091f71ecff0c0c74
61767 F20110404_AAABBQ yang_j_Page_012.jpg
6f3b0f8c21f3eb0164a8716cee25574f
84181ab9054375da7f8a9afdb9dc5e1b0fd88836
F20110404_AAAAWK yang_j_Page_070.tif
331832260b51a782db4d7a01a481c073
882e819cdd0145301454c94f474ab329aac57720
F20110404_AAAAVW yang_j_Page_086.txt
06ffcdeb9de945a76e8d77c54ed4f355
d351888a41f8c01a4fc05de59bec059a925fce15
F20110404_AAABCF yang_j_Page_083.tif
5a9c5ae5edee6cfc07d1274b9894c4f4
56dbb9fc330b2c64cb1d0b9187d31c8d02593141
871649 F20110404_AAAAXA yang_j_Page_004.jp2
86fa8c37b11b1a2a7e1a093dcfd9afa3
c4e2ae3c3e836a1e28072fd4d1ee9f26aea11fe9
57773 F20110404_AAABBR yang_j_Page_010.jpg
64d343cff5665b56f844143085096568
ed4a3f378728810eb05a2c78150e07d2db84ebba
15917 F20110404_AAAAWL yang_j_Page_113.QC.jpg
28e263b5c540fb5cbd7ec9285f20596d
02e27bce74c066db3386bff70747ed7a6ac633f6
84550 F20110404_AAAAVX yang_j_Page_053.jpg
43f4a1c11003b24359166efd6715825e
ae0854d2b9ee05b675aa0391491e9ff7a87e3e00
4371 F20110404_AAABCG yang_j_Page_042thm.jpg
e17551afa9f18d9b70b73e5b09445dc6
bcf3469da36e29b959062ec9d3e40b637f6125da
4099 F20110404_AAAAXB yang_j_Page_063thm.jpg
bd473e04c277bf2ab886551cf6d68226
a4922c4f842334274c6faba0a9cd65f2d5559a0e
67880 F20110404_AAABBS yang_j_Page_056.pro
6d777f1f5d4cd9986473225cf37eb1a1
09280947ca2626c182649eda3c6194d8d7b58e0b
1051961 F20110404_AAAAWM yang_j_Page_045.jp2
10e35e596302a43045060f08b8555930
f45d52ad34772d752db4dea6e78911ff8ebbb2cd
F20110404_AAAAVY yang_j_Page_132.tif
d6f1adb199b26389b3c7df78e05e6cf8
241c5c39f529b895c337828a6ebbd9bd3bc82f8e
24236 F20110404_AAABCH yang_j_Page_060.QC.jpg
f5141ef171dbeb29862b0550efbc81f7
4c6334d97c95ef93d1175ce1a6c1e17cf873bba8
780044 F20110404_AAAAXC yang_j_Page_010.jp2
601f0ec6ddda957eedfa586702231f43
e3b0e5a4c0516e745407fd3c32bfeafc2b3ffd3b
993559 F20110404_AAABBT yang_j_Page_145.jp2
d0959023da38918ab0536e20c12efd99
4225a7381e08c970e59313b7f563596f3d3ecc13
35605 F20110404_AAAAWN yang_j_Page_139.pro
cc94c444a1702e62beaab51a9a85961a
a55a23aac2df0c26d1b6f4debbff0cdefa78142f
1957 F20110404_AAAAVZ yang_j_Page_100.txt
9884f120de8151a2d8cf39dadb465b32
1991f614c7ece9a0dd19b04ea9de108f148aaeef
F20110404_AAABCI yang_j_Page_026.tif
2e0e6300d10cf6b6c3737ce606ad9ccd
ffed3621cfd5cc88baac227c1889d88d20456484
84148 F20110404_AAAAXD yang_j_Page_083.jpg
c571547c146083ecb4d620a31196fd7d
45d4a87d1b92ac43b4e2ce2f795c64ce71cefe5f
1051980 F20110404_AAABBU yang_j_Page_038.jp2
f119814bad91b8789b540fbd12b9ef77
88bd160777ff59b627c4b724e17eeaa8665ac332
54896 F20110404_AAAAWO yang_j_Page_131.jpg
132cbe5b651f4f2374e94945dff967ac
f92a06f6bbbf042727ee6f9275e2e3188a35a02d
82963 F20110404_AAABCJ yang_j_Page_099.jpg
f1a544cd04b947ad77cc6367172b3822
c2b39553243e1168d6746e688b9380f1ca9cb291
6222 F20110404_AAABBV yang_j_Page_152thm.jpg
a16a5a3958d52cf6c9c2e692d067c0a7
a946abb9c257b1f60a80ec4b62b3a62bc7f51c46
1051954 F20110404_AAAAWP yang_j_Page_025.jp2
8176280246a0a66e2d5c49808f9ea97b
f479bafae9c14da9de121e497fce77ed78369e6b
F20110404_AAABCK yang_j_Page_055.tif
d57e139cb9a1a25779a3dabf504528dc
40b5e40a032796410d6a78bf158b30719272a843
22343 F20110404_AAAAXE yang_j_Page_079.QC.jpg
796ef4b8ced871611beb000fb6b9c66b
de296190edf7ed3f832f8cd542a14a2d3a415373
8700 F20110404_AAABBW yang_j_Page_144.pro
b01df4763e7f9fbb8cdc283bddc6d0a4
c3474fa59e7861cad19a46e142e2d3ff13d234ac
1047591 F20110404_AAAAWQ yang_j_Page_086.jp2
51e0e3214c5881fec8bdb93cb0d91170
6620dcbbe3d6d0121b223af391e9e2a62f016bb8
24927 F20110404_AAABCL yang_j_Page_149.QC.jpg
f9eb1da5eec5d4c000a363dbd58652e5
35de56f7695924e20ecac8761278cc3d9d11875a
871700 F20110404_AAAAXF yang_j_Page_063.jp2
3e428d83cd319a0e7d44794b4c5d39c2
d6cdf105c122a979fb565cece8dd835e43a556a5
4930 F20110404_AAABBX yang_j_Page_070thm.jpg
a9389e7febbd1ecd7988ccf3a1c80f73
bb1c5e4e08efb45d7514766a9109d18adb90a0a5
3275 F20110404_AAAAWR yang_j_Page_006thm.jpg
bfc6c06b144ad3f74adff919522f9321
6738916d3276b14cde33171e7250af1f7a50d9a6
1562 F20110404_AAABDA yang_j_Page_012.txt
9026ade805b5e79598fdc0dd930f8c13
5e16a57625d11178717ef3e8bc94804e874050ba
1250 F20110404_AAABCM yang_j_Page_002.pro
9ff60f80b87989013771dd70334b70dc
62bf2bc935159f957b2047224fec64d6d2063f1b
1051928 F20110404_AAAAXG yang_j_Page_029.jp2
7ddec09acb9ab65dea194b6d9c2ca6a8
f0d03929d752456d4e9ec51f5566743be5b62547
37040 F20110404_AAABBY yang_j_Page_040.pro
faf3524ae9a2102b4089296fd5609623
ac413be9fac32147893e959bfa5989855f88e6b4
F20110404_AAAAWS yang_j_Page_091.tif
08f96b3c77fa0de1ef9adcd236119010
f5181ecc5a97a2d99be6f112c6cf9630743ec902
6221 F20110404_AAABDB yang_j_Page_149thm.jpg
39eecdaad07a3155cc7192368495f54c
fc8373a87b1ed6b07a2a9a294f1dc7addd2075ac
51449 F20110404_AAABCN yang_j_Page_139.jpg
853ca6a542a4f493eca8919606233fe9
aa8a340903dbeb31645b74ca513c9c4d8d178b05
2603 F20110404_AAAAXH yang_j_Page_093thm.jpg
5a157a95a76de0ee389f067dae592c5c
d157f3f5a3c4126c675175082caf4c147c4700a2
1810 F20110404_AAABBZ yang_j_Page_043.txt
e266168cce20dc8ac8ca57cdb5ea2892
b45ae925a7ecc1ce49ccb53dddb26a47bfe77f36
461343 F20110404_AAAAWT yang_j_Page_093.jp2
2007aa23ce14c8b224e9859e44670902
a8bac81ce250e0f1d36f35e354484c4748db7019
5766 F20110404_AAABDC yang_j_Page_117thm.jpg
a0ffb185171432990b9277bb918b9f9a
bfd68f1744b20cac76b384e81ffda68583ae1367
F20110404_AAAAXI yang_j_Page_152.tif
855a10cd152f4e150b800fc19b5498cc
4ac6cbde63e156e7cc0096f5daadf2d94a5d363e
F20110404_AAAAWU yang_j_Page_035.jp2
11bb97134977c7ca98ea91edac08d502
3a3d3e474c1a12a00e1e769ebcd762f7aa9e6b2c
3987 F20110404_AAABDD yang_j_Page_132thm.jpg
25c8faa6778f37bab4f0a3abd77db090
2f19e76dc63ba55beae13409ee9b4b90fb35de29
2545 F20110404_AAABCO yang_j_Page_079.txt
292ad499cf158851cea93fcb0be3cc2b
3091ef9f8b26e8141775796e83d854e92ce62dca
F20110404_AAAAXJ yang_j_Page_055.jp2
e754a1cf2add9655c1f6908014a39ab9
de2d2d873d2495734fcdbacd6963bf69471020b8
46413 F20110404_AAAAWV yang_j_Page_098.pro
c36a3daa1664ef1532e94e5cf48810a3
1bb848d356f6baff9ccb8eb7d3e8f2822904b13c
81685 F20110404_AAABDE yang_j_Page_086.jpg
f86e5bf8d03c7f34a6d26ffadd81a84c
909a41bb0179975512fdf4a566e2afe776cada02
F20110404_AAABCP yang_j_Page_081.tif
b1baea96e09d6b759d3d7f84b67ad7c7
2c03efe555859b6691a08a939f715038a341869a
F20110404_AAAAWW yang_j_Page_020.tif
f0fc8608855eba59705da30b48839cf8
1c0b715f663c87b34948cb784abe9166f6219903
23241 F20110404_AAABDF yang_j_Page_080.QC.jpg
7a3074aad9a3da2eb38e4579c2c37ef6
9edfa6e2502ce9f2a346e3bda7ef9db70f91b829
36472 F20110404_AAABCQ yang_j_Page_021.pro
8eda60b90490859c2c9207fa9a38628f
e7e7c3afef9d87d98c7c9ee9c65f5763cdcd9800
612291 F20110404_AAAAXK yang_j_Page_133.jp2
ebe013f9e20648010137d6ac994dce03
2ced28207263bb89d79b3e1d9a04ff9b2f0ba0a5
1866 F20110404_AAAAWX yang_j_Page_039.txt
831fa462c43fde09e80b60aa2060144c
83a98c6df2b236aa27df8eb45da4cde6809f15b6
91660 F20110404_AAABDG yang_j_Page_151.jpg
d0cbcee131591ae94d8fc9d9812a9910
309af09fc44de21b996d77e864b1265167b7d8c5
35455 F20110404_AAAAYA yang_j_Page_122.pro
a992b94389ad23675fc66e0f85396878
97dd51fd8a9f403714d7a2fc919ca5973ce7a622
56642 F20110404_AAABCR yang_j_Page_154.pro
c08db6a4d0d91e431c3f8b1822fe3ed0
494de3a9e5d8c4b6d2634b7306c0111f1232b7f5
783 F20110404_AAAAXL yang_j_Page_116.txt
876084a21bca7c92536db585e22b4ada
472f2b50b36a6b18c532c07b7528d132c6b4fd47
1937 F20110404_AAAAWY yang_j_Page_096.txt
3e15616fea84a95b832066012520510a
0f4c4901b7394e324308b23535ff23e505fc06b2
1800 F20110404_AAABDH yang_j_Page_110.txt
210650a9523926bc90a61882f6e47724
e28542af1f12c6e0d7ee047621e21af97a63bf8b
1050922 F20110404_AAAAYB yang_j_Page_026.jp2
aea6d2e52e85165fcfada8dcf3f6071a
47470447fee734b8d523f3ebc06dceec23cae226
23615 F20110404_AAABCS yang_j_Page_110.QC.jpg
0d47cf7d73e13b5a09bc30d46e0bf694
64de2140549ea2f3aa1c049bcdce56dda8e1965d
22863 F20110404_AAAAXM yang_j_Page_057.QC.jpg
77191daf9c940a3314c3a3f47bfbe60b
8c1e4d40128d5c429121d8d7843f3fabbc617ff3
49487 F20110404_AAAAWZ yang_j_Page_015.pro
14674a10717af84e1f2cc49a7c0aaed0
95dcd0271f9e1adab314f9e415d2868f1a8930fa
71 F20110404_AAABDI yang_j_Page_140.txt
7c9867f334efb58d121123e022066fa6
fb90e667da742f07f7b360040db9d306fc548809
4492 F20110404_AAAAYC yang_j_Page_062thm.jpg
566ae05b748fb8fb3bd292c803462990
5f8c21e1461376f3e876db7c36b54538fa98f272
1630 F20110404_AAABCT yang_j_Page_004.txt
ff86942cae286800fdfec4df45a0c546
f900b1201c1402bc3213c20c61adf32a6d5f2560
F20110404_AAAAXN yang_j_Page_153.tif
8f73b71282840b5d4f25fa766b422d35
abaca347e949a0113deb6520d7601ac3bf2c978c
59266 F20110404_AAABDJ yang_j_Page_062.jpg
b9606ef96575aa49749eae439771f308
b8b8c1063c4abd07ff1766494b6ff9cf92e57f6d
6197 F20110404_AAAAYD yang_j_Page_102thm.jpg
904a0f34c70c9569f4a2e854736ef5a9
b08ffb9dec3f691edd2fe1bd274d7dca62bc9c40
62418 F20110404_AAABCU yang_j_Page_138.pro
cab044b7f2a398c71b2bad2c430f4eb6
48bb52f8b21c9eb8b3c18f524c6afa79a4c22e83
2087 F20110404_AAAAXO yang_j_Page_108.txt
4fe800838731c69869ac1c90615f7b94
38aba5881f82230484694ff6618a0477a31b6dc5
3269 F20110404_AAAAAI yang_j_Page_137thm.jpg
875cc6a09be1659d8183b5e5574d250a
2f394cdb3056d05fcee34cac0f30019856a4d7a4
1741 F20110404_AAABDK yang_j_Page_013.txt
75ade4ad73cd5fde8ab0896923895d36
a0efd65a7e20047a7a2cb1158508c1651ec80f76
80361 F20110404_AAAAYE yang_j_Page_078.jpg
35452e0406dbcbda174573610fbb9577
c9f0a6c422a1999f5503d4760b0f6d654cd6813b
23656 F20110404_AAABCV yang_j_Page_098.QC.jpg
2bb61fb7e57fdc9e3990e6f664122acf
aa55f323f2d31d06302827631230025aa3822249
45585 F20110404_AAAAXP yang_j_Page_121.pro
8f18105c871044436f394cd9978a35c4
9ee60bc77b34fda554f4be8334b11f5ecdc686b7
46600 F20110404_AAAAAJ yang_j_Page_033.pro
90134a9c37dc32c09ca975f561a2466d
e737a19dde72336fac8aab2ae30d1918fad1fed7
34891 F20110404_AAABDL yang_j_Page_065.pro
bc1cca2f0f928d0b00308e0ed87ccd8b
de0977909d5879092c394513f1eb44d50b162896
F20110404_AAABCW yang_j_Page_005.tif
f2fae9bb9a1917a9197d070a2b22fb70
1eba37ec9d80013eccab9dc651953fe5a836f00e
5350 F20110404_AAAAXQ yang_j_Page_087thm.jpg
a4235e13dcd9e9a8dff28af9ae1e42ef
cbe99a3fd41bb531b75434a10d0453dcfc27c8aa
3871 F20110404_AAABEA yang_j_Page_123thm.jpg
8e3ca249c532c33aae86d3ece2e503d6
647b25d464c75eacf1e74e3ac802137b698c11eb
25444 F20110404_AAAAAK yang_j_Page_035.QC.jpg
119e673a983250ca881647298c326f53
c12b1ad37865daefc010bee20ca88608b39f0ec7
48458 F20110404_AAABDM yang_j_Page_086.pro
16d2b670e59cff9d96566f484d407027
f899369e13958929b4a34f94c78d7e8bbb354dc2
1051908 F20110404_AAAAYF yang_j_Page_083.jp2
25374c49fd0e4f18d52c1a061e249073
359923cc413dca8558affe3185d6b04dc16947ff
F20110404_AAABCX yang_j_Page_101.tif
9ae4a631c15f3ef18b9de29f95b66579
2b20a2a83e5bc2446076a34fe1303586866cbbf4
34858 F20110404_AAAAXR yang_j_Page_140.jp2
082f3fd7ff2b223dd50ce396c6393bd3
d2cccaef4954c0596aead888e0464f8e017990d5
1841 F20110404_AAABEB yang_j_Page_121.txt
a599af886f04f1cf1837a67b27156159
e72e657bed68836ca074dc9614804a71c266e360
78676 F20110404_AAAAAL yang_j_Page_039.jpg
c4b290f91c341322ec260d65d5f626dd
34d61f4a25822d2711c4795a58533aef7a6cd854
2074 F20110404_AAABDN yang_j_Page_045.txt
ad06b1b29e45fc04c8758a13da626ff7
05fade89229b0a5e6ff62526242a05dda79791f7
5111 F20110404_AAAAYG yang_j_Page_114thm.jpg
69f67f6848947e00e53471100a1775bb
71a8c8af974f084a57732647b1a194b151744453
6147 F20110404_AAABCY yang_j_Page_024thm.jpg
2c8b96043ec66a858e86a58bf2981e2c
8a43e5ff6d59a3a8dda26a42462e4360609964e4
F20110404_AAAAXS yang_j_Page_058.tif
2350cae88deb39e0c3b007dc00d44827
16f2a765ac826ff0521ff93a6adb9e55dc3de571
55233 F20110404_AAABEC yang_j_Page_146.pro
e597db212412ee52210b3407a701420c
e7857aa730c797058c57595ae0d2926d28c5913e
27180 F20110404_AAAAAM yang_j_Page_150.QC.jpg
7c2b4bf6377ce9a1c265f8653de75d13
025415bd2aa1e0ab2a9778c95fb2d2ed18f83baf
74461 F20110404_AAABDO yang_j_Page_007.jpg
0115a1b70ef0660cdfcff454b9420e8a
d6fcb57de0f7f9c835fb8bb37e5420e1a65370d4
86234 F20110404_AAAAYH yang_j_Page_056.jpg
1bf8f3835491c1789f4b97b60e4961a6
4a725aa6cba0e359a45064045a2c3444ca7deb38
F20110404_AAABCZ yang_j_Page_145.tif
e692419f6ac6e37949dee7e854191b8e
099c608d9803a8f132cb3d509844f1019499348b
90789 F20110404_AAAAXT yang_j_Page_061.jpg
16f0c7fb54ac63ae0a9116ddf705a5eb
a6510636e654ae40b15eb1f348504c983275fa66
2279 F20110404_AAAABA yang_j_Page_052.txt
856d93214f72ee64e2ad366f19c50817
e4b50897fec37e5ce80394dc613201ffd8addbdb
2466 F20110404_AAABED yang_j_Page_129.txt
f7236b9f9db42e021184d751750af3f3
7097a85204e93411c6089cec73b886883661c605
1051944 F20110404_AAAAYI yang_j_Page_089.jp2
8b1fb89222d852e2606dcd7228febfcf
3f5a7d89c604c6a1f70a7880495ef37aafd8461b
5375 F20110404_AAAAXU yang_j_Page_041thm.jpg
caffeaf93782a140eb7388e964fbf5e7
687d83a3c1c277ed716f76dccab256241e612e74
50429 F20110404_AAAABB yang_j_Page_122.jpg
79c2f25edbb503443a66d38c113e26f2
fc5b36f6a0278540a945d181abab2a2774bdbc92
83990 F20110404_AAABEE yang_j_Page_055.jpg
12094c17df3fe5e41a5239ec59c47813
90e584d2f50ec96f657ddb6182c0428c3b5ad42a
49497 F20110404_AAAAAN yang_j_Page_034.pro
727920dd80b6f4bb4b526d64cc346b0b
a0d847fff848ca11d6919778a4dfbe8ed65818f2
52805 F20110404_AAABDP yang_j_Page_053.pro
70be7cc25abfecd0caab5de1127c7edb
7797a7a199c9434aea295a74b14f36ed041d0773
85514 F20110404_AAAAYJ yang_j_Page_022.jpg
aef1abc6d7102262091898a88c58ac47
8952e025b5d1d269a4d4b360fed1df40a6bbf34e
87676 F20110404_AAAAXV yang_j_Page_052.jpg
e61f483ca2bab249a5269a995386f798
4e27c17fe5dbebc4a3594303ec5381238982f757
6624 F20110404_AAAABC yang_j_Page_001.QC.jpg
4c2a647e5b7a7f9f3d5782cdce325d6e
cdebdb790d2727d1062f73fb464382f96fbbfcc1
2275 F20110404_AAABEF yang_j_Page_085.txt
5face3e0b3254b71eec64ac8f840ea04
1f1320b09bb686755f590aaf5846611dbfe8f029
909672 F20110404_AAAAAO yang_j_Page_107.jp2
be882de68178fb60c640b45027735b3e
24e859656f3c41013fd833a4c4a9e99d05d4d67e
41426 F20110404_AAABDQ yang_j_Page_124.jpg
8ad8977df7c623a8afe42e1634d69f87
94787fd933cd7d648533c3fab1c3349eba2b0c9a
25611 F20110404_AAAAYK yang_j_Page_031.QC.jpg
1f577471b3686238c3536da35eafd929
e281681469c0a5eaaa0bce6ec13dad3756a7a0a2
97999 F20110404_AAAAXW yang_j_Page_115.jpg
dfd497087c097399d24956bac4164d9b
93a3b793a0335284c64707ef8c062a20c10e63ad
422830 F20110404_AAAABD yang_j_Page_011.jp2
1454774f65220a05706e5391d288e93f
1a427a0552018cf7e340db946bd1c1807f62de43
516901 F20110404_AAABEG yang_j_Page_124.jp2
77e7dfb20f4d2fc987bb0f9090946467
f44c6c1320806f7ff6729c47c8372cd9042f6922
6111 F20110404_AAAAAP yang_j_Page_022thm.jpg
a0f36fb83c166c95e7d5f06ae997d1eb
eeecfad583990238e4a86d77c7a54403d917a788
5426 F20110404_AAAAZA yang_j_Page_017thm.jpg
0a4b485d283684e710b683683e49c9bc
4cb5fcd7844881ce5d46f224c5ca6fbd7d5b576d
28506 F20110404_AAABDR yang_j_Page_011.pro
d64c9a4f765f27a66e12e2b397f5cb91
e401ecad47526f22c3ef0540b350ba14c006982d
54071 F20110404_AAAAYL yang_j_Page_103.pro
1d266047b782ebb6fb665a57fee3d06c
389ceccea6bd6afec6fe42611083e3fcea8702ed
105083 F20110404_AAAAXX yang_j_Page_147.jpg
6670e2cf99c551dd70b4f72cac290bfd
d9af5f3a64690ece2ea593ad52f40e1649d91f6a
7663 F20110404_AAAABE yang_j_Page_112.QC.jpg
0be26808d1d7296f378f0d41e5130047
53aa96ff92b37a6a0032170d923c8ad66c6da90e
F20110404_AAABEH yang_j_Page_109.tif
7ecdb04f987ecdb212e073e579df2371
97959ef41bd8c281d9212d4e233a6c0fd1189368
F20110404_AAAAAQ yang_j_Page_107.tif
b4597e04bf157bea0380af40fc42d672
2bfc5924e609686c1df9d57794397e632ca7d90d
389 F20110404_AAAAZB yang_j_Page_072.txt
4a7a954c96ffda4a70d3e3c06bbc9588
041b0742e8fd84095e0aa1392244edd08772fff3
24442 F20110404_AAABDS yang_j_Page_104.QC.jpg
59b0691283929cc324b52445f73c0f25
b3bfc1ce7438107efceb34a91d8d894ce20c7496
1055 F20110404_AAAAYM yang_j_Page_049.txt
9d0c8ab08846f5854a67882200a3f793
e97530f54258b771ef7a881f9cd0e57025cf64c4
4356 F20110404_AAAAXY yang_j_Page_009thm.jpg
c6e4f14cc41acdcf6c3f3affa1834452
c0d4d53894584eb56b2e3c9813ad3593f2e09763
1164 F20110404_AAAABF yang_j_Page_011.txt
0067d0ceddcdfb819bf4d0315863af8f
1e9c1656dd96161d3be251f75b0a220081f64d6b
917928 F20110404_AAAAAR yang_j_Page_064.jp2
9de9fb5c831fa703019e0469cf87ecfc
a48e0a142dfe23ab2bedcc73607ef7af6b6b6860
53834 F20110404_AAAAZC yang_j_Page_076.pro
af7f8665e0181b2a9d36602af7cba57b
31decab2121c04d795af47b550c398ccc9e5cc16
38499 F20110404_AAABDT yang_j_Page_051.pro
6fe467f4c008bf8818065b2cbcb779b0
ebcc99543228f098f6e9675b5e8c5f32a038dcae
F20110404_AAAAYN yang_j_Page_098.tif
9105cae7697438b6c7cf5edf4d5484f1
30406dd997beffdbe0d6d692b9e1fef61606f741
1051941 F20110404_AAAAXZ yang_j_Page_015.jp2
cb453ec3de3201d925d2ae1390ce4b12
a12dc996e7ebc5cf241d9867118018f1184f09ac
1051555 F20110404_AAAABG yang_j_Page_097.jp2
3c0a2b6d874e265472bd927e0500d34a
ec55198013a2645f52933ebb15bb5b4bb67c59e8
1830 F20110404_AAABEI yang_j_Page_123.txt
9f00c864379674f51938adab4d648b31
5f86d4efebda85039fdecab3f04b8d7bd38bfe92
26123 F20110404_AAAAAS yang_j_Page_027.QC.jpg
cd802268c6f3f6234882131ee9c85d75
8f424f146cd6b778803e60382c3c36411018efe1
17881 F20110404_AAAAZD yang_j_Page_009.QC.jpg
64de013164c0e5e4843d718b23c0410d
96728e5666f887609976756ae6b69fb9af11a9fd
32606 F20110404_AAABDU yang_j_Page_074.jpg
3a14c9d09bfecd011b4d6876044385fc
afda2b85dee88237a39c9ea4f8fcbad00f470dd4
F20110404_AAAAYO yang_j_Page_068.tif
9917e3acb89ff3cb990894082e1c3fac
591d1e4873527eb2f110591b2f9b4c9b7d3b53d8
6425 F20110404_AAAABH yang_j_Page_008.pro
aa623032a615aed68ba6730c6f51c72f
8cd500392845da0298b44339ea17e8b76f4537af
47883 F20110404_AAABEJ yang_j_Page_114.pro
5ce28d860c3f6875070edaa55998886b
f6c6925cbad8851f556fb2d38de1467ab02f4cba
1735 F20110404_AAAAAT yang_j_Page_143.txt
376e5a8228d0753515374d3dadea506d
a4858af8fcdd284592f6042e0bac7b3ee1f9c3a7
22929 F20110404_AAAAZE yang_j_Page_134.QC.jpg
3f1951d45f3e5374d224e23de2456063
908d786223aafec505ef0e9c4433d8e6d980804f
1491 F20110404_AAABDV yang_j_Page_113.txt
cbfa4197a1cac9be2e1fb8aebb8e32df
b912f4ffa93ce74ecd369387d6bd179cf2b716a9
47150 F20110404_AAAAYP yang_j_Page_048.pro
2d7dac0f38a42a6bdeb05bbf02908489
402043a6dac82474f6597db53fea74e792fe7682
F20110404_AAAABI yang_j_Page_039.tif
8ae71972c18b310b7b3d4c2e63ea3b28
2bb577f5fdb528a01b2a6e815c2c79a81ec5f708
24515 F20110404_AAABEK yang_j_Page_033.QC.jpg
ccf6730383ae92daaf222e542a604650
18924d5b984fed09c027aca65a581e554b7ada4c
1565 F20110404_AAAAAU yang_j_Page_019.txt
b35da9cba43b6872eebc01120e7e2b53
4c27febf489cffa7061ad01fbd7ede8eb10d6c44
48506 F20110404_AAAAZF yang_j_Page_023.pro
290d67f8c3351140aa19d3217e47355f
0eca44ea8a7f93c5650a5c3aa3bfd7be5c8193ee
F20110404_AAABDW yang_j_Page_030.jp2
70ab5778cad2aca09f1aa5185b66b857
33dd6b943aafcb2821c48628c142601e57a9eea7
1747 F20110404_AAAAYQ yang_j_Page_014.txt
0c5a6df9ac71df903df78fb3f32559a4
ffb438d2179e45da3c17cbc1bed06503e48e5ec6
9410 F20110404_AAAABJ yang_j_Page_144.jpg
741efca2a00068bae979588206fbd6a0
edaa7bc16fe81c4f75edd4087853d7403198f20c
25437 F20110404_AAABEL yang_j_Page_115.QC.jpg
ae1d2aaf59594635c57d60c817ca1d3e
734537741fec883c6e6c439a6e5c3831e083902b
2503 F20110404_AAABFA yang_j_Page_118.txt
7fe2aa5526006c2319f7c24743fce2d2
aecd3bd7a6a7c154d28c6e93f0d6658a17de3623
166791 F20110404_AAAAAV yang_j_Page_144.jp2
5a1962215d2e06a9464e784ab6f23a0e
90450de36e09452bc341aec2b9244da50051cd05
F20110404_AAABDX yang_j_Page_115.tif
0ed07a7a3e5b8dd5f95e3731dd9284a7
a7e2de0167e420f6eddc493dbbdfaf3d84373e98
6224 F20110404_AAAAYR yang_j_Page_030thm.jpg
7f23b74715328a0571a56ff4147688ed
12528f9731a79f2ca33e61c42adc41404638d2fd
739230 F20110404_AAAABK yang_j_Page_123.jp2
bc9617aeec983ce93f0e2ca20f3e40aa
cbbae7d5c90874e55204a7e4c6169bf60baa21c7
24105 F20110404_AAABEM yang_j_Page_042.pro
669aa75e7a3fbe2caaf24e3cabe3802e
39c23a2dd3b04cad08a00288a7f5a7b73e61c131
19099 F20110404_AAABFB yang_j_Page_119.QC.jpg
30a2867397e58f54491564ba635febea
4ea02115548b002cd6588b3fb2003c2fdefefeac
5835 F20110404_AAAAAW yang_j_Page_033thm.jpg
59077a95a3f7d1d6e2bb777d152957bc
c46f580b1ebe1956b17770f4bf8014f50b0c3d7f
6044 F20110404_AAAAZG yang_j_Page_036thm.jpg
4bee612ce6b77df19daabe9220e632fc
e982d020baacb713686c13be22c9da63d2d539eb
24237 F20110404_AAABDY yang_j_Page_026.QC.jpg
16e549144bdb90d4eee91d37d00ccf29
4a912ec4b39f8331c57e373968e2b84740a66574
F20110404_AAAAYS yang_j_Page_150.tif
d239588b8d792126825ebf3891bf5ea2
343c7c54ba33e7ca07dda87d2916769fb21c6d58
25383 F20110404_AAAABL yang_j_Page_083.QC.jpg
12ec29caa9872bd648be9d9d216d8d5e
e5a0b787a7996c1b81a734ec31e134aef2853d59
54979 F20110404_AAABEN yang_j_Page_130.jpg
b7e4d26dd8ee00e7d3a3bf9113871c56
843951a3a808551b63751550ed9d35d2ca1ad5eb
F20110404_AAABFC yang_j_Page_027thm.jpg
232f8cd879c87c35be564f96a32b36f4
85b65a3974bb7430f76028f4b6930c640c68d835
F20110404_AAABEO yang_j_Page_028.tif
154f241be81a76f1f203a70e72a586c2
54435e4041a9a9fbeb34dd6539f65e3aa469759a
1051967 F20110404_AAAAAX yang_j_Page_037.jp2
97a5c44a54030b47d56030822c94f9b3
322d584c58766465dd2d2c435483593232f45cfd
5373 F20110404_AAAAZH yang_j_Page_075.QC.jpg
d9372bdaf0253c6753b702ffb07069bf
0a319e375befb53442afba9889c27b16de070df0
1506 F20110404_AAABDZ yang_j_Page_065.txt
08f9d2527a9d42737cfec49694540e05
8245f8590c452241a4119a678a10f95c91fda043
F20110404_AAAAYT yang_j_Page_034.txt
67cb11e8bec268fc9c3b0b5e788808e9
5a5aba31b1f54fcb79dbb4274fdf34876b7cba2d
4174 F20110404_AAAACA yang_j_Page_131thm.jpg
223d916df958cb7c03c24f98bb43bc44
7dabc24d11c7c7a23e324a3fc307e7f923bcab18
2258 F20110404_AAAABM yang_j_Page_078.txt
b9b90650290c1140c035162d29760c59
353b161ceabd9181da0d1b2fefe0e98d9414ca26
25598 F20110404_AAABFD yang_j_Page_096.QC.jpg
c95218bc381072775ac1cc766bab8f06
71316149e8774cbf3bdb48f92e1c3e2227043e3a
F20110404_AAABEP yang_j_Page_031.tif
77bade05c8a314ef99685fde854e5a27
b4b776ee265b6078a336c80b6ae4f0e1e6183e29
862380 F20110404_AAAAAY yang_j_Page_142.jp2
131148ec9b60605036dc7d5982e82323
04e84f66ce4623142261e7080dd95a3c4febb7eb
689083 F20110404_AAAAZI yang_j_Page_066.jp2
a7ca3f29fc11ec89d03b3398b9ae439a
adac7d889a85dbfa9ac9638660252b67f631c532
2028 F20110404_AAAAYU yang_j_Page_028.txt
7946d6bd9b7922c722f571d80c75f46e
70d906231b350a69be5400bd35b4c6a80cda3e4c
F20110404_AAAACB yang_j_Page_157.tif
52a15e5ee72b35d8714f84de4e132b7e
5c7304a4d2e63921b8c4710ded69eca451839515
769701 F20110404_AAAABN yang_j_Page_018.jp2
857a65fdb07f470e06d404ea108c5648
8c2c971174eec9910c0eb678f5871cfe97a66116
26880 F20110404_AAABFE yang_j_Page_038.QC.jpg
06509fa2cbb46886e873ea92fe7edcc0
54a077ce7235650cd016d342090aa470cd38fb07
49838 F20110404_AAAAAZ yang_j_Page_027.pro
ec584612bac36ad10564003956b942bd
cd0c52dcf5ca33d1f963535d19445c26276e5b1c
964819 F20110404_AAAAZJ yang_j_Page_007.jp2
1e36f7ab3987beac5d6b972e4a61ecca
e8979f12fe7e98617aa6b07434e4fb839a87c587
1222 F20110404_AAAAYV yang_j_Page_018.txt
d890a639e4796e2edc240418de04c758
dab5888ae6d8a2bda54642cab1a7633fabb4ecb4
1051933 F20110404_AAAACC yang_j_Page_108.jp2
21de294b1f71a67b5a8e3b8c0934210a
e8a0fbb3144dc216653e0775839af824df59fd78
3544 F20110404_AAABFF yang_j_Page_092thm.jpg
42f3640c5bd3bd44b958af3b62748a8f
88a9835b152578de546b65c6e6f4b67860f22b75
1045564 F20110404_AAABEQ yang_j_Page_109.jp2
4801f6b3c6bcf556d1a990420e317899
7f8b28b1f85745679380cf4132367f145b1ad0cf
5412 F20110404_AAAAZK yang_j_Page_077thm.jpg
d42350ebea713c42fc324df2c760ed4e
47590770ea67b587e961e0b8c81a39d7734ce94f
5451 F20110404_AAAAYW yang_j_Page_072.QC.jpg
c576623d0e5b5b6e342facbcfc93a3ca
faa8f59565cb13ef126476a21d99295f1d6f7d04
4450 F20110404_AAAACD yang_j_Page_002.jpg
2b057ea1c0d1ffedd9068d19e178e58e
4549065ec7437b122805de4dca04d8e2bc759a61
84538 F20110404_AAAABO yang_j_Page_029.jpg
b9d848871872b007747d2a12c5aeaa5b
ee1485a38b7bea89eb5af7c356f99fac854ac2d9
54866 F20110404_AAABFG yang_j_Page_105.pro
830e88a2b90c12355785b97fdf490e06
4bd11e8f5a7f3d83a4d56f628411ae86efb558fd
56422 F20110404_AAABER yang_j_Page_152.pro
a7170d40e029d7dd460212de0188249a
4ef2624e038587641d0144b03067207ff7bc6a2d
27820 F20110404_AAAAZL yang_j_Page_045.QC.jpg
5c4eae3804f5d5c398295233fbfd8ebd
6df4898bd243f3e06834ca26511bf1577ce0071b
3195 F20110404_AAAAYX yang_j_Page_056.txt
058c20ff7eae648b0d135e931b8830e4
e174f9a7dfa80c961bb43c8a51bd4888615a51a1
39724 F20110404_AAAACE yang_j_Page_125.pro
c8304cc6be19886827e3cbe9f8921a36
c7fd0e33ea53d0aec3df259d1c9b18ecc7429072
F20110404_AAAABP yang_j_Page_138.tif
d74a96fa9b5eed8e44ae9cd49f6c9f8c
c7ef3288d0053b74809401fde2e0885f65280059
78956 F20110404_AAABFH yang_j_Page_026.jpg
51e68afcf7900d0f0de57110ddab3482
24bc1c8b8e55bbeddf987efe079825866c20ca7c
64032 F20110404_AAABES yang_j_Page_129.jpg
1776be303a43895e7d622e11baa49695
eecf238feed7e948e1ffab44389b6f2741af01f5
F20110404_AAAAZM yang_j_Page_085.tif
727157d1df2597ccbb76d04fd54e12b0
57543bc485941e035bc4dd307d63d0c11579475d
594 F20110404_AAAAYY yang_j_Page_120.txt
c754f379b3944f6c923e539e4f6debf4
963c1e9121c52d8098f77e5bbb2d1a214491d563
28054 F20110404_AAAACF yang_j_Page_124.pro
c138ae524a3f7d995a54018d4cb52f92
ba3074b2f6196e2e38e5e0471ff220ac863dd337
81259 F20110404_AAAABQ yang_j_Page_081.jpg
4f58cd529eb0878d66be831d2513a7a2
64f4ff4956cade9e0c58dd75428e882d6462495d
41229 F20110404_AAABFI yang_j_Page_123.pro
dff7b1ed1c58fb0d2ea0c7129548931e
b44b9f7303b0445e800988c57fae3d4e0bb17f4e
1145 F20110404_AAABET yang_j_Page_133.txt
a2a9e88705dc39c98df33c16a8c9871f
88f6b2c7f46bed9e157031e40b65288eb8a73310
F20110404_AAAAZN yang_j_Page_009.tif
5827761db0e0d461c92c1d113e2dca9d
45914be1cbb19083aff59f545339de1069e48e72
27307 F20110404_AAAAYZ yang_j_Page_028.QC.jpg
f10b470bab2a7e3df96888970c7950ca
6c0e6976a657f1b0fd03c2b34e8b13f64cbf6409
F20110404_AAAACG yang_j_Page_147.tif
29ee233708b564a385f8e450e0ed362c
ad041e8158841d149e7037577ed08fce5211a6a7
2233 F20110404_AAAABR yang_j_Page_146.txt
26cd176a4bb56b6e5cb4e16de9819036
94e11e6644f7dd693a6fb558e133ddea94fe5aa9
21671 F20110404_AAABFJ yang_j_Page_107.QC.jpg
ce81c2d4b981b6b994dd5cdb4cdb2764
c2d635175563d7b6443821fe040006e346d46f32
F20110404_AAABEU yang_j_Page_063.tif
55cc8941af4f122cf5a7bd5c1cfb6d48
04416cae9651b71b4b95e22bbe60b476f202c20c
21443 F20110404_AAAAZO yang_j_Page_056.QC.jpg
10ea27cddb097fb27126fb388ddbb4af
abdfd75e48587eef7d11669fbbed2fdcd7afce6d
F20110404_AAAACH yang_j_Page_151.tif
890879d81b2604cd6cb7521b18cd4790
a5cb97be3dafd7c92e8d0a2016dfe4e618e7b79b
F20110404_AAAABS yang_j_Page_056.tif
f3d21fa9bf14d34c0a5b324e5148e361
c2500f5a96b8d24c1194952dbfc8946faa421e0e
10914 F20110404_AAABFK yang_j_Page_142.QC.jpg
cd40433e7a92ec4948f47b194038805d
ed4052fc786e1ffc30ce7612e664afb35ee29265
52446 F20110404_AAABEV yang_j_Page_108.pro
ca7922b46d43d734f2d5bf6b55e511cc
2b2232c21ca18a34c407f4bc3e48eaaca77a0172
16092 F20110404_AAAAZP yang_j_Page_130.QC.jpg
d88845ed67141d06209dce160b461aeb
8f08dbcfecb39628e8635fcb81ad6c3aa5f1b13d
F20110404_AAAACI yang_j_Page_096.jp2
1f7f69372ba39c1e70a3d4af61ef67b5
1e4767c58b5836202484cfe821cab8a8aff37930
63135 F20110404_AAAABT yang_j_Page_117.pro
e44e023f5e8132ffe18e821519dba3cc
10d550a62e711454585abf2b5929cec50c3c04bb
1039665 F20110404_AAABFL yang_j_Page_104.jp2
48cb10e9e5e1588b26d6f2105e320663
fe5ea99d9be893647a59fb0b7452245e7c9f2b74
25848 F20110404_AAABEW yang_j_Page_047.QC.jpg
659418df010cc9bb6a0c08af7ac17f4d
32d3489a858f08cb4f84a701326f4cbd636a1d46
33011 F20110404_AAAAZQ yang_j_Page_011.jpg
2f45dc79fe68b7cbd7a990b4fd50d2cc
6de78d2f87324299001ec90e25d56d9d5421ea7e
47188 F20110404_AAAACJ yang_j_Page_092.jpg
285f56ff7a0f1d06005ec2f7ebd6c06f
79dbb0491332e57dfb36627ae8f87af120e73f5d
29062 F20110404_AAAABU yang_j_Page_018.pro
ea802c59316af85aad16c2275bc2c2e9
ada875100a8cca108b12fa9f144129ee4eeea9be
24575 F20110404_AAABGA yang_j_Page_049.pro
600a00ba8385320f2ea2b93030f53755
0bd8c068fae60e3e0815e06f6f44b4b5c9fc5ac8
12337 F20110404_AAABFM yang_j_Page_133.QC.jpg
e31477076d4a15a85b87068d6829bd79
7a7b0840285b3f489cd30e1e081ecaf13ebb3fb6
198 F20110404_AAABEX yang_j_Page_003.txt
80a9ae3bd200a5bac75dec5792bca194
ea03ee896f526b2ba26a2168b15901ba718f18fe
24379 F20110404_AAAAZR yang_j_Page_085.QC.jpg
068b14db991a1367448c34316070e630
4240ab1b49c2b13f0a44b0d82d98d25169183e22
F20110404_AAAACK yang_j_Page_136.txt
15996c5e2f16be70985c4c675186627e
d5f6a8bb4773abe00d8e4198123cba494f608e2f
257 F20110404_AAAABV yang_j_Page_008.txt
9ba3b3b0be867473993f556be89df51f
0e0ed5df064d44eff0ba40cf6e9bdff6952d9a52
F20110404_AAABGB yang_j_Page_121.tif
5d86724514f824b09129b604e0df84c8
44fdd6173389dabd0148f2d01b863116aae74a45
5503 F20110404_AAABFN yang_j_Page_080thm.jpg
0f8add4e616c9223b34eecb8b781eac3
aa840fdd1c894722007599891d848384eb5b3f01
12899 F20110404_AAABEY yang_j_Page_112.pro
1559cd520a0f67fc10ad25eeca5ba245
8e6b5c0bb0b1cc248ea766a0d53c649403e6b072
1048245 F20110404_AAAAZS yang_j_Page_060.jp2
aabc930bccf1da62a7491a4f2d4a9c2a
ba236ad5b44d86dbcdc7960c87beb9016c9a5115
1966 F20110404_AAAACL yang_j_Page_037.txt
b7c9f0442718eba1067492a11cc54935
0b38814117a7bd3e24de70b1ef70399187a8fa85
2396 F20110404_AAAABW yang_j_Page_064.txt
c815a8d9b9773c60b1ccd4f77f786ce6
3b355a75d43af75f39482a76a5e1169f737eab2e
11675 F20110404_AAABGC yang_j_Page_124.QC.jpg
e29aca16756b0c490c24222c9be1a728
59409d49986f2704da9661ac49042c73525069c2
F20110404_AAABFO yang_j_Page_149.tif
63db4b171b08f09e72948e0da5b8ed83
7c5bc273588f610fa24ce1674007268013712d6a
790855 F20110404_AAABEZ yang_j_Page_062.jp2
e7687f080fc0d0da86f954122174b33b
527ce9f3dfc50e5624978ea8e295d2f52e41c25b
51466 F20110404_AAAAZT yang_j_Page_028.pro
0217caeea6749d73cca79ee989f11eb5
261bc438e0bd2c142e5c9fdbd6fb685331a820fe
F20110404_AAAADA yang_j_Page_087.tif
454d07197a3d7a5829bcc6f503028243
e7cdb61a930d885a479709f895d18a3888f926f7
F20110404_AAAACM yang_j_Page_081.jp2
075755f3957fefea57d862bfa864daf9
c7dc93df62de89612cfd5aaf774c66d6e7a92dd0
40721 F20110404_AAAABX yang_j_Page_143.jpg
b3708405a47047d147c4b40e28f21316
351d9b3bcd7cb673e315722224fb98763745d076
1861 F20110404_AAABGD yang_j_Page_112thm.jpg
0873f9b5b7311764f1613fdee73c14a8
b8e7e353c12226b0ff572bc2c65540fd861a5ed7
14917 F20110404_AAABFP yang_j_Page_132.QC.jpg
3494e886d7fb67732106f84327634779
5d3773bdd785efa97936dfe6a289b8fe988b139e
F20110404_AAAAZU yang_j_Page_032.txt
dd17230c428a08133affa4ba774569fe
5d52ebc7d8bf1a125e99fdd46f50cfe88752d20d
58622 F20110404_AAAADB yang_j_Page_081.pro
15efe062167f8275e87b63b6d978eef1
0b69efb6aae58b24ab1a7381ad317c55fbb13111
51514 F20110404_AAAACN yang_j_Page_113.jpg
ead1854ad98047e0b12aa1b72292366a
16c0ea678fd035a841a74b6ddbee2dfd857c45d8
39605 F20110404_AAAABY yang_j_Page_069.pro
e96d9c444f4f66377654ea5209e3dbe5
6c66be6f0aeed1ced0b2a4b16cceab3ccfb63bbe
F20110404_AAABGE yang_j_Page_017.tif
e7c37dca1b1c9b74f7c7c7e62a71b38e
6b1efa60f8510acd314a3ec219565234465a506f
2479 F20110404_AAABFQ yang_j_Page_147.txt
065027bd1d4a38aa3b7ded249454d19a
9b2eda119749836b8c6de4e8f7af2deff17afe2b
7417 F20110404_AAAAZV yang_j_Page_008.jpg
80349a00e987be7e32fc561621b847d8
f7d69b80ece34cf7b5ae8678eb394359bb58a477
75681 F20110404_AAAADC yang_j_Page_058.jpg
d072ed7fc31b52f014f2052242b886d5
bad4ec23192c019dc8b4ddd1788971bc3e427330
F20110404_AAAACO yang_j_Page_024.tif
2f7979664a1befd1754d5a322484e2cb
285bbdb922f07eada2f5528ed101b4299c20d971
4697 F20110404_AAAABZ yang_j_Page_064thm.jpg
340f23f13aa8924f76f68dff80c7a506
6a60f29db3d6126c5963f19540da9ca221e07863
5220 F20110404_AAABGF yang_j_Page_019thm.jpg
a175ba8cdcb3e3676b087347057e4839
04c18fe6fb31f80faf6d39a4a98433785864db57
4649 F20110404_AAAAZW yang_j_Page_021thm.jpg
6cf2d77961dbd0dd49c4ebf505e96e3e
41fe947ab23e0f379b184eb22364fe9287274f47
1040730 F20110404_AAAADD yang_j_Page_090.jp2
416ece67d699be5c97dd7404a6a50a9e
a2917d495401efb199713216744189d9210ac46c
73083 F20110404_AAABGG yang_j_Page_068.jpg
2da1457b8208bce2fa6ad434507ce127
14ab36145f66419b658454c87fdd485ade451d67
1051957 F20110404_AAABFR yang_j_Page_156.jp2
1fa9c21975dfd01a7009997906d73525
ad61d0cfc6a383597febdcd2986e13eb602b6a08
1051934 F20110404_AAAAZX yang_j_Page_103.jp2
cb8852dd64454a212dbab2ee4e13c54a
a46c5a8d24b063ac9a87e0cbbac974cb92943a57
2287 F20110404_AAAADE yang_j_Page_152.txt
9a0a42bc2661e8971a3e74f749f4109b
a5aa8dac3d206a6f01eb437123d6d3c9e15627f9
F20110404_AAAACP yang_j_Page_075thm.jpg
6af1746a113acb3e0dc57e7e2ab68334
8df94e37fa86644074fd1bfb28b9b87f98fdf78e
F20110404_AAABGH yang_j_Page_013.tif
a34081f708cd22a72a95b9b211ea1a78
497adb98278503447be2bc585032568cc746a3d5
F20110404_AAABFS yang_j_Page_071.jp2
58e3b4ec7e181b5565ee0d01a7c2bf8d
6b7567543f4299030492efc8883acf4e382c4d70
F20110404_AAAAZY yang_j_Page_095.tif
9df6334d4c8bfc218b6d6bcfdb0df725
0bfbbe1655afd9fd866c125d2b46722509b48954
23374 F20110404_AAAADF yang_j_Page_137.pro
720d15a0725578a8ce693b39e6f5e547
674a134f4c583a6c9a07aa3ec52ff39736b64627
50433 F20110404_AAAACQ yang_j_Page_099.pro
8366a31af0f82ea25d8b266b244486a6
57c18afc928e36eae100ae9f2503084318fa2c20
F20110404_AAABGI yang_j_Page_139.tif
3bb97591b16a9c8ca4d8d65b42b335fe
80ddf48998f00ca8a8895a27b1c6c1ebc0cae597
1180 F20110404_AAABFT yang_j_Page_074.txt
128e847ea7bd69899ce8675bbad4bc79
d2214ae0d7559c5d9750f5c75cd08cbc715fed59
1859 F20110404_AAAAZZ yang_j_Page_026.txt
0da81733589537669ec1342c96962744
8c6c357e942aff0ebe04022b733ce4df63fc08b6
18113 F20110404_AAAADG yang_j_Page_070.QC.jpg
12329680521b84899cbe1ba809308d6e
61e7e6195c7ee36cb82317dec90f594690de5f4e
1598 F20110404_AAAACR yang_j_Page_040.txt
9475762f82230ff3e9336e83d828b904
d4e0d209c52e6b30a3a29d05bace984a791dbb57
6412 F20110404_AAABGJ yang_j_Page_038thm.jpg
69667915a2f28030e488815571f256a3
80055c51e47c7322d995415594b59e3dbae9c143
1051958 F20110404_AAABFU yang_j_Page_039.jp2
1d759f4871c8e45b107150daaf9fe5d2
c4ea7ba3d67a4190b70a1d09904d350e7b6cd8f0
71941 F20110404_AAAADH yang_j_Page_049.jpg
2ec4c467735faebc2f8dd9d4c53bd97a
26de5a1154a4a0e25a812ea6906b76cfd4ba015d
47574 F20110404_AAAACS yang_j_Page_133.jpg
cd25bfb9f6c62451f28e7ad0214aa674
132f2636fcc9e11403bed1f4aa08e34ceabb1d8e
24652 F20110404_AAABGK yang_j_Page_100.QC.jpg
0bf4793b00273b32d8b1c4bc70e05840
7be8bb187c883518c041cab59d650b1107f28ff7
5364 F20110404_AAABFV yang_j_Page_048thm.jpg
bbca51a63c9f5594b7522b2a647d7752
dd89533e1606d379ae13f545eb6d2116723c0930
78288 F20110404_AAAADI yang_j_Page_104.jpg
6be503c37c4c94f779c39c85a06bcbce
b303e56e329faad8d09935978cb89587ffcbb7e2
F20110404_AAAACT yang_j_Page_033.tif
69681ce08893c10b7a1abddc58dd5ad0
38c77b609f853595b3a2c91211d373d8dae29b90
2821 F20110404_AAABGL yang_j_Page_003.pro
80a8cef9d8fee39ed8f9e3294932a3e0
70d01bcf11befa5a2900b1a247b27325d840f048
F20110404_AAABFW yang_j_Page_023.jp2
159ddbf808be5f25e90072155b5f4611
f72825ef34ff459d2ea3efb3386d494e3b33a995
1725 F20110404_AAAADJ yang_j_Page_132.txt
0c101bf9fc1238f5bd0f5486c7a3a4ac
6ee915f7343be800f28a339bcccb4865395a32be
5577 F20110404_AAAACU yang_j_Page_053thm.jpg
cea08fd2567f14f7698f3273a2323099
5a33dc304a63b660f484de59897b20b65e3f8e97
6766 F20110404_AAABHA yang_j_Page_138thm.jpg
4b13c15fed7b94a8884dba7340d5157b
7fcf98d6c0eac3a9d325109b74e3a3ab0dafd1b7
81222 F20110404_AAABGM yang_j_Page_030.jpg
6c05ad1255238b37246be95d61f1dd57
ee3699e3b18eea2faa6b1655f956ee53f54dd1ff
75381 F20110404_AAABFX yang_j_Page_016.jpg
9c2083ea318a6f3ad8bbaa14dbb731d9
d363271435f5e70f06b94d29ed729ed58ccbe508
61425 F20110404_AAAADK yang_j_Page_126.jpg
186f63ca4771bfee00cdd682c1a7bcf1
654865bf93e1dd1d17d22ea50c396f57d005e2a9
6109 F20110404_AAAACV yang_j_Page_085thm.jpg
004762474603fad3e8ad8a2b76106313
7b5ac9469ca5cae3d801c00f19f81d959e3ca704
70597 F20110404_AAABHB yang_j_Page_014.jpg
b82856d98edab9bb21572483dad30923
695168c35acf1af15e087628fe926f86daee3ef2
F20110404_AAABGN yang_j_Page_050.tif
3bec77edd43ee8cdd54141cc60c9c0fe
4f497bddcd8f4bd5dfb3e9a496741d74bc835348
4872 F20110404_AAABFY yang_j_Page_040thm.jpg
299fba52e0391f715bd9ea12896ba136
adc9d4dba1340f065c82e8e6fbf08a6bac6ea418
5564 F20110404_AAAADL yang_j_Page_013thm.jpg
fcd8e48138c5c9ed4e1acb6750a0d679
18f09a9714a88cd682a7186b0c9447795e59840a
87043 F20110404_AAAACW yang_j_Page_046.jpg
d0ca0e2b59503881ef2294fd52295424
7cbe8bae4677908253eb9e525c7a8c39107024be
2718 F20110404_AAABHC yang_j_Page_133thm.jpg
a127bec959ceaab8e95436b85315a188
96c3d706290b3a3a6bb4d8d684a1a6bdda28dd99
24499 F20110404_AAABGO yang_j_Page_097.QC.jpg
c3bfe4e3528a84126b7f73c62f9ebf69
04688d054032069632e59f2d04f981bc664b89ff
F20110404_AAABFZ yang_j_Page_051.tif
08de15ca10a2abdfcf8f560efc18fe9f
d212b46e2a58b08d244dc7d186006d1e6f65f20d
94288 F20110404_AAAADM yang_j_Page_153.jpg
5a1607daf2937b799f04ef3e56cee081
916feadafa3405577c140929cb9541550bc592e2
25992 F20110404_AAAACX yang_j_Page_152.QC.jpg
12cd058b5bc5a2c8cb353504c0a799da
fb9d7b11fb8809b866c0d93af6b307e46fc19068
6153 F20110404_AAAAEA yang_j_Page_035thm.jpg
95eeec80ab950699634685dd12a2c91f
f1694ed4563d5d3d464f2c08f9bf98b9adfd0666
86366 F20110404_AAABHD yang_j_Page_038.jpg
ebb1646591d6e4c88294558230e43a5a
b72eea59abbd8c43884f6251fb79a1ffa2f9e042
2050 F20110404_AAABGP yang_j_Page_022.txt
8e8e1da272b0952d2d4083f8956b53f2
6467b9da1d03e956abd7bb72b90df1c9158ca33b
2038 F20110404_AAAADN yang_j_Page_020.txt
f9aaf523c8a61e1cda58a8728b1de6ca
0495e8d3614476b70af4156f96de1bf867063a56
72944 F20110404_AAAACY yang_j_Page_013.jpg
cefb6157565cbb1fdecb3a21c9e5cc61
a8b208d189ff64e31b943892284549304ca54df5
19072 F20110404_AAAAEB yang_j_Page_116.pro
3afb1175101e43a652801fa7fa91a826
7f1a644d6af44c76ae2935ca5534c4160dbd952d
F20110404_AAABHE yang_j_Page_090.tif
2fdcdaeeca1c2d0ada15d62e87369807
871ae75d03a443ebf51d5a49fe7adba3da8a7adf
F20110404_AAABGQ yang_j_Page_082.tif
3d1552defc2912adbac4bb03014ca58d
1e9df90a31eb0ff057e8e332c2a8330d577b2076
46276 F20110404_AAAADO yang_j_Page_129.pro
5cf925a32f7dfdb859f56f7e086cc236
52215c6c7b0bd710db946df752b41f93bb87070b
25871 F20110404_AAAACZ yang_j_Page_061.QC.jpg
8795614ca201fcc329d36b60fba60f32
7a49ce201dd580f66d98b045efd9b4a4188b3ceb
16727 F20110404_AAAAEC yang_j_Page_042.QC.jpg
6fb0e9688555281d2ecad2fdd3d185d1
84488fafee04c539a58b8e3f297fe673690c0bc1
42019 F20110404_AAABHF yang_j_Page_143.pro
b6de95fd5ceb6fe9acf6bb7c58c0234a
aad3b12b128c5bba0d1409b3c57ab3e816c86121
25639 F20110404_AAABGR yang_j_Page_044.QC.jpg
17a761d0790c97dfe680a7a67f129b90
8e607d18873643567e27650dc27f0230763aef89
73512 F20110404_AAAADP yang_j_Page_059.jpg
258785328918d8af4f2bac8f0bcf079f
1be59474e37b7d14df406097ad3d005c14300cd5
F20110404_AAAAED yang_j_Page_124.tif
7e133694a83b61f1c3277aee70805dcf
19fc7a42c07b477d39802237229b64f02cb35d73
25494 F20110404_AAABHG yang_j_Page_024.QC.jpg
85780ce005a9fe4a63d4de5d22be6282
0abc6274d38bd198b262fb5d7396c68bc8d61028
289100 F20110404_AAAAEE yang_j_Page_112.jp2
c076c9d350ab68871ab4e3282ed94242
d918242766a28b7fd393dcdd43f7d8643575f939
5580 F20110404_AAABHH yang_j_Page_079thm.jpg
21fb08600d786d78d564da5a214d7ad8
bdf069a1e9570787f1a27888b184ebbd484962eb
24798 F20110404_AAABGS yang_j_Page_015.QC.jpg
5708a0b7f50e3c3fa781063d5b0ae611
1b23fdf819534f8bea00fbbdde58d39fa2b07d6c
992675 F20110404_AAAADQ yang_j_Page_095.jp2
af7d604f522cbb0e4b83b11a5afe4840
36633d8f2f06b98dde7bb67fd206e3d37ea89d6c
F20110404_AAAAEF yang_j_Page_123.tif
3997efc1124f3a9aa0a3542e32363155
c999c8d809055df53918da3ec933180e3487ec37
F20110404_AAABHI yang_j_Page_040.tif
8d9361d9847f1137f503754cd6523475
0c7d5207d14eef794741e6dc6d1f9b143065dec5
3562 F20110404_AAABGT yang_j_Page_157thm.jpg
ff96a9fe92f3e95c78359e178128158a
490c04b7bc4fa5259466103b0acc139c0d570c8f
F20110404_AAAADR yang_j_Page_156.txt
05c3f9c94793d7cec96a01ac54c5233c
673dba7a0a20579f416ff3187400280433ff67a9
4388 F20110404_AAAAEG yang_j_Page_054thm.jpg
306f61571e7d60d140c1762c46c44a30
6de4b1a7c551b2df4a9c20e145b3895a9953c9c7
2218 F20110404_AAABHJ yang_j_Page_009.txt
a871c2fc913e7237a18afec5c87dc8cf
cd013f149823b11ee794639f34b50fab1202c0c3
28153 F20110404_AAABGU yang_j_Page_074.pro
bccb9330f2800b73305595e09365fa85
fcfb4180fec30cb7f65675ff6b3896cd7c53c5a3
F20110404_AAAADS yang_j_Page_015.tif
b524b9726da7e0f5ea4b1f84bec3479a
afef43386d303488eabe7f4ba3f90a3dcc5379aa
43589 F20110404_AAAAEH yang_j_Page_013.pro
77514e1431868b5b8ad8e1d95ce2f6af
b60b361183779fef3764dc13291c1b6f23fb72af
5793 F20110404_AAABHK yang_j_Page_089thm.jpg
e63ec0a6602898085d625066a2084b99
e8c1433cc995a14f296499fb1c87072f3c47c5df
990 F20110404_AAABGV yang_j_Page_042.txt
02342ee20c016f4a1d6ffe47f50cacdb
1de82db0afecf384948fe2b7cb49297ae23c6ed0
1928 F20110404_AAAADT yang_j_Page_134.txt
c03caa37f1e44b2d9d4522434cf60567
66d8068e33d23392954dba353c95f4f894d70353
71705 F20110404_AAAAEI yang_j_Page_087.jpg
4512724b5197489862d748efb98022df
e1c54e53761b51732c1f404183a13caf41e12b16
2615 F20110404_AAABHL yang_j_Page_138.txt
bff133d69051a7e1d24b6dc782a4e953
a72df661970781a05542be774e5d75f035c34d42
2304 F20110404_AAABGW yang_j_Page_153.txt
ae03c361d5addd4b6c37d585521d9d33
dbbb84a725b17c118b65592caab38a92ec0deb05
35554 F20110404_AAAADU yang_j_Page_132.pro
6c5def1470b89dc0150c721a17cfa949
99404632aedbc14c3636e0c42abe5d1f365410d8
5697 F20110404_AAAAEJ yang_j_Page_110thm.jpg
752f8151baf97149385fa5be37ab97a5
2293e3b9a7a788ccf7ad66a7f23c22f301186dcd
F20110404_AAABIA yang_j_Page_047.tif
583acd4c4fef39395b5df0a6745171cb
c9db3e2109bae4998d4f6a07e71dc5892de063ba
1870 F20110404_AAABHM yang_j_Page_104.txt
596b0d81d8c08d1ec3b3fa5303555023
336b3f50d4bb28ee3e3d5e3fac1b0c9a38069ae3
968905 F20110404_AAABGX yang_j_Page_013.jp2
91f0adb29927e74ce19e4f6b7304e14f
011d5055101fa3882dcac106d19f8db2cf2e8040
24482 F20110404_AAAAEK yang_j_Page_082.QC.jpg
5dc0f740acf08e196c6ec6e40746c06e
cad14b58fdbc2936f6558c8f32edfb4d2e9fa8c3
13732 F20110404_AAAADV yang_j_Page_122.QC.jpg
5a6165142eb6cffac122b5ba0364c6a9
92cb7a768b19e9607801f41b3bf3dfc48463db53
4803 F20110404_AAABIB yang_j_Page_067thm.jpg
02134231e7a801fbd9f59c32b686ba35
fff2ceeccce59ab75bc526dd929cf3080cb260b2
F20110404_AAABHN yang_j_Page_120thm.jpg
d7e1a0f9e2a77b94a42827e9f50982e7
569b889224ff179c967ae5d8ff2da96caae2d780
1034825 F20110404_AAABGY yang_j_Page_016.jp2
50ff2abf456c13fa377d3cecd1808098
8ad0e6ea9471ab24d5b1e6862bf075a560b58d6e
14095 F20110404_AAAAEL yang_j_Page_139.QC.jpg
59feb7bf03e0bbbd8f55930e58aa3ec5
f57d745cfe5aa4543b56d79905816570f14beb7a
F20110404_AAAADW yang_j_Page_131.txt
4367152dddae094be8fe52106e92c198
0dc167c683900f68dff7e9205b2e4afefa4b7842
2005 F20110404_AAABIC yang_j_Page_077.txt
dc6c63e3d5113167a2d87fe568681b30
3506f4e20ab7fb5a78a9c4fdb44cf48b2542cfc3
80725 F20110404_AAABHO yang_j_Page_032.jpg
4fe98a61dcd7d8f48c271215802bfe79
0084c7b7b9a001beb94b0dd178ed5ac6f0d71261
F20110404_AAABGZ yang_j_Page_072.tif
ed303f2cb23b844328f411055163fe0f
eb80065c97321919ddda8af19daab341717b9764
25424 F20110404_AAAAFA yang_j_Page_043.QC.jpg
a60a3d9b1dd92f4aa79b2861ac076450
aa877ad3266ec3143c780de34562c9a38c699f9f
1839 F20110404_AAAAEM yang_j_Page_119.txt
bcc24606ea20d0d1ad2bdb61eeee6302
5974923f0e4d3062b3c48cc2b306eb15b664bc9a
1183 F20110404_AAAADX yang_j_Page_140.pro
ba9413a3be5f0d645a3e581e3c30958a
2a53559a04118beda4ca69b5683f7bcaa4cae4a6
638158 F20110404_AAABID yang_j_Page_113.jp2
f5138b1a8c4692b14a54da2d5a7ebdc5
e38c51da27f1ea7090bbca3a99d5adfa10e9e54f
16070 F20110404_AAABHP yang_j_Page_127.QC.jpg
de5fde2ca794c6a03485ba36f4da8389
fef3a80e13f4638ca8f24c28601aa4b6cbe244b0
2323 F20110404_AAAAFB yang_j_Page_044.txt
b585131b4296cf3768caa6529ca1165e
a3a22c727f8578680247d6bc76673a19630a4196
25203 F20110404_AAAAEN yang_j_Page_102.QC.jpg
e0115839c7ef8eadf1b6038360ae4b0e
bc2c16156a756e696afefbbd82e515b4ed215574
985 F20110404_AAAADY yang_j_Page_144thm.jpg
19ad8a7364abadcf996ddf072838b3b1
313d37a7fe8106236238a467afb8cd0fe0b7b3bb
F20110404_AAABIE yang_j_Page_097.tif
7bf3981e77dd30b761ed242e1d81014c
463f014a4f326cc822c82f40f0e367166ee563a8
5403 F20110404_AAABHQ yang_j_Page_107thm.jpg
7b70c25238404add89842b350ec54b9b
36c4deb4cd85bc971bf98e1eec06494932b99cdb
21441 F20110404_AAAAFC yang_j_Page_087.QC.jpg
8de583792c3a2b6eb503236639f2c128
012fd815f5f9980658ce4cb3ba3fba096f400537
24285 F20110404_AAAAEO yang_j_Page_086.QC.jpg
f3f7c728cf9529de55dff71d4241eb60
e6bb25ad6a8acb7c02a8fd979e4148e51744ed72
313944 F20110404_AAAADZ yang_j_Page_120.jp2
ed719a0a16cfdcd5c8bc1489a088ae5b
7b62b5d3d465faa1546762df4f3ba16ce6f763e8
F20110404_AAABIF yang_j_Page_099.tif
a8a55a6b0761431bbd186e608d5371a6
9cfc21a40968445cc979bb7d2f1fcd3b8415e023
50913 F20110404_AAABHR yang_j_Page_078.pro
6e80637a0d8523a0f679b7b2f3da2146
2b7cccfd6b31767c137bde6374b8368920187213
F20110404_AAAAFD yang_j_Page_042.tif
7c7476246524ecd707302a76dffc9672
1bf3a005bd5976f8b9d3a628d0c282cfaafec0b7
513763 F20110404_AAAAEP yang_j_Page_137.jp2
6a25a4c906b56e4ee8dee33eac6c6413
2acad5b2160743d4cfac66f9de7dfd23fa7fc7d6
1051960 F20110404_AAABIG yang_j_Page_115.jp2
3fb74ddf0ca7e6b8b0b833ea0954eeba
27ba0133f70d67a8cd7961c4bffd5718dd18bd49
F20110404_AAABHS yang_j_Page_110.tif
765a46b7f7677856d56ace08b0934b70
526284656d5700673b1d1b106c71822f347f1e2c
6226 F20110404_AAAAFE yang_j_Page_154thm.jpg
47fc3a405220b5774b45d51c47912e17
a0c95c076f0b9240b7ba839c2e7cf8066a48f449
F20110404_AAAAEQ yang_j_Page_125.tif
88619ddee8e0f17c5d9116841b4975d5
ef81c34abae66213cca59069d8185d33d80d4926
22185 F20110404_AAABIH yang_j_Page_068.QC.jpg
ee96152d655b142a72affabdee8af06c
6f121f007f51e562928a0378ceb5941c98468a79
15869 F20110404_AAAAFF yang_j_Page_131.QC.jpg
93cc0398710d0b26becf1db1c9672abd
28df39a8fb9e006265dc78c9d6beecb7a159fa0e
5321 F20110404_AAABII yang_j_Page_145thm.jpg
fe4e09ce89761c76f2385ceda16f27a0
7f8828b90340e06e6381c563926cdce3c3e36829
47332 F20110404_AAABHT yang_j_Page_060.pro
5765c45b1e191dca50006765f41ca845
30e470ecaf7cf31dde3096d9c440550725f3777a
1051983 F20110404_AAAAFG yang_j_Page_053.jp2
b3955867a18b03c898ee78992e99cd38
04d76114309ab09eb6f7ac5b561d67d8a089f37c
F20110404_AAAAER yang_j_Page_054.tif
85b281480b1f5115882b6ad684d3e6b5
ce78aed2ad67daa664776deff12b9bfe945eb86d
4740 F20110404_AAABIJ yang_j_Page_119thm.jpg
fd991791aa277aa75d8a4ce163d1b1f3
671f2580091ccc5ead06eff29c368c8c5f060bf0
51374 F20110404_AAABHU yang_j_Page_038.pro
5153491e24882116a39cc3a0e6722e14
ee5fb851c14c2d2651572b31ac52504e8aac07a5
17255 F20110404_AAAAFH yang_j_Page_121.QC.jpg
699c766105d453c26f196167ff3f06f0
de05f34846e1f7f5bab6c5468859904df1dbaae2
2399 F20110404_AAAAES yang_j_Page_155.txt
17384bed9e957fef259214260b0b023b
86ce97be386ad9728899b1cf582876bf18fd7c69
1909 F20110404_AAABIK yang_j_Page_130.txt
9b6cf149b09b89ea2563ca5a3a1d5313
2682b3637989f8b0bc5d110282d1567ebcf13643
27259 F20110404_AAABHV yang_j_Page_093.jpg
1d46478e0e5d22de8e5eb3b035cef33f
1893c8a07c82bfe28715b8aa765ccf35ea1ad9db
56829 F20110404_AAAAFI yang_j_Page_083.pro
68a0caf92f1f32fca267401213f6d663
deb14506f1560d12241bb74de8c6df9ad05ba72c
1921 F20110404_AAAAET yang_j_Page_070.txt
dabd0299c0d6d620934c4c51de97ecff
ed5906d2193b1e53a334d69fa5cc7a094a211c2e
5888 F20110404_AAABIL yang_j_Page_083thm.jpg
4e4ed35152805c5db986f26673062430
368538deb0e51b81fbd834a3f93aff367b67df9f
82221 F20110404_AAABHW yang_j_Page_102.jpg
4a033ef3f557f69a9e963ff4ed1e614c
46ba60a1eb2cb3148659e5c6cfcd97374732cb29
45128 F20110404_AAAAFJ yang_j_Page_058.pro
cd00ffe3d88d3cf88e63f2c4f29b7542
a345eb566850bee4453127f932d9099ffdd51595
670543 F20110404_AAAAEU yang_j_Page_139.jp2
98e07da8dec9a0b1772807d657b8cc51
41b7fcbabbb985772c08f878ad4cb9bc69dbacf1
1051971 F20110404_AAABJA yang_j_Page_027.jp2
3988bcdb8ae56ffb5b8d72f03078d6aa
0a58ba67a07516e9e2e3e47c0c8d770b71c05b5d
54650 F20110404_AAABIM yang_j_Page_156.pro
91f082d1080ce0374948deccf0a1514d
9937b9b7f346a67ea28c84f7046e60b601283636
18908 F20110404_AAABHX yang_j_Page_018.QC.jpg
461aa9c9fe999197d0bcc0f6b26ca868
83ea8a8aeb865a8b78165d3136b0a4169d24daca
11297 F20110404_AAAAFK yang_j_Page_143.QC.jpg
82cfb3a14daf47badff327ca54a9a430
51f9bd01d4db02b84a89b9c69bdeac0e7f2c0ba8
F20110404_AAAAEV yang_j_Page_010.tif
d8f052c21dcccc070e6ef0c15b79ea60
9f30a59269880777937ade212273d4492990c8f4
15019 F20110404_AAABJB yang_j_Page_157.QC.jpg
793432e584cb425391de65b3c31b709c
b9d0aca58243548306922aefc8c33f4fb273a72c
22661 F20110404_AAABIN yang_j_Page_016.QC.jpg
33d0362bbbc9b952ba2b654713f4f260
4e6721f7d2024c4fe46df93ecfae97cecbfcc6c5
19778 F20110404_AAABHY yang_j_Page_004.QC.jpg
6b40c7afafaf6af2dd193304f90543ce
90bc131f50bbb31b702322c807eed424c439893c
26675 F20110404_AAAAFL yang_j_Page_108.QC.jpg
68e11ed2779000b76d15d7ddd6a9c078
38764109dd23de2e4035daab0656fb5d9fd6f007
1813 F20110404_AAAAEW yang_j_Page_145.txt
090487928dbb96e3f51ec2073e3156ef
9f7860f722bdf1f96e1d4631893ebdef8ec3a908
3848 F20110404_AAABJC yang_j_Page_007thm.jpg
07157816920ac692c8a90956283453b3
5deeade91873b37b15c2742fcd73a13f5f95e6e1
48251 F20110404_AAABIO yang_j_Page_101.pro
898dc7b817fb1a40ac997b22dcfdeb8a
b1024934674a8b7d61df9e9b34ce2f44043dfcb7
4973 F20110404_AAABHZ yang_j_Page_126thm.jpg
ec79d5c2b11bf163502e894015b093c8
baa8f00102ea4b17df428d7f3f639d4d71d3abcc
F20110404_AAAAFM yang_j_Page_086.tif
bafb05661df1e9afa6970058133cc894
e6e3a39aeef12f21fa06482804fd4073dee686bd
93120 F20110404_AAAAEX yang_j_Page_007.pro
3d49027ef00ff036f707755cb90aea75
90c91aaab09252992851371c75b62c51074a9e2a
81095 F20110404_AAAAGA yang_j_Page_015.jpg
8ccb7e566c915a8504b1920aabca51c5
7bbd1e9c6029d0b9edfedf72638e9fe37468c58e
5464 F20110404_AAABJD yang_j_Page_095thm.jpg
abf7e7a7e2ebcd686eb9984f70c43d14
5488e9f23c885e059a727b76faff80209ec87d42
55948 F20110404_AAABIP yang_j_Page_153.pro
b3711eb5182cb45e3f77cb3c6be94384
32f5ebc600db8300c54f5adb053eb40fa043ccf2
25066 F20110404_AAAAFN yang_j_Page_071.QC.jpg
97f9a98dd94f209c62f35723909fb689
89d2ba2fd82d1e322a40350cd819946f3ab4d451
796783 F20110404_AAAAEY yang_j_Page_006.jp2
ae31981f1584ee5115736862e685e2f4
7d10a2d0d8c2ba3ca1b1ad905cedbbc7c769a52a
5138 F20110404_AAAAGB yang_j_Page_069thm.jpg
f78b55e9732079fd442d98d4c77fe39f
b899f02d582fec83331abe45558cb55314eb8dcc
F20110404_AAABJE yang_j_Page_024.jp2
ea05c75514da98e79365f1769ab44aca
5681ec3994fba25925afb4f2b013fc07beb8f9df
49522 F20110404_AAABIQ yang_j_Page_100.pro
9cbc866c4d21029822afe305ccdf4c0e
95dd0d3ec1b3e5f0502daffef3d8adc280b5e57b
52777 F20110404_AAAAFO yang_j_Page_066.jpg
69edd315e4b8ded0b7ed1854e2198659
53b1bc77a6a53d5b8be138465f7467e7e19d91ce
3861 F20110404_AAAAEZ yang_j_Page_010thm.jpg
9157be8ff8284ef6291bd92f37731cba
397853d8e68a113b51c080685122bdd74756ea20
15018 F20110404_AAAAGC yang_j_Page_005.pro
abfae7718e042f6be4ad300015513818
cde42c919362d73141e3810afb683626da31bf67
1918 F20110404_AAABJF yang_j_Page_101.txt
a27f5e43b581f4c624ead1f06015c655
e01c72365d00d42fa422a70c492dd74360df76c9
5654 F20110404_AAABIR yang_j_Page_058thm.jpg
0a71d84762c117e5d208a956e3a085ff
3fa620777f0f3c97761024f491836c6ae8bfee72
39648 F20110404_AAAAFP yang_j_Page_070.pro
dd593f9911cb03684e4fc92da02a62b8
04326d2751e6142f114c1be1003c5df3a7268711
59650 F20110404_AAAAGD yang_j_Page_018.jpg
82acc683bfb7eb83081377d05cbf87b6
28125f5a1e0a7c621323bc4a2314cd9777b425fe
85809 F20110404_AAABJG yang_j_Page_044.jpg
b7024a9705a8d1faa5bd4322a187393e
c61ed6330fc1f0e028452b9f4c0af6cbe9dbb35d
F20110404_AAABIS yang_j_Page_089.tif
97ca5279e2ea7515479cbe08f46d54bb
2821c7a4631e9d21e4f283b91f60ffc3e54e7c44
23307 F20110404_AAAAFQ yang_j_Page_095.QC.jpg
411165c6532b6e6c5af58d7701c9051b
4afac1bf1b33091916cde5525ae917887ea156ae
1991 F20110404_AAAAGE yang_j_Page_047.txt
51e70b8decb17ea65601b127fb28ce81
6592003eea388ebdbf59aaabe31660c21dbac8f2
F20110404_AAABJH yang_j_Page_127.tif
3e7fcc91e939e527b89ae582465af00f
638ca93e9f4b1bf95b340ae9469b221e4c5b1606
5952 F20110404_AAABIT yang_j_Page_084thm.jpg
5e465ce1edab48dc4efa514ca0175c79
23acd2459e44c65663eab2602c68540821f8a35e
47964 F20110404_AAAAFR yang_j_Page_032.pro
d054b75c8c201e5b5941d00bf23770a1
e408fad6105908400ccaf6fcb9fa1b7524d7c9f6
680630 F20110404_AAAAGF yang_j_Page_073.jp2
04f18173daf1cbbe2965c55c4c240bfd
bb625adc5c15f959c34feeb858e7e43fc1451062
F20110404_AAABJI yang_j_Page_117.jp2
2b8f57c2eb146b7fcd949c729da1345d
3a97d7a73cdd614de3729c24a358181573a2faf7
21794 F20110404_AAAAGG yang_j_Page_014.QC.jpg
09023429ad97707d7513439310f49b19
c47521b7b67e9b9b949d4f976577c15a7c5cd6f9
51708 F20110404_AAABJJ yang_j_Page_022.pro
a8f2e85c8362ce79d09700d1d9601584
ec780a08e179c2172afff8890b1abf11fd725039
405 F20110404_AAABIU yang_j_Page_144.txt
67ca04dbe5db2d1d188acb4d1c493366
297c6feb7762b077abb3a1a3d5924f1949879b37
741329 F20110404_AAAAFS yang_j_Page_141.jp2
5fb053785dfa7476ae859f3398d959f3
11eeed699c54a3b235638d843cdcad78a3449796
36886 F20110404_AAAAGH yang_j_Page_119.pro
10d1ebe49e90fa33eb349184f11049b3
58f3672850b72fd32a94629fc4c2cf89ac0000c3
37696 F20110404_AAABJK yang_j_Page_131.pro
198d21e35ed968a1cd0253682d58e6dc
2c848f4ac700255ab1ffa88351bb6b5d384e3f85
2411 F20110404_AAABIV yang_j_Page_082.txt
bca598b37dc8ee8ecf04d5d1b0ee4ce1
658e6c1f5d3a6218b500ba0e47a7ba132a7d1214
F20110404_AAAAFT yang_j_Page_006.tif
1ecabebc0669688e35dd20a848f4b5ea
eea17d83434fbec74e2bca640272782240355471
25214 F20110404_AAAAGI yang_j_Page_084.QC.jpg
27365333d2beae0e9b25186703615ec6
6715d218b382863414c0cdf490e3a5c449912749
80573 F20110404_AAABJL yang_j_Page_023.jpg
188818c60f3cecf01da125e5565e130b
aefaca233f7df8b842514395838b1f8f020c9407
560 F20110404_AAABIW yang_j_Page_112.txt
ea3f1378fd527fc4a8ecdf5ec49c2335
9e03a029745a8c65c359acd49d71320cb3c1264e
40315 F20110404_AAAAFU yang_j_Page_142.jpg
f561416246a6cf819696c9ff9bf882d4
73b270a6d7ddc0e4a393c7a8abb96d816cf141c6
F20110404_AAAAGJ yang_j_Page_021.tif
99b42f97b772d1e41b7f22b4763221f7
441ad0853be7dfbddeb39b76bc5ddcb37e261d93
F20110404_AAABKA yang_j_Page_035.tif
cf0f7a48663171fb179f63550bd6f0f8
72376d8cd1f7bb3a86a2ccff827dd14647357350
25052 F20110404_AAABJM yang_j_Page_103.QC.jpg
3366a2749e7a78b8564619131f9b850f
1bf270549ec0aa2dfb7ee8329da796d64a523f87
2495 F20110404_AAABIX yang_j_Page_117.txt
02e2dfea8a15d02fc87487aa74b61ef0
3a776022c0a984396b2aebc410ea77a9d0284818
6087 F20110404_AAAAFV yang_j_Page_081thm.jpg
426ffb7746b19c8392aa051dee39576a
5b7a86dc487469c5854cd1f5508db56792b6d36c
13575 F20110404_AAAAGK yang_j_Page_092.QC.jpg
89a7187fd5147b349b81e261bba570a3
4dba7e61bb0ae6fea60d409d9fde5659c62f5fb0
F20110404_AAABKB yang_j_Page_037.tif
1a5b5086fbcc42ba92a46ce7facff8ce
25ddd6defedde9882f4eb2c42fbc4f21ba7f0b15
82952 F20110404_AAABJN yang_j_Page_084.jpg
1e7c5e5fb5806c341bdf7557d95645a3
52e5d6001bfde4b98aa7befbd9fa7036a6bb3b6a
17268 F20110404_AAABIY yang_j_Page_063.QC.jpg
968177daf1c0bc7eba48c6029e535696
ef019b8246ea91eb4200d1ccfb76a2d217ade2c1
1931 F20110404_AAAAFW yang_j_Page_035.txt
0d088592e446d272f9afae036b7f9c92
f8764c1960f93bbff78dd7b80d845e09c9fcb220
60914 F20110404_AAAAGL yang_j_Page_128.jpg
91a58e0de97352488494c2849def2cca
6aa5fe76d90178cda5bf92bfcbdf964c8244dbb2
F20110404_AAABKC yang_j_Page_048.tif
e524a7fbd61ef4df447b6e9c79a09ed9
570455b5b8b90e36938b4cacfed82b37c18562c5
1547 F20110404_AAABJO yang_j_Page_051.txt
3b175434ad52a4fb5a438f06c2d1ab99
85cbb43eca4ec059faaa3e89037d329f1243d294
1645 F20110404_AAABIZ yang_j_Page_107.txt
ea85cfdd8fbb499af25a17d95fe322a3
f240b3cc2bb1bc3e836d520d79cbe6078665e214
75868 F20110404_AAAAFX yang_j_Page_110.jpg
7de23c9f649958107af3935ec0b3d591
17bf08a4d006f7901da71bf92105a59770618cb6
F20110404_AAAAHA yang_j_Page_036.tif
9b8425569ea4b253a84610c37166a988
fd595351150274062b7bc9bc0b84fbf33627c350
F20110404_AAAAGM yang_j_Page_033.txt
7e99c8ca3af40469b02723253e38b965
dd10c68230a3db60b52c7499228aa8c9fb787f6b
F20110404_AAABKD yang_j_Page_049.tif
7c99290e29b13d996a862a36072e7248
cbac0bdd39ace55469ead2675147e00d155eac7d
35122 F20110404_AAABJP yang_j_Page_041.pro
aefd2df45f62775265778a5d7f7ac31e
1085317de42a322c40bd35908d10c035bd2fa6e1
9685 F20110404_AAAAFY yang_j_Page_158.QC.jpg
68fca752e713f073f0ee9e2595849aa4
89bc5ffe73863397dbcfd13a6641f13ad7d09271
82277 F20110404_AAAAHB yang_j_Page_027.jpg
eb5d10d70073bb91fef537acc154bc76
b7620233ba980cf81437411f4e3a69adbec3054f
F20110404_AAAAGN yang_j_Page_148.tif
9b28c28f6a1a2635752d66655742e508
1afefc6680d568575157462b321e36424f98578c
F20110404_AAABKE yang_j_Page_052.tif
cd45781557901c94c93da080f299a666
3bd5d47a477ea78a599ee4afbd44d5083b29030a
79198 F20110404_AAABJQ yang_j_Page_090.jpg
8068bc23cad01e8db430c3b6c48f4f0d
cdbb3b41dfbe5623d2f31746f6e7d84448cf9759
11975 F20110404_AAAAFZ yang_j_Page_091.QC.jpg
32bd575f6785904bdfc938538de5ca0d
798d40c5b1b035f12fa65056528c7159ce46d686
6072 F20110404_AAAAHC yang_j_Page_071thm.jpg
d930beb2b1b1de3cbdc07074ac7df168
ea504f7196fa43807c145c8f1b884a81dec36f8d
16292 F20110404_AAAAGO yang_j_Page_054.QC.jpg
802dacdfec9eb395457d40f6f1f779dd
1c49001694743559b4527ffd4f8ceafd4bf3d426
F20110404_AAABKF yang_j_Page_053.tif
f81596223f33b4bcbec113dcb2636d58
8cf6401534395c4d0682d71c8c34e0153bf00bfd
25446 F20110404_AAABJR yang_j_Page_117.QC.jpg
7120affc28b84b983a4f878eb1f39a67
6aa6cc1ffa782ff21cf730bf434ab62667733946
25739 F20110404_AAAAHD yang_j_Page_106.QC.jpg
ae815e504b8ae5f1fa4193d638803ebf
3a1a5be8f29a6d378b4d7482e3146ec3a04be250
1051973 F20110404_AAAAGP yang_j_Page_153.jp2
7b4c53b03344f9b8ff37aaf3ae9e8f93
579f05a459f223971b393ed4d3ecbc4d1611d419
F20110404_AAABKG yang_j_Page_059.tif
35cd1a34ae853da1e7dda28d8073f265
c2524508c0c4122d17aaed9105664c35b09d4203
49217 F20110404_AAABJS yang_j_Page_064.pro
d0802a108998bb5d32666f5f2e0ec3d3
d53be707bad4654a5d4a3f3917f8101acfc80fc1
1042169 F20110404_AAAAHE yang_j_Page_098.jp2
bffa4f5f116fd25cbe31f6f3727a2341
74a8f65f36f9a0c8f193aadb61907eee8a589d38
F20110404_AAAAGQ yang_j_Page_129.tif
6ae0af5347c8ca807eec1141eb89e358
532ada91e752441c002c3238ac86cb807d6f6324
F20110404_AAABKH yang_j_Page_060.tif
558932b7aba2150509b09a175d56f42b
f079f08597f05038b39f1df4520afc954191a994
183511 F20110404_AAABJT UFE0013620_00001.mets FULL
b36575782484dcf71eca97a9c792a1bb
9830a8593cd591939fce0e69e47247bbb4143087
BROKEN_LINK
yang_j_Page_001.tif
49024 F20110404_AAAAHF yang_j_Page_035.pro
c6b86a27fcfef5a8f268bc2887197509
dc47b3895c9a6c8bd460a1253bdb2d561a3552b6
F20110404_AAAAGR yang_j_Page_056.jp2
35c1f584f1ec8188ac278747f231b88a
4ab86da2595ce9282b3e3997ce527de273e65599
F20110404_AAABKI yang_j_Page_062.tif
3da81da0b65545ad967121d59e9d6a36
3f538bde102f8bee068765febae637f5baf021a6
F20110404_AAAAHG yang_j_Page_134.tif
a12ea783133e7ec09b63baaaaba192de
a91f6f3fa2b71138e42b0e3c5e1099370117b809
2988 F20110404_AAAAGS yang_j_Page_091thm.jpg
1c60ff48c887a3b6e3f15a7cc760e09c
2385311d5a3a3c4f9f4d1886458ec5ecc33c3e46
F20110404_AAABKJ yang_j_Page_065.tif
8fab4bc216f1876e3ebeb76fba805bc2
36eb7898e2bd17c25b884ebcfcd5038eeaf42f71
49595 F20110404_AAAAHH yang_j_Page_050.pro
862e856ebfda8f1efaa0cbad209bbd39
b396b37d6159f24d8d11d6b35b5daae4403ce612
F20110404_AAABKK yang_j_Page_066.tif
d8afc97293022b1b2779f9cc4ef4e316
b255a89db6f764ca5f551a3d335240567fb397f4
77168 F20110404_AAAAHI yang_j_Page_017.jpg
0a0a2aa883988190e8476054f9d8bd04
6e5f2143a953297c41d3c29b12bfc44ee3998a02
F20110404_AAAAGT yang_j_Page_064.tif
732e72892194845e386991b85b95e906
46b0685ccfb20bcca12364f5ef230e98898f448f
F20110404_AAABKL yang_j_Page_071.tif
6ceb892755f20df29587d60791b08a69
d6a470ebd5e1e2c7a39b6fc1cc4a9b5c9b33e140
F20110404_AAABJW yang_j_Page_012.tif
124ce13691c48346e7ba9c565e947168
b5b6b4b9900f657dec0124b4dcdb9b8aaf2e401e
F20110404_AAAAHJ yang_j_Page_016.txt
1f0343f155101f73210854e1eb2e6cf2
eddf9d2c689eaab5f93f2ff9a87fdc7aa691d954
761593 F20110404_AAAAGU yang_j_Page_126.jp2
910a85e1dd10fe88bb657769277bfa6f
75090865f1e41949bd5eb130809b9f76bd6a8fb0
82853 F20110404_AAABLA yang_j_Page_034.jpg
90e25ef60284bf161813b108f6673832
a7244727a1c5abc66a97f5dc05346405ee488deb
F20110404_AAABKM yang_j_Page_076.tif
9d982fef88a252a3431ac160941596cc
0e669bc03df6a48cc076e8ef408526102247a603
F20110404_AAABJX yang_j_Page_014.tif
a00f7f3484a5f42559ebaced94ccb679
4f49f5309620b190e37915eacd250e53cb0e944d
F20110404_AAAAHK yang_j_Page_099.jp2
2a5fc39ceb12e19843d20533728dabd5
08a41bd5479b88f288b9b062bb5a71b4559338ba
5923 F20110404_AAAAGV yang_j_Page_109thm.jpg
081ad4cf33dc23352703f948ac90b9a2
1c106dfdc2f311cd5c4234cd4d2b07da8029d256
82444 F20110404_AAABLB yang_j_Page_035.jpg
359dc0349a328f2337e395f2b4dd97c9
35fda610b61bad94f639a60df843ee76a04015f1
F20110404_AAABKN yang_j_Page_077.tif
64b185008b5ce75b47380b5bd68e18a1
5a6cae05c4065c952610a653ad08bf8ecd8f76b1
F20110404_AAABJY yang_j_Page_018.tif
20e177b79b2d59399973c0757bf811ec
549bf6409da0cc5252508968bcac93b76bc315b0
16024 F20110404_AAAAHL yang_j_Page_075.pro
103a89a616d6a17663485ae39fbaf0af
91c03471bf55c7688a471956925c83e3c3bae2a7
681 F20110404_AAAAGW yang_j_Page_003thm.jpg
5a6b6d65d2c5cbfd3263a220405404d6
3f45e3380592e88e6e72d93567c9d085c226a50a
83269 F20110404_AAABLC yang_j_Page_037.jpg
d48bea3750e7a754662c2c404f44504d
921eeb709211e926cd1583bb84215fbf54461d65
F20110404_AAABKO yang_j_Page_078.tif
c4e4b125504f7b13417052753305f3fe
16cceff85ef6eafa12598e0f5c8dcf82996aeac3
F20110404_AAABJZ yang_j_Page_032.tif
891d24ffcb0aa0d89cdc5bbb8f16b037
410949f27cd0e3bf80988e0e3aac394529669eed
F20110404_AAAAIA yang_j_Page_008.tif
268f174e56d4cf6ef1ac7dd56a2f45aa
b2a7b7457d2b4a45c6a96dbce5b708806ee8d7cc
F20110404_AAAAHM yang_j_Page_105.jp2
4f8b607c37cf06c60d581bfd6a5a93d8
279047a7308a8962ed8e24ff72804b9e5ae7a781
F20110404_AAAAGX yang_j_Page_102.tif
b218959e96f445efe279ce696c9e358c
0681478c165f394b24acc84316cea6321c50edd9
52716 F20110404_AAABLD yang_j_Page_042.jpg
cc214b285bed7874e52d2d77288fc7aa
bc85863241dcc931d6d37b88c04756d163a0f3c5
F20110404_AAABKP yang_j_Page_105.tif
6b4c1a2a93f1bc44f89049620af596fc
2efe807f048ff00b7c6e0ef8f766fca540233c24
F20110404_AAAAIB yang_j_Page_068.txt
32fa8f7596336922f5285d452972915d
45adc97b92daf8b869290d10d85913275a029786
1889 F20110404_AAAAHN yang_j_Page_109.txt
beeb6a777ad9e329c758c0d9b654773b
eb3a977f9e3df708e3dda3a946bd7cfa4bc04e7a
1051940 F20110404_AAAAGY yang_j_Page_047.jp2
c198b117360ac6c420bf07318ed6ee58
38f839bb19cdf95330df47ecdd293f196e82538e
79064 F20110404_AAABLE yang_j_Page_043.jpg
2674fa34853d5e64b2305f555fd3432c
c538589693ce8b88241cd9caefa4b8c4d7334855
F20110404_AAABKQ yang_j_Page_112.tif
102c0ae96acb622158871b42467d7419
eb009b7adfa3bd4c90680444e2eeaacecbbcdf7b
1047552 F20110404_AAAAIC yang_j_Page_048.jp2
7c9aa3efa094c12f554c6be295a3b4e0
3c815a00263d63d3629f80c99668e8a4e8e99b60
1012768 F20110404_AAAAHO yang_j_Page_110.jp2
52bbb08a28f1d82627c4e70ca5f42bb4
6b5156a457dc3b77f3208ec80849ef14f4cd5671
23074 F20110404_AAAAGZ yang_j_Page_114.QC.jpg
a739326a8274335be98a7a2549259428
800b793e28bad9087c82eecb7e028563a87c90de
81433 F20110404_AAABLF yang_j_Page_050.jpg
117a9b2df468fba15be4c3223404b65a
d332b58b14ce5d38cd9961a6de7dde7d068e9abc
F20110404_AAABKR yang_j_Page_122.tif
b22eba091c2c2eae81d9f90e58090467
1071d211e52ea18cdf2227ec824c290f4c5e9220
F20110404_AAAAID yang_j_Page_093.tif
7d113a7c9663af8afbd86674f1c0869f
1cfc3b0760759fcd4f21885d4823aae9aeddf3e2
872367 F20110404_AAAAHP yang_j_Page_051.jp2
9018210d8d6aa1d1888b292cd20a276d
093a8916bb755136bcf58b288a1dc73259f53d15
72822 F20110404_AAABLG yang_j_Page_076.jpg
aa4cef0b25e362821e17e03a8e899683
8bd3b7826eb59bc52491a1b9fc530dc3e4f93d8e
F20110404_AAABKS yang_j_Page_130.tif
2a1c631a0b5f2c4d6ec0db1d0df3584e
539e45f776ca98849f5e486d651256de4d4d685c
47010 F20110404_AAAAIE yang_j_Page_109.pro
864b296f1c70361a3f6e7c1c26736d56
58762c81e0fbc8a0a4510871007593be6d62b670
31727 F20110404_AAAAHQ yang_j_Page_073.jpg
40b4215393003fbff7096a653add3e3a
bc3f41c450825b9f9a2f520c858d157ac7593839
74549 F20110404_AAABLH yang_j_Page_079.jpg
2107b1166c2d1cd58b30a57e07078d25
dc5a62e47d198c5d2d89019be83caff24a1aedac
F20110404_AAABKT yang_j_Page_131.tif
04bf4361080466bec66772b189e9ca21
168df6425fa6fca81bd475b507a0ab9db7e562ce
65926 F20110404_AAAAIF yang_j_Page_041.jpg
f93ad6af2aa325af80c0db53da866c69
e9fac41d60eafd288e7a55a9ddb4eb0da863e466
F20110404_AAAAHR yang_j_Page_016.tif
23ab54b38d1e2b89675efb328b43c058
26efbef291354cec21e939aaf54668949a19ba8a
75710 F20110404_AAABLI yang_j_Page_080.jpg
9da85852d5744f07c53d58c4aac8b58c
b2f3d19f1b6f0f132c4b36cb71a63dd399595e5d
F20110404_AAABKU yang_j_Page_136.tif
36539f53a5be7e8fffb253f97b663fd0
c7fa0dfce8295f0fb0db6739d56e11ce8cd2a832
13484 F20110404_AAAAIG yang_j_Page_137.QC.jpg
6ad45cf5b91ebe9942da5cc438e1f72f
6ba6d2de9119a19a531143198ba92fb61465f5f0
16072 F20110404_AAAAHS yang_j_Page_010.QC.jpg
421c5f70d0b198996e430439ad5d3878
ff478486155eb9cf32d248e419d20c7f6161e725
73548 F20110404_AAABLJ yang_j_Page_094.jpg
a1d73e3f7b11f6fcb07991e14f526880
214522cf6b1bbb2af62b1e5b8d8d339796e9a899
F20110404_AAABKV yang_j_Page_146.tif
ce4015230b7e66d8dcd54e2be32ab528
41f937bc5e4bb9ffc1f73ada6c08da3ccfabb94b
4733 F20110404_AAAAIH yang_j_Page_113thm.jpg
fb167c1e47c791b2c5d4a9ad6e560f35
76a6babfdc3cdf5b484e9db8d56403d2500f33d4
1715 F20110404_AAAAHT yang_j_Page_041.txt
77bc9693c860f48123d330dcd009863f
fe551ab9f91acb8bac5baa28b11d1bbfac594fa2
78475 F20110404_AAABLK yang_j_Page_098.jpg
2506909ea34c0eea6ec43922f1b059ff
d7c12edbaee04ffaa9ffd00d8f89d120b3cd4273
23083 F20110404_AAAAII yang_j_Page_017.QC.jpg
a60a576269666d930f538c3d7d1ee2fb
2b08d9d5b208221e5eae9a646cae4bab12b613eb
80137 F20110404_AAABLL yang_j_Page_101.jpg
f71f4e0ac2ad573bd4356133838dd8c7
0e4716c59e378cb3fb1a5adc110045b6bdf2a885
F20110404_AAABKW yang_j_Page_158.tif
283b70792cb089ad05d779148314517a
96935096d4e1b80d3d10d4dcc968c8f7fcc847dd
2250 F20110404_AAAAIJ yang_j_Page_053.txt
f043f603d3c8ce97044375e85cfd633f
11134f9370914f91636df77402eb62d481a589c3
9714 F20110404_AAAAHU yang_j_Page_074.QC.jpg
c7b1ae04959070fd3a77770331fd8031
a7935a45e99b419e710a0dc5bfea79824de8eb2a
868061 F20110404_AAABMA yang_j_Page_019.jp2
d92078458e531ced7b3c9ba66e461bab
0f2f102acf937d9ba2e959db021cec521e37e83e
88611 F20110404_AAABLM yang_j_Page_105.jpg
7407d0be46d72d343cd38ad496371d11
626e7d246ee0b84eb8aece0dc687f005cb4c0bed
21912 F20110404_AAABKX yang_j_Page_001.jpg
95f7ab3469de4d53e785cf6a18105ac8
92abdfde3fc64bbb9c7e0c823e99ffa6bd14bade
F20110404_AAAAIK yang_j_Page_057.tif
d217430b255d421286cb34e86b300003
c4873e7c45cc1911c1ada08d3aaf63498c286b6c
817877 F20110404_AAAAHV yang_j_Page_067.jp2
4ef28a46463656e92ac486c967638958
fcaa22dcfd00d14007a083cd7494412c0171f2d7
819802 F20110404_AAABMB yang_j_Page_021.jp2
ad5b2b35d57486fc00328a8751e44bf2
7b62c6453fdfd3af5d1e7e97866e5ab2368fb413
85877 F20110404_AAABLN yang_j_Page_108.jpg
828ccf67d98ec1ad57aeaa4540d926c3
c7a42f84d4745d90dfa6b3567cd22b296bff5332
6844 F20110404_AAABKY yang_j_Page_003.jpg
49f0075ca06bf6b55e6a592359531692
2cced33f2ffea8547abed34780231479f9ee551a
724482 F20110404_AAAAIL yang_j_Page_042.jp2
1a5db8a8e806c5ac865dd8fe147c6e49
5e638dffda40146c111f16be0d10ff3d02d73039
39535 F20110404_AAAAHW yang_j_Page_066.pro
01f96475d1da2d58e1fc20cfeb36df03
546bc3b035a12b8de31b9ecc4c159794895bf340
F20110404_AAABMC yang_j_Page_036.jp2
14fd8b784541c676670df5b78ff68b03
3b904fffa09460fec8496bc6bc7fe95ce590ae66
97974 F20110404_AAABLO yang_j_Page_117.jpg
ed30f9fd0db93b4450a03d1cad478d00
ce70365c7ade1121d7dea1b40403184829d41b78
83030 F20110404_AAABKZ yang_j_Page_031.jpg
c990dad978f44d8576509f21a0e14e9d
a4030d2e8a2060166b9ab67f84f8c870f2520e2a
82940 F20110404_AAAAIM yang_j_Page_047.jpg
cdd1ff228d8c4228db7efb101b20223e
dd76f43e96f054ec3c2cfde27872a5a02ff0b0f3
17542 F20110404_AAAAHX yang_j_Page_128.QC.jpg
384dbf9da713b67247131a18b184d93a
ff2985e6ea42b882685fa4850835f1013af5edf1
5037 F20110404_AAAAJA yang_j_Page_049thm.jpg
0c422d23cc917462dc5f239768f55057
e77641e0c2c059084198e40760c3f192c96c79eb
F20110404_AAABMD yang_j_Page_046.jp2
2852684209a089ba545469c3a5ec9036
af2db0cf242bfe7e386d7ae252e3aa79c5743b82
60577 F20110404_AAABLP yang_j_Page_121.jpg
5c2302135b796ae931f3e1e47d3bf6ce
b986a15679cfaee3677f4ddb4e9487f1d1953112
F20110404_AAAAIN yang_j_Page_119.tif
0e61e00a91f481d49a2a91b90a03b641
e225f7dbeeb4d9488929809d7115b906cb2022a6
775145 F20110404_AAAAHY yang_j_Page_070.jp2
4b1a114c77a550f248cbb4de6cbf0f0b
6a8de180efbfb7c95956c13278bb8cb5297bb9cb
25840 F20110404_AAAAJB yang_j_Page_037.QC.jpg
4c72d3a24b6f0fef5f6d0ca7185394f9
ddd3cfff236d6ed2d2f0e42f06466c65b5ca3814
992904 F20110404_AAABME yang_j_Page_057.jp2
69731d888aa01d80da389edc949b170f
f3b6a2b10fafc020217fa83c432b19d815d275db
53984 F20110404_AAABLQ yang_j_Page_125.jpg
672ddc2f164ca2af6e9e5fe781cfe750
91daa11bd1d7a543b4c2ac94f51eed3f1ab4428e
9261 F20110404_AAAAIO yang_j_Page_011.QC.jpg
0560fe8849666546df0cb6e2b476f594
0c86de85df59318a0c9138568d551a7d410469d1
614075 F20110404_AAAAHZ yang_j_Page_054.jp2
ad5a57f894fbbbc0cc79ac3cb44b5b1c
7c122cdb0a02dcf3095b81fd391eebfbf0e03663
F20110404_AAAAJC yang_j_Page_084.jp2
a94d9efb1d47f0e1c94c6afcba2d66cf
3729f94d167312cb47a678c0165fb8185791592e
1002816 F20110404_AAABMF yang_j_Page_058.jp2
51ca12421b5cc7f29a0bb5bb43896bc8
81ead93b1244e35ca1340742fa00a5973f042dd9
84343 F20110404_AAABLR yang_j_Page_136.jpg
d704e186d1ed887e08184d523e105904
a083fb65506624aba9b81d57d69b8f265fcc1c1f
24061 F20110404_AAAAIP yang_j_Page_136.QC.jpg
41710fa0e70c91c6934915ebc65e2267
79dec528f4245625fc85a54a04dd68c203c907fe
241546 F20110404_AAAAJD yang_j_Page_001.jp2
2dad9f4ea4ace91c23838260de42f9fa
f42d7e15aee2689b12246b4b1ead3621e48e38f2
1051968 F20110404_AAABMG yang_j_Page_061.jp2
6cd21cc89f240e68dc725fe49bd1a7e6
3cf97f1f1ed00c6d4169db9697a89276e760f761
36037 F20110404_AAABLS yang_j_Page_141.jpg
ec7b4f1cc0bfbde6b81d6f39ce592f80
fe1b537c2c8db8d9704ab7b5d13755fb6d150288
2034 F20110404_AAAAIQ yang_j_Page_029.txt
57ea00f382a47b442717188df8192cf4
fab45ce715cef269fd0736ce855ebeaea751a9bf
969025 F20110404_AAAAJE yang_j_Page_059.jp2
dadb880906185c72bdff292d968e3611
1cd77f8557d5b6bfb37d8fb496834f9d469532c1
965789 F20110404_AAABMH yang_j_Page_068.jp2
49c900c0f548a2a8322fbda26bdb0802
20bbdd15a876f18d1f95e0b7efa5e8b779b18381
74374 F20110404_AAABLT yang_j_Page_145.jpg
53b122e896d5deb5d8f197392ac02e8a
055c722ac66c1af7a3441ee535ea22d7e0b4d0c3
6175 F20110404_AAAAIR yang_j_Page_044thm.jpg
d75a208950f3b91685b3c56999b487c1
755eb3cd8c3f51887f2bb9ed84c4406884e29b20
510121 F20110404_AAAAJF yang_j_Page_091.jp2
8918c42664e75959f0a881e23006d9dc
736c1050892bd15a308bceca3d98c5fad1ddf9b6
900627 F20110404_AAABMI yang_j_Page_069.jp2
d854796acc71695dd38ba3b6adbff236
f9b5e5f62121370cea48c3077afb6cd7ee6f7e60
89930 F20110404_AAABLU yang_j_Page_149.jpg
b1bcdb2ada6adb7a09cd4c0ffead0985
fb20904b410fcdaf31c24216cc8f2ad257f4d826
78507 F20110404_AAAAIS yang_j_Page_060.jpg
b87b39bd893ae51ae9b2bcf40d400b84
b752db798698128e8333b769faec6eb198ae08be
1827 F20110404_AAAAJG yang_j_Page_058.txt
7ceaa15e3bfdb1e3b6d9be3e7c9d86db
e24215f8ffcce0adb0972f0bf7631ca54f4ecccf
311037 F20110404_AAABMJ yang_j_Page_075.jp2
df25fd3bc606719785e4089a1444467d
06516e8dbf5541beaa57224763bfa6ee4d670712
94531 F20110404_AAABLV yang_j_Page_152.jpg
714d3105403c332720ca271b147ef7d2
f8e812c1c4ab654548c51de8471732d53e75e59e
762323 F20110404_AAAAJH yang_j_Page_129.jp2
0283e6e98c1e6f5be81b7bdd1e3b014b
2feee0cf36235a58de691f07dc1b7236e28fb527
F20110404_AAAAIT yang_j_Page_137.tif
e47575a278b3d7d66b4361c47304b8ae
76d38cbcf67ca26b8f951139d53f82c1639f789c
1051981 F20110404_AAABMK yang_j_Page_078.jp2
c5f2a8e0dcf1b4f92e29e6f425a15a7d
72120dfefecc8710038d666acbf0defb1ea86336
66719 F20110404_AAABLW yang_j_Page_003.jp2
7bd2b549d1cffe501769b3d8094ada95
4292fbd341f8688d93752634600e42b09619615b
85862 F20110404_AAAAJI yang_j_Page_028.jpg
5513dd9f7859bbf7303730a1d22ded3d
f0cd6ab73ebe21c9a1e95f035dd65c00109a753c
5738 F20110404_AAAAIU yang_j_Page_134thm.jpg
dee19744aa0dbfdca8e55e3c914a6f0f
6ebfd0589eebb1ddf11023661f3ab67d46bc3722
F20110404_AAABML yang_j_Page_100.jp2
b3dea73cc71b970acffed3c3ad58d3e6
fe4956a8b548ee18d399278bcd85bb72b1f6d02a
716 F20110404_AAAAJJ yang_j_Page_158.txt
0b4b058f2e074b954797ee0d043d1ea1
1f6167ccb4fe0fc5d2ae8939978156a3804c4ba4
1414 F20110404_AAABNA yang_j_Page_062.txt
b58e1d7ceacece6d7ef8549e1438df6f
c01328f9c56f48b8546a2296d709fff98b0ca0ee
412017 F20110404_AAABMM yang_j_Page_116.jp2
acce38e233266dd2cdd10070f9c0a577
d1a24de3c8cc833039172ff55d61b2a6c1df9f68
65787 F20110404_AAABLX yang_j_Page_008.jp2
7585862375d616bb961059226d9119f1
cbb8a7c6c1235b17b953ea6b84555c6bea4ba62b
F20110404_AAAAJK yang_j_Page_118.tif
7b53d947e5a0b21acd7bdc5581cbfcaa
11ae5dc3aaf8ffc2418188c3488717766b67eacd
37631 F20110404_AAAAIV yang_j_Page_135.pro
4cd1cbe2d3f933c40dbe4019d109173e
1da8d874184a816f41c79984c739dd56c57565b9
2199 F20110404_AAABNB yang_j_Page_063.txt
d51e075d03722427891883b6300cc8c1
ba8c9762eb0dcdd36466cf330a00c5466b4257b1
1051978 F20110404_AAABMN yang_j_Page_118.jp2
bcd3a29a5acb6322887272c900685867
a09e5629e486087ef7933ebc3d37fdbf2027a462
940838 F20110404_AAABLY yang_j_Page_014.jp2
609d8acc77584f5913fb9f7f7033a455
dc16194baff0d028446012e1021ec8a2161d8e70
F20110404_AAAAJL yang_j_Page_061.tif
013fc82ca91e51c6336efd606606835e
b202b90a652aaf29cd47b6cceef9d5fc8d7fa753
6379 F20110404_AAAAIW yang_j_Page_096thm.jpg
2c37a7ec4a1c8a9606099fd3ea0dab52
860067791150c99a5e469e9ffacea5c194288d54
2317 F20110404_AAABNC yang_j_Page_066.txt
d2ca84f56a659fa9f51496203913e9d0
e13f6a1e7d639ee3d781205b75f802d58ba45fda
770393 F20110404_AAABMO yang_j_Page_119.jp2
4cebb611b43b94950a7055cafb93776f
b83c76e06fd0b21a848b040a6d70b0844a09a581
1027064 F20110404_AAABLZ yang_j_Page_017.jp2
c97f2598bdaabc953c7a14bb3c1122be
a1634d6d95b05700d64b68fd66c784101188c65d
23290 F20110404_AAAAKA yang_j_Page_058.QC.jpg
4bdcf6d58dd124652e1d5b9331e10493
600cf82f50dcf92eecd05e29a66def5960955e00
30222 F20110404_AAAAJM yang_j_Page_138.QC.jpg
e5c1f4c2da2b76b762f4662313b809fd
dfe43b0ee51c481412ebc0eba74be5f2f7267418
27193 F20110404_AAAAIX yang_j_Page_155.QC.jpg
fdf27b5f81de1e2adb242d8ca8cfdde6
3c02906d7b6ae163c235c717b93c5a92fd271fac
1864 F20110404_AAABND yang_j_Page_071.txt
035e390a505334e21901252e788156d8
23062618576a473910743bf4afbb160a8ea220b5
1001842 F20110404_AAABMP yang_j_Page_134.jp2
9a518e9b29c261a67c378d10fbb76dfe
c01465fdc59c4b50983bb6ffe1ed7533e0e37005
1546 F20110404_AAAAKB yang_j_Page_139.txt
7e88e55aa217093af0c06dabc3e20b38
b30242d68faac8a92326d3e57d39de5af3629603
19798 F20110404_AAAAJN yang_j_Page_049.QC.jpg
b73d9c883833d4eb6c6a709bcd464ac3
298399216910279a56b772056bd564534daff05f
58798 F20110404_AAAAIY yang_j_Page_119.jpg
3b0ec2d3cc80e25e830b35410cd0bc13
0712ee276bb81e9cc60a7d05eb81b36950a64e4d
1281 F20110404_AAABNE yang_j_Page_073.txt
353803ad0271a455bf515fe47eb17ea8
9ed05401f147ba2f2e3cc52181caa69eef7953ef
840185 F20110404_AAABMQ yang_j_Page_135.jp2
8add09ba6850650ed8622e012f467d29
23ec38c16faea359d68f59f09b48e28e91f75a6d
F20110404_AAAAKC yang_j_Page_103.tif
964d538daf2eb626fa8158bca9204c6d
0c9e2553f3f7f2468d38840a1e27c3383dd6b747
48952 F20110404_AAAAJO yang_j_Page_030.pro
9711b43f09989d4b7b6fb678ab187a25
737a679857b02d721c67d1e1e78615b8884cee9c
26347 F20110404_AAAAIZ yang_j_Page_153.QC.jpg
392d122deea37d9303890b36e2591986
cd58ce2924785f16575dca57adfc5a6616d501da
2752 F20110404_AAABNF yang_j_Page_081.txt
6beb0a4b24932d6574839a9ff4fd9edb
804d385fb12ef035eb448a5111ead6da039a64c5
F20110404_AAABMR yang_j_Page_150.jp2
a549cb1927f20372f4adf6ba0d0d4853
81806361d7366cbd8979ebabfb84749cfee6e053
55874 F20110404_AAAAKD yang_j_Page_009.pro
5cf8fbf1e1d52e6ff66bee6d2dea581a
a77e5611abc4007030e5d8960c2e74aee4058079
1051969 F20110404_AAAAJP yang_j_Page_082.jp2
9ad2ae1109131385fd8fe50d4cae0e11
e92b248d7d2e681d90094b2f4a4724073bcbaca6
2454 F20110404_AAABNG yang_j_Page_083.txt
cd91230e3f3c0da86c71e490101e4fce
e00335fae46697b0619606dbdf306b70f74fdef6
1051923 F20110404_AAABMS yang_j_Page_154.jp2
ce34db5ae18b7cd3973aa3ee61ddeed7
ff8a21242b0a87169276d90c89fb71f0141fdbce
1718 F20110404_AAAAKE yang_j_Page_001thm.jpg
00a87d9415d7cd65e79decd8a1a9ba36
43b99029a07ee427c516012b209144eff0a76554
F20110404_AAAAJQ yang_j_Page_146.jp2
10d52e055b06bcb5c71e3ac87c714cd4
af43bdf42cedddec03cbceb729cce4068ff6b3d5
2329 F20110404_AAABNH yang_j_Page_088.txt
ac932965f4729d9c484f7cafebb9b63e
d8207f15c05e2a5e3df27e3bf68c4775a37e59e8
F20110404_AAABMT yang_j_Page_155.jp2
a7e494d20edb053064c55fa4da862f31
6b42b4ead263dabb8541c8f9cac2b5f87a130611
83964 F20110404_AAAAKF yang_j_Page_082.jpg
09f948039fc9cb647caac423c444cdb8
7d9b76337aac03e404cfc82e412bcd2a5ea54e27
25044 F20110404_AAAAJR yang_j_Page_023.QC.jpg
c10cb20f5c0cfb8528c80e74ed6aa400
e99f47d3d3c3723cc401928cd94c5af8b50ccf47
2015 F20110404_AAABNI yang_j_Page_089.txt
3f6049cfb329934f7e8614cfaf42108d
c6b89ce12f06e704055a780232bcb48cafe9320c
622 F20110404_AAABMU yang_j_Page_005.txt
a8cc75354ee8441b090e80c47659ad71
cad66dc13159f62c4cb12be54a1d8d780611ecd5
F20110404_AAAAKG yang_j_Page_027.tif
0cdd820457edff54c3961d208a615a34
8b83035aac37f6b7140598e6bdfa5cc29fff965c
1755 F20110404_AAAAJS yang_j_Page_059.txt
f07b86a748ea080a7c159370130ab6d0
5f7354b471670d9c89b0350c50bbcf0dc212e08e
1431 F20110404_AAABNJ yang_j_Page_091.txt
4929498a65f8e392a1ebb69e180200ba
ce9578047c20fbae56b5a867c6042ef03d03d677
1563 F20110404_AAABMV yang_j_Page_021.txt
db62d3ac2052b0f5cfba66a1031ab8e3
200513856a980a57dec278b38801b794a4f352b9
79121 F20110404_AAAAKH yang_j_Page_097.jpg
a5b7eb7a59cb3162a13c2d823025bf75
065e40ae8e560d14397c72b9f9751a394d9b90bd
16654 F20110404_AAAAJT yang_j_Page_066.QC.jpg
789d1e972fc55597e951d7a2f764b532
685065a362a8a11eda034da2708f3874ffb901ec
F20110404_AAABNK yang_j_Page_098.txt
3d6a94c237a2f1c65f24a866cd235882
ee46d3d7405de1149fe21739522ff5ad704587d1
F20110404_AAABMW yang_j_Page_023.txt
cbfb9b22341b122fe9dcfb1f8d16257f
b3346b1723cece952938dfbb88f7a16fbc94bfcd
6463 F20110404_AAAAKI yang_j_Page_153thm.jpg
3a2def53df284f8990bf7ff7e1bac0d3
2bcec5f122b174e1bf5c14f22655f01014665eee
1032461 F20110404_AAAAJU yang_j_Page_136.jp2
a98bc8cf7f7181c75f1ff0b7197f97d0
d0892aeac9e7b7425a63c05759c66e9a8e6aad05
1978 F20110404_AAABNL yang_j_Page_102.txt
adbc4711c2a9da2637cff9a2c56b0a75
b93f43e4ec06160576eed5ba5e03d7ff3cfdf977
2007 F20110404_AAABMX yang_j_Page_025.txt
0ea81dae3b540afa43789e7bb64f5357
0daaefd0731c285b5e6f8a2480e814f1c0fddd44
49837 F20110404_AAAAKJ yang_j_Page_102.pro
ca28f17bb3428464b58fad258914c9e6
9c936d714051b1498bb26fe56f86ead7dcee207f
6304 F20110404_AAAAJV yang_j_Page_146thm.jpg
2feb076a88a489d46a07b6b83440ef27
f19ba0ca109a77469c05b09f87e633975440e02a
53739 F20110404_AAABOA yang_j_Page_044.pro
ab1aea190e6738d4a0ae3c9cc2708afc
b81ab6ea299c382e8cb4384a8da20fe63f36cc4c
2035 F20110404_AAABNM yang_j_Page_111.txt
00d2c6b4cf569d5372f606f21346af74
2463e0b1314116cf5884fd63e146f4e9b73b634f
54768 F20110404_AAAAKK yang_j_Page_127.jpg
3e088870597d58e5af281f41fe6b9b7c
930919739cb9b86a8f367d3b7501326952e8971f
52602 F20110404_AAABOB yang_j_Page_045.pro
7237886ed31fda919ca4932b0ef2db0e
cab0a4557ca071b41eb88490f69269c7aa8c1f70
2253 F20110404_AAABNN yang_j_Page_115.txt
54c9c77808985f024f293d71938df728
fc4b7fb75ca86a638428d90dc5a9de19ae75cc1f
1977 F20110404_AAABMY yang_j_Page_027.txt
752207b2af0d13579af32f559dc7bc3f
544469614fdf3c037475ecb0e86f06790512c121
F20110404_AAAAKL yang_j_Page_097.txt
d353bb656b4b1bc07fa0f0a666c1babb
c7536e90bd59a9b9be149b08b7e602e6c0ce9b07
3147 F20110404_AAAAJW yang_j_Page_143thm.jpg
c5dcfd5ccc57fb1cfb22fdcc06f40aea
b7a19fd305421168e727ff363db1d97058bfa996
55457 F20110404_AAABOC yang_j_Page_052.pro
bbde90c0584728764fb3f92caff72f38
0edbe333303bffdddcad48621eaa8d2459275050
1599 F20110404_AAABNO yang_j_Page_124.txt
8623c239b0abf2f4fe5a8ea6bcbd2671
2faa82e1413ebed5aaf011249886b44818693974
1935 F20110404_AAABMZ yang_j_Page_030.txt
2fcbce2ceb79c8c2e7e91f1058d0b109
3123f87c18cf580d0fac0990d854591a0957a53b
F20110404_AAAAKM yang_j_Page_043.tif
a26c9982a8b0998110a91f65adb3bc03
9bc59654607d1944c023fae21cb9c3c2eb594832
85220 F20110404_AAAAJX yang_j_Page_114.jpg
6e50463fdc638048158a81294b4e48a3
bab24d45d7a7d31d530e738fd46c7543dc255ba3
1051972 F20110404_AAAALA yang_j_Page_033.jp2
431d25c326c6cc307da8d853fb74467d
e70b6935ca9b91ba592370a2c011b9659cab60ff
21338 F20110404_AAABOD yang_j_Page_054.pro
1aa1f19a0de67149ec7e3fd586dd759f
e6532151396b7866dffbbba00c40a080edc8c84b
1812 F20110404_AAABNP yang_j_Page_127.txt
fc7b5d0c2bd480b1e0406a2e732dcbdd
8f4b8c594fe7af2b5c062bd853d5242d40bd55cf
F20110404_AAAAKN yang_j_Page_036.txt
ec5de1c0b8efe62258313c7bad82ae9c
a68936ce8d0c480f5c491e992a5219b12b1e91ab
43788 F20110404_AAAAJY yang_j_Page_094.pro
45f45757fa36450f8624e9b8316c36cb
ed4d0295c26e1cddb086d0bc2648556c8fb7f445
F20110404_AAAALB yang_j_Page_116.tif
7ce5cdf9e1079c77e92320f190ca5432
72ed0e55159947ecc4b2806d1252940992c32dc9
55824 F20110404_AAABOE yang_j_Page_061.pro
c74d09b56251028d97cfcc774a5572bf
97f29a9a3e1e477fd97b749fec8680136df79c46
2381 F20110404_AAABNQ yang_j_Page_128.txt
de33969cdffd3f34bdacbe9581ca8a1e
3e9404ca69a5e4407f289473b0a1862eb1d4b710
6027 F20110404_AAAAKO yang_j_Page_039thm.jpg
db9968211f66a71b7371f3fc0f0a2643
e619ee71287f850b1e140ab26a111f4bd0436448
26473 F20110404_AAAAJZ yang_j_Page_148.QC.jpg
02b1f471235adb8fbfe7a2e7c6dd2256
a8a465a5ca8002b48133696b84c4563f6345cf49
F20110404_AAAALC yang_j_Page_106.tif
2d48082e125dda54a6eb3f7b279a63e2
3b324a82227ed7fbe92b350eaae033450d13dd5f
41792 F20110404_AAABOF yang_j_Page_067.pro
e03b2a0d2984a39cfd24d3c29f4166b7
ad4fd5e62e055f7d1e8e394bdb8c5f83158680e3
1042 F20110404_AAABNR yang_j_Page_137.txt
dd5765c53b4e46afbeedd9992eca8b48
43485a1293c56aaa5bd512a90d783a530cc8372c
2110 F20110404_AAAAKP yang_j_Page_151.txt
6c34b380fc4ef487ee1acd5fbe72713b
3f0f64a04fd924dc029d53a9f4b5aa3e68b7e72b
840945 F20110404_AAAALD yang_j_Page_121.jp2
68c5464ae5baec87fd3d9a768b98df16
d4c826fb6427718be7799edf5b01b29783aa52c8
53901 F20110404_AAABOG yang_j_Page_068.pro
f07b1521988b3c0ac470912730f52791
659d1a797342cf795920598ea3ec61e71a2a1425
39069 F20110404_AAABNS yang_j_Page_004.pro
421f08b27d3ca8c31839f357c9c35b3e
174d89090ddf64ee1c2c4c55a0de4ea76eb0bcbf
894631 F20110404_AAAAKQ yang_j_Page_087.jp2
33925e7c5ab4b5b6c445b3e7ea43861a
379f8f6fc32bd551f8eac7b92a7a9a07beda43e5
84450 F20110404_AAAALE yang_j_Page_025.jpg
48c27747caaabc546d92a24c3bb61c05
d7eabdd7b3b3f310c4beee79c3e29e2f821bccc6
44331 F20110404_AAABOH yang_j_Page_077.pro
75e97824a1c5a655e86bc366f09dd4b0
d9517777fbb0d1baa07e5be0abae98313f74a9c2
50476 F20110404_AAABNT yang_j_Page_010.pro
e829ab807c56580d7d86d1838f224961
61b35947ad0d71e8f7e2ff01721eca86886f65f7
1902 F20110404_AAAAKR yang_j_Page_017.txt
d5110ae3d556e62018af2653cc58343d
0fe84f40ec7baf16b2069857879b9eecad04038e
61815 F20110404_AAAALF yang_j_Page_009.jpg
84d515125fd3a10247481048cef629c6
d2d146a5b51e552314c3f51afb08311e3950bcb7
54236 F20110404_AAABOI yang_j_Page_088.pro
1ec077584ad84a4ee8dc8ebe1dc5fc59
bd6217164df83e3b1a7b09ff4389b5f185143580
46099 F20110404_AAABNU yang_j_Page_017.pro
1d3598ddc67aece76144d671cd795929
bf24ad91adf853ebb95683400c1f0c1c5edc2e3f
94210 F20110404_AAAAKS yang_j_Page_146.jpg
59bb723bfe1e85a95f1a2408da95cdd0
a17d3ce30779bc6ba8c5d36ba866b52ef8c0bd32
1051921 F20110404_AAAALG yang_j_Page_106.jp2
cd6c844779b557eaee85aae37241cd1a
71c86a655a773d3f7f44bf38148127258c8acdda
64319 F20110404_AAABOJ yang_j_Page_092.pro
01d610d1d9cecece3717addedd181dd7
4797ddd5161ca4df872344a1f4dda99c7fc1788a
48662 F20110404_AAABNV yang_j_Page_024.pro
17a94eb71448245a97baf56cd00e5933
bc280d7660918ae8124444737e3fcba4e6e97be1
F20110404_AAAAKT yang_j_Page_108.tif
83e7646efa7ab16dcf1d0927574626fb
49bc78971075853db80813c9becc4be4ac073a52
1716 F20110404_AAAALH yang_j_Page_069.txt
5004d925aeff9645c3a7f4bb9a0d96e5
bbb44864e0626b3b5f39bb4490ce5d07fe40bd73
33590 F20110404_AAABOK yang_j_Page_093.pro
887099105833bd515f7c974c5fe513a8
50a52126123c4db11ade6dc030e2e9ee3513407e
51027 F20110404_AAABNW yang_j_Page_029.pro
90f9d02dc82f130a1589021b48b62da7
e62a2d1d1478f30a5521246a044dfbaa6f00f0d5
23512 F20110404_AAAAKU yang_j_Page_053.QC.jpg
02cb06e6a088a026734b39f9c29f01c2
8a1b6cb1424ca94638e9dd06778dda6ea79bd31e
1970 F20110404_AAAALI yang_j_Page_031.txt
0b983fa5a1c764416e59d1855831c109
d735e192623588a23b3223613c8f2c0f4143bb76
49166 F20110404_AAABOL yang_j_Page_096.pro
99ed662f5518620004fea2a0188ea4a3
4fba7150ea26ac4c67d85620a0d1848358ee0001
47902 F20110404_AAABNX yang_j_Page_036.pro
9cb02d72b3c674b2d796c3c474e7df17
ea41e61197811b8d029614d6fe02d0df2a96ebf9
2359 F20110404_AAAAKV yang_j_Page_011thm.jpg
ce019845c0048acedbac1e0ebce326da
94f264719c1dcab48904b794f2c7758b48d0fe9a
3259 F20110404_AAAALJ yang_j_Page_006.txt
7d339256d00a0234d40e19c5db3860ba
8fdfe9e584e796bbded986ae6dbbb5c411e1ffc9
769738 F20110404_AAABPA yang_j.pdf
8dd617e4b2a864feba0e8cd951bf9712
1180dfa0c88d4b1144a9d9dd037c510bcb3f0836
47071 F20110404_AAABOM yang_j_Page_097.pro
dad8fd5d0747ba0bae4c6a79517a8c19
b27d80efe08a6923b56d7a533f6bc9208710ab91
47047 F20110404_AAABNY yang_j_Page_039.pro
14a517dd0dd3dc53588c7af5cf59110a
29ec03c9d64568d0b69c249ceb8a62a7a1e158f4
23544 F20110404_AAAAKW yang_j_Page_039.QC.jpg
a270ab43c9e96ad4c925c0e3e87a9d22
613471066f7f2af2347e016f40406b123a7a1df5
1786 F20110404_AAAALK yang_j_Page_094.txt
5aa3d6cf32c71c7dc1ab41eaaae2c66e
7d61841255e2809bf6d1e7ea374b41be34393d45
19431 F20110404_AAABPB yang_j_Page_021.QC.jpg
e1f2c5223d184d9eeafe21665e4a1689
6f1265cd1f1cdfc53d61f592acafede44a7e8d20
45366 F20110404_AAABON yang_j_Page_110.pro
7908eec3b0173dfa747fb45dd15f87d7
f8093a4a932e17e21c97ac5c051b9cd6463ae7be
799866 F20110404_AAAALL yang_j_Page_012.jp2
4c890c1739aebbda86c148d0a99b96f1
be046e091a9e18c949b790d31c2842ac16074e06
23627 F20110404_AAABPC yang_j_Page_109.QC.jpg
96c7b399450e99dfb229636f4f4be155
eb683743a88d5d3055bb852d10a73d25af32293e
62437 F20110404_AAABOO yang_j_Page_118.pro
fe031fba08130ae8b08feb00ce55a015
45bfc1a645c1282bc2ae43274d293827cbd03478
45733 F20110404_AAABNZ yang_j_Page_043.pro
65c35ae909bb936bbfd3171410e08c58
e3917e5c7997f6f4f8af05a8fd296c100059ff33
F20110404_AAAAKX yang_j_Page_077.jpg
288c2d0234c07f847faa8221130b25dd
28f408a6da0f88f1ad2a2afb4970f2a2565b0a24
F20110404_AAAAMA yang_j_Page_128.tif
d146a220288c38c6182c382ca9653a5c
47e597a4c3b25ee947aaf160568876d773816d86
26979 F20110404_AAAALM yang_j_Page_022.QC.jpg
b25bf6749f24a57a52cec4ceb09e3829
97a9f5193a4d7cda15a222923de79a78f8644b24
22914 F20110404_AAABPD yang_j_Page_048.QC.jpg
1ffc8cef9798e6ed8b8d5442f8df9a76
e7e89a0ffe1c2e15c7d8ebbbeb4dcf4b06536de1
46855 F20110404_AAABOP yang_j_Page_126.pro
10b976d624f52436ab41efa1ef28794e
673d8f154932b99543f19d7a0ac7e822fa853755
87695 F20110404_AAAAKY yang_j_Page_089.jpg
bed278db75be4f26732944c321ae2cbe
fa82b849fa53952a07ad95d605955964f2843933
F20110404_AAAAMB yang_j_Page_133.tif
0402c66db361707013e2e64aef8e5832
173e135bef7fbbc50b9ac25a743cac956dc69da3
42283 F20110404_AAAALN yang_j_Page_091.jpg
2e7cc8309c5ac5a6575fe51eb4936721
b5af2cad51a580c996906c8812b5767a6af59288
10041 F20110404_AAABPE yang_j_Page_120.QC.jpg
34cd617fc9c23aa7db6d2ed00ad72531
e2b1f59ba80e1c298d0d02f39ab8c29835c8dbbc
46565 F20110404_AAABOQ yang_j_Page_128.pro
948824e82064509fa7c34972f4cc1775
1e2e0000b7288e51657799c2ca866d25384ea798
26566 F20110404_AAAAKZ yang_j_Page_025.QC.jpg
8685ca7ca43d99a899d116c6cce7305f
0dfe251d7524f9d9e1d4ee4aba7157f945f2fb6d
50000 F20110404_AAAAMC yang_j_Page_031.pro
c7e773c84908ba50caa6df6d7e5f898d
2b7f405231b5c23de361bb1027e99c452b774f2d
F20110404_AAAALO yang_j_Page_104.tif
bf34691728791f5350211e8b0c07ff34
a4df1ca6414dd8a81227064a7f9659c91f150888
6350 F20110404_AAABPF yang_j_Page_147thm.jpg
86cf3823238156549c475b71342b5031
b75da716d64df231acab0569f40ec94cd63af272
37750 F20110404_AAABOR yang_j_Page_130.pro
b674abf431658744c2d96eae1ca8591c
756a348048a829672a45f137763e549f66f0ffa4
60598 F20110404_AAAAMD yang_j_Page_065.jpg
28ab9b86d442205bbe158437bedd8189
4789eb5dae6bb6a07dfc519e8ada453eb860f1c9
956448 F20110404_AAAALP yang_j_Page_076.jp2
e67ff553869bd7a0c58661d8a82f29fe
4859d7293c3350547db63425ab6190a54dad2547
3685 F20110404_AAABPG yang_j_Page_139thm.jpg
0ac1a8c87684b1b593b47eddc7c2e71a
63cc0853c8c19ab299336d7bd8086a9b3b9667e6
27576 F20110404_AAABOS yang_j_Page_133.pro
d34572d668aebf6941ad5bd5131b2a08
1e01a3e3bc91828b7f16e37e28ac69d910db0d61
26709 F20110404_AAAAME yang_j_Page_029.QC.jpg
65d4a7d3d113c3f9b3060e6a09ad7dca
cf69d5e167513d7abf26574e2ed6ba9e9af8ed17
F20110404_AAAALQ yang_j_Page_094.tif
701d7b511a9833fd587d9d6f65688271
19e615b9620256a5e82f3a94cf28d0c0f6983742
F20110404_AAABPH yang_j_Page_004thm.jpg
4ed708dfb181aecf0a7b5974ce5d0f69
6c0a0decdb345a3f38d2f3ff03c79cdad84cca3d
46005 F20110404_AAABOT yang_j_Page_136.pro
9399b91979c42c80436752bd7eca271f
0e23bc8bacabc8137720e8048b49d905c420ff04
F20110404_AAAAMF yang_j_Page_114.tif
d802f4cc6d252317ccbf7b004d597cf4
77f006b3feef872cc1910d171ff45fbce6ceb30d
23551 F20110404_AAAALR yang_j_Page_078.QC.jpg
b61a2477fd3e9c6d80ef19ffedc992dd
a4153d552e272182c01c9ae1bf77881e1b213004
6258 F20110404_AAABPI yang_j_Page_055thm.jpg
11e6222d1c45a9d2e76a7649b0bab9bb
c5c8b4b9366719271535de8f0f49077e15b2545f
34508 F20110404_AAABOU yang_j_Page_141.pro
aeabbd328fabf925dd78d3b84ae1ea85
5b8adbe24abe86f749aaeb4b493d6c9c23287692
2456 F20110404_AAAAMG yang_j_Page_090.txt
eb0a2f941a83f742c6ed059b64fed8e2
0f1cb40d652747a6e0213e26bf04b0f1edbadb53
20894 F20110404_AAAALS yang_j_Page_145.QC.jpg
9555013d2797e9e1aff4fdd29ee27a16
7f8eb46e28fda414802e3fb3bc3b9439fd76d532
10536 F20110404_AAABPJ yang_j_Page_141.QC.jpg
6b8999b9aca76c14386e3a7f177de5a2
83bac4940fb6e420892b24ed3cc5aaec615efb4b
43612 F20110404_AAABOV yang_j_Page_145.pro
2d1f10ebc70d2128390149186e52901e
a3abfb28ae15da730c4b0f243f81b67ffcd81c6b
89476 F20110404_AAAAMH yang_j_Page_103.jpg
db547fc4d9598c52f229ca154aba3760
9694941bf5860a69df3887b0237b1103c08748cd
22725 F20110404_AAAALT yang_j_Page_013.QC.jpg
92239f5f3da8a00ff51a95d38e34c32c
55feaefc484bc4ec1638424fedb654e4f1fdf1be
25551 F20110404_AAABPK yang_j_Page_151.QC.jpg
b4ad6cdf2a4df878583e783bdaef4900
9bd3a391c19f375705920a6974d9e9a721b3dac7
56863 F20110404_AAABOW yang_j_Page_148.pro
a54514d8e01809c450c3c2a9c04ccccc
07eb0ba5296572f795f4faead3451ee67cb6ee95
25614 F20110404_AAAAMI yang_j_Page_099.QC.jpg
e7f5243a695dad3aac89555f72a6f5a3
403485b5d1bb274c4b5156639a1675d4d6823a62
68803 F20110404_AAAALU yang_j_Page_135.jpg
7b6f3e8029ca0baf21b1aa58ec8cb6fd
f154375864e358a385c1b64e67558de643e4570a
F20110404_AAABPL yang_j_Page_030.QC.jpg
a6b77c6b0933df18eebb8037154e8cb9
4aee6acae787c77d8ba6175aae2e031d7d4e149a
59701 F20110404_AAABOX yang_j_Page_150.pro
01769437365b5acbf492cd3eabc4c193
a7722642e63d43db993fb1741475011018de86c4
34476 F20110404_AAAAMJ yang_j_Page_012.pro
67d2d88da53850c33bd50b352f32e36d
e890e6843dc7ad2905205895700d61b0aa578b10
2446 F20110404_AAAALV yang_j_Page_087.txt
9a991bf4b44b17a0b396f0be9e0c7455
8a396858dd7e711b4c5f5716c8413c989f523196
25990 F20110404_AAABQA yang_j_Page_055.QC.jpg
364dad6d9698621b8d8864fc9f34a736
70f2b4d2953060f23ed779a7b4e09c843b71f777
20268 F20110404_AAABPM yang_j_Page_051.QC.jpg
0a1e705203225bec28852a77360eab64
a5499ad00750c61dc2f39b08c47f57bfc4c4d4e6
52580 F20110404_AAABOY yang_j_Page_151.pro
fd0dd2ad1e892f9cc895f1c6bdf1cec4
55fb9ff98b50213bfb6b490d5ed482ad0c7603d0
F20110404_AAAAMK yang_j_Page_088.tif
2467cf1637be142e8dafa72f74b99822
2d4dd99ba8ade5c2eb2727a072bfe984081403ac
4964 F20110404_AAAALW yang_j_Page_018thm.jpg
5687c652ee901664ea42f9533aa988bd
4938b47b22b57b059378c6d4d64721d270cfc47d
9613 F20110404_AAABQB yang_j_Page_073.QC.jpg
418cad0434f886085ea5b11fcc125f60
9c8d6dda7d809c221806769d5781ebe5a8c10b9e
6067 F20110404_AAABPN yang_j_Page_061thm.jpg
394cf785b322f75e8d81ad51f7dda345
ffbcc9025c2d94849a220f6f98e83dad7259dae7
30098 F20110404_AAABOZ yang_j_Page_157.pro
1b0ec6e16e173730fc61b0be4fd13dab
690484ac392bcc6c86ffa18f55346d5a800aa936
62387 F20110404_AAAAML yang_j_Page_067.jpg
e0d4c4dbb98883af0176d8400cd96650
11926cb73aab811d1af327bfbe722e9cb51af0a8
F20110404_AAAALX yang_j_Page_126.tif
18ba01a90a6aee1cef6f7a42799a63d7
88cbad9a1935faa30bcbeaba8b67b6943a2fc96b
22245 F20110404_AAABQC yang_j_Page_076.QC.jpg
e478af3b3d9a9245ce59ae8b8f603caf
c13bc82a2ec29c7b69ff400912a62606f641458c
6177 F20110404_AAABPO yang_j_Page_106thm.jpg
ce1511eba8de524f79aadc8152e71fb3
c4cc85184bf21a755c95280991939e187d236997
6389 F20110404_AAAANA yang_j_Page_155thm.jpg
ff816d5e26df1c08c63b11594baa5ad1
75faef4c8e1e9add7b5444deb3edb2262b08e059
F20110404_AAAAMM yang_j_Page_074.tif
fdc2b32bcd2c5f2d0e585e575203b4d1
cef5c678069bffdbc36af1c2cdf4b9a0c4e7df72
8661 F20110404_AAABQD yang_j_Page_093.QC.jpg
e26f9fc8a113d8ffb1950e95aea9fdd4
1b86979efdd6b37a88c547c668edec317dbfc4e9
6189 F20110404_AAABPP yang_j_Page_037thm.jpg
319b7fda6e6f2c9a576aabe2edd1b36b
801e44bfdf4213a067edddd474312465d664ba2e
6250 F20110404_AAAANB yang_j_Page_099thm.jpg
a612ad277e3849a3f16bc87ee8bec268
50acfb9f3ed343a4f29df7161f0d6e828f78a6b9
F20110404_AAAAMN yang_j_Page_073.tif
6514a6b11cc3c640cb271c388779da82
ff301686a4c4122feeab662924b777272d2a7718
1227 F20110404_AAAALY yang_j_Page_157.txt
5efa6010bd6fb95d9effb0b3a1398282
b89a4944347db621fac0984e07d025f907c51601
26017 F20110404_AAABQE yang_j_Page_111.QC.jpg
d9869feb96ee5f62f709827e55820210
62fd4c7d9e696c1af32ee7babf3b1247a296685a
19736 F20110404_AAABPQ yang_j_Page_040.QC.jpg
f88ba8ccab6f3cc6e5a673cecedbe6e6
c377c6868f8912301c09523ff43d5ac3736a23db
5650 F20110404_AAAANC yang_j_Page_118thm.jpg
0a33c32331f3494e5a7c4962a53692c4
0b1d02fdd9ab9733fb37a1ada5e786d72f3444e2
47136 F20110404_AAAAMO yang_j_Page_104.pro
c23616442615311afa9e6b2f445104d7
249978925ef858be3a7fc22f491ba90053f6aa99
F20110404_AAAALZ yang_j_Page_031.jp2
e1311208b36ce741f939ae6b1e254156
2c222d7d6f91b62db96b81beb3b97ca3bbde748d
15432 F20110404_AAABQF yang_j_Page_123.QC.jpg
7e3e48bf22fdf01099ec8e738577e547
afc5cbfee5dc884ccfea082ee112d3e18b74a621
6015 F20110404_AAABPR yang_j_Page_050thm.jpg
7c9daf14046b7fe7901a67ef053d7394
bab204910bdf67f33d45af998c98c9597092f497
2025 F20110404_AAAAND yang_j_Page_046.txt
59a42283bc1a0a76890b3a742d882bc9
e5e963f0a6cb0c83a850682b10254f3f6fed9ad6
2248 F20110404_AAAAMP yang_j_Page_103.txt
1457faf6b7cc48c9ac80d3445dd624ea
a7de8f5ea4422cc6bb5efb621cb1384ac88c5849
18515 F20110404_AAABQG yang_j_Page_126.QC.jpg
de69d028cf94bc2510dd1a6fc9bbd61a
9b02de4fb370b5d01b9e474d8bf4c475e3d8e36a
4188 F20110404_AAABPS yang_j_Page_130thm.jpg
81add91266a516247b39ab72123ae29b
33267743329c6809300d48220e035827c1ae86e2
F20110404_AAAANE yang_j_Page_019.tif
fbdf07c82c5f3ac6f80ad18923828c2b
a52024ec77a1acf30a8f77ba604a50222041b567
F20110404_AAAAMQ yang_j_Page_150.txt
2f462c16cf05c8e6aaa0444d75bdcce7
af3953a5523990df0e20686118ce69cb70829f0c
1583 F20110404_AAABQH yang_j_Page_140.QC.jpg
0b4da4eedcd4b37e6ca92704a40a8000
12c99e2c4365534da0e03587f474a79f747db0cb
23761 F20110404_AAABPT yang_j_Page_090.QC.jpg
39987b6b6430b5e860a924cdcc07eca8
c151370eb635ac4c102eaf77bf2a1acbaf3c5dde
F20110404_AAAANF yang_j_Page_111.tif
2484d4b3bb9a75ec053e31c7678a8a92
0b428992d77f0f5aba238801d55b68c9d64f4336
2665 F20110404_AAAAMR yang_j_Page_076.txt
d7ec54c956fde98ab4815334e55288d6
77b1be8d4b0443aad9619cd86225cb6ffca68978
2909 F20110404_AAABQI yang_j_Page_144.QC.jpg
56b5775cef79206a53c67a06b6b42773
cf1ae1847e7e6e59d6ec0404db91911e102cd3c5
710 F20110404_AAABPU yang_j_Page_008thm.jpg
3711ab7523ee37652582715d3f790ed2
1a770501c659180e312b5e5901d2bf4d7b3c696e
1051975 F20110404_AAAANG yang_j_Page_151.jp2
cc9c286adddf34fb6e7de0142ca4316c
934a45593a5eeec4449ee8e2529e4191d09311d9
50845 F20110404_AAAAMS yang_j_Page_132.jpg
a45d69ccf84579cf31660308effba1e6
ec4a757e950d5096ed4ae786e1c6918422039290
25752 F20110404_AAABQJ yang_j_Page_156.QC.jpg
6a8f8b5783221fa1c91e5c055f5338a9
4e4065d0e4083e36aa21480c8cd2b9bf5855ff81
5587 F20110404_AAABPV yang_j_Page_016thm.jpg
44a5f2637ccf23de4836059b36699a28
20962309856f9c34a4d64c61ae053b88c6e686cb
20963 F20110404_AAAANH yang_j_Page_069.QC.jpg
a93a0fe2c1954a7e6896e68dd2856b45
6cbf950221a2c945645ef75a3fd12c8844a6d7d8
F20110404_AAAAMT yang_j_Page_067.tif
67283a79088103dadc07315bd72b9702
7d75283a2e18d0caf8066cdd1e90f2f32beb07eb
6129 F20110404_AAABQK yang_j_Page_032thm.jpg
0c5ce4bd1539e11ec7270d66a1364eea
e3cd3b78b645aa9a55adb0a706a72cc2da247f75
3108 F20110404_AAABPW yang_j_Page_142thm.jpg
df734a598bf8b3899a8e0082d24616c1
1e3b4a369aa2bf25498f1f85badbee1e2b5fbc43
4383 F20110404_AAAANI yang_j_Page_121thm.jpg
e3329b37e765c3348b1408c022afca6b
bad0ce6ae14c74966986be04f90533c25db32d56
13680 F20110404_AAAAMU yang_j_Page_006.QC.jpg
e34317709f0bf60fa1b1f0586d0461b9
1472f3c32fca74103ad29e119f4340b47e8cf37d
6547 F20110404_AAABQL yang_j_Page_046thm.jpg
cee58d8421e1ec9353aeeed21ce6cb0e
08e4a176b09d6674e070ae79653337e2f3348527
251894 F20110404_AAABPX UFE0013620_00001.xml
9c72db5a7993d1d3f663970f735e6e48
bda8081fd83e824bdd23b400d24accce24b03ddd
yang_j_Page_001.tif
61930 F20110404_AAAANJ yang_j_Page_070.jpg
d6e2e999642ffa8a54b73a19db07751b
b6190b102bf6b6ccafe89799431adc0d2c61e48d
61303 F20110404_AAAAMV yang_j_Page_147.pro
4542e2d5d715894dd4ce94aafad74788
797da86accd59ccb95fe4f444fc68d9b0ef61869
5005 F20110404_AAABQM yang_j_Page_051thm.jpg
bd2f395f0e27909f4f64ef4c3c4e8779
4e902671989c15628d1769d175a3e3954ff9b856
2179 F20110404_AAABPY yang_j_Page_008.QC.jpg
b27ab375c4937ded54b65fd517af7d24
e9ca2e80fe4f2f998298dca17289822f66f7385b
80233 F20110404_AAAANK yang_j_Page_048.jpg
5f045681acd87fcc48016564089f6079
630fac70f9dcf07040d3fccf230e66a202f86a95
2958 F20110404_AAAAMW yang_j_Page_141thm.jpg
b7913a7d5f9b4ed1249ec271eb6c4d8d
345c4325b860e7e2038e848b84599c41684102cd
5443 F20110404_AAABQN yang_j_Page_057thm.jpg
1f4ff00a83e19d3bfdce232f3b2851ca
52bd17212b05ea778be8764e4eaf2af2886f2817
21937 F20110404_AAABPZ yang_j_Page_020.QC.jpg
224b2424cb67707204e9145666937c2e
7c0d2e355c5c1bf6dbfd174f9d0512f539c37459
F20110404_AAAANL yang_j_Page_007.tif
89df3a8744907e8536a6d81d8cd021d3
8be8c1f3a77babb6aa84efd4d90b4ed3dac123c7
47187 F20110404_AAAAMX yang_j_Page_016.pro
ee3878ad66e3faa3553778526996a5cc
417192a34ca2c34b8b20fe5053a7307e26e816ab
5902 F20110404_AAABQO yang_j_Page_060thm.jpg
8c039931ec5c612fad160a47296d7822
02a3f4502cdbaec4438442cd3a04ee68ab396210
6076 F20110404_AAAANM yang_j_Page_151thm.jpg
418d6c7c589558787cec377f6b18a00c
250794c5edd07a4dc5845eab5dc5ba393e78b34d
51507 F20110404_AAAAMY yang_j_Page_046.pro
650b3a47467ae51d0a209a5a15fcdcf4
380cc6fcc9966233890b79d08c4328f90fb31638
51212 F20110404_AAAAOA yang_j_Page_089.pro
85c44f5d7bd940604411400ff44c75fa
55c5fa617347e1196a4c12dc01542a85ad6f8999
2648 F20110404_AAABQP yang_j_Page_074thm.jpg
ee1c9217cb8fe69b085a8016fc36f6d9
a4e32a3daece96f7672ce18d417fd1df53ce3852
F20110404_AAAANN yang_j_Page_142.tif
09036ad9a501ff171cb207d99abd7012
48349b43705ce43646ba6a7aa74c036b9ab0da4b
18657 F20110404_AAAAOB yang_j_Page_067.QC.jpg
954e1aa04e5641c8b710913ae49133a2
2423b944feffa076e4c4ed1f5b8d7f5ecda06261
6030 F20110404_AAABQQ yang_j_Page_108thm.jpg
ff15ee2e5bddbff850df9fbfa1e23b54
5cbfc377449e91342eabb9db67068fa0e42b94f0
6281 F20110404_AAAANO yang_j_Page_101thm.jpg
846fe842a594cda6626f0fa31e185e47
e08254befc46045e1731e6fe34883c92fe5d32b2
6415 F20110404_AAAAMZ yang_j_Page_045thm.jpg
4e6acced85a115590cd5ecfb55f3cb2d
b9a3b6bfca2f2b48cc1bead6b3ccee3b15f22f67
20223 F20110404_AAAAOC yang_j_Page_135.QC.jpg
889dd52550ca28481aa6f53e78177ac1
1d34bde08500d6cbb16e681cae0b9321ff563f0c
6243 F20110404_AAABQR yang_j_Page_111thm.jpg
2ad1cb3411fb6210c29a59cb94c8dd6a
41445f3381258b1152722338a809c7d15d31f727
53942 F20110404_AAAANP yang_j_Page_079.pro
2b31f7b939158488bb51932772111cf2
68fab0be37675093d0e3c9e5c41c85d1401d62e5
42118 F20110404_AAAAOD yang_j_Page_014.pro
72a628f77c59dbff8be25d3971f16c16
17a8e9a9615623ab94ca2a80f2fe223247081ece
3229 F20110404_AAABQS yang_j_Page_122thm.jpg
e77fee5317a58c8ce3e9bd3edcb5af05
333074d62d4e7bb778c0c0c5958bf3c05e496742
104 F20110404_AAAAOE yang_j_Page_002.txt
ea561f704be6710a0709459262d543c6
c28d833ac1ef40612910cb77ff55892a4f627cb3
55306 F20110404_AAAANQ yang_j_Page_090.pro
f8e44a33c801ecbf0d9ad09a5a4cc3cd
a1baaf2b65a1eb36abf04e477f0734a5144f9aaf
4414 F20110404_AAABQT yang_j_Page_125thm.jpg
d0e4650e1e0d7a65bb89a38ccb16a1ff
c307f695819c2833b1a60b50f77e97ceb6d6b3af
58703 F20110404_AAAAOF yang_j_Page_115.pro
d5170c38812d7ca4656eba801415bb17
e4df74f20bcf1f11af9c7b40e849b4acc84baf1b
F20110404_AAAANR yang_j_Page_154.tif
5184ca0809957050fd8f0db9cc57c128
978c2bb0cbf9d683c706660539baac7e6225402f
5032 F20110404_AAABQU yang_j_Page_135thm.jpg
5fbcd92e22770caf040f37b73d01083c
f177d2abf579b7e4f9b748e60d525bcf8cbfb8bd
F20110404_AAAAOG yang_j_Page_144.tif
4acd1b77af308ea1e67bc83775b760fa
1067021a810273a6bf3c7bcb2e87c219b99ec876
18831 F20110404_AAAANS yang_j_Page_012.QC.jpg
a20194d847f4f06ce6727f31cbb36cb6
f2f2bd32c5baa6e0a7590a425db25fb8b3c95390
6209 F20110404_AAABQV yang_j_Page_136thm.jpg
071f5f1ad708b861cb5060151ad2e4bb
ad4e9f6f1b1b5c7c71f691ce8e9868e893ac6d96
F20110404_AAAAOH yang_j_Page_143.tif
11ad5573a591288a78430dc806808dc4
5ab9e43b32522af21cd56841bcf6a1b72f1f29d0
F20110404_AAAANT yang_j_Page_038.tif
73a31bf48ff894d81cfc4414ffce07da
d4b9f12141e8663cb15922099074ff5e73117a8d
F20110404_AAABQW yang_j_Page_148thm.jpg
bbe50981c010dced833c582a5fbd6edc
260ec6cc63318fcda8f5411a1cb9a42b41984a2f
330282 F20110404_AAAAOI yang_j_Page_005.jp2
04505d4221a0d2bfead97906350a2376
3fcc07bb3f90881ea28515bd593da63f872f8a0d
F20110404_AAAANU yang_j_Page_135.tif
746249b0335c8d6562f58fb597e1cbeb
0e10799d0a92df9ff03e952430f4498a505c427b
105604 F20110404_AAAAOJ yang_j_Page_138.jpg
114f2f01249cef633a3d0564827b4511
62946ebed58e69b8c7d106f55489e074e4b951ec
4529 F20110404_AAAANV yang_j_Page_012thm.jpg
3561068de472578d22e52d5a838c4425
e25a8ce22bb00fbc6a8fa20df61771a689f0a98c
850796 F20110404_AAAAOK yang_j_Page_009.jp2
c4c991b40bb5ca645f24cea459bd51d5
63b2ef495edc0d18cf5aaf5766e756e02adbc4ef
913270 F20110404_AAAANW yang_j_Page_077.jp2
700ed3354055347f011e0e8e8e113fe6
d330911c449735e5ea2607b5cf36243d1a2f7e7e
49799 F20110404_AAAAOL yang_j_Page_037.pro
d47dfbb1af82a21fdcc0f509ec876d42
acdb64abbf5f1b2bc3173f2d6d584f9acf243573
874883 F20110404_AAAANX yang_j_Page_092.jp2
8fee9fb5172e1c22ade1f710b043f5bd
d1bd7bc958f6ae15ee24ad67b9d7ab9dfed133eb
6040 F20110404_AAAAPA yang_j_Page_088thm.jpg
81cd900f2efee05b01bd81b8920f4565
77fcb8f33d45279413ad2479a5555e6800fc773f
46951 F20110404_AAAAOM yang_j_Page_026.pro
59d974ebcbed2a5f4aa27ebdc149597f
7eaa33be769d4ff7a49a19cca09a40331e3176e0
F20110404_AAAANY yang_j_Page_080.tif
ee4d7d74f741ef1e7fa6b5712ad12819
dad0c0e4c67642da903d92939048c56348475d9b
F20110404_AAAAPB yang_j_Page_025thm.jpg
39f3baa09e4a72f456fdaddf769adf48
3b27505f4e53f7837f5b139b2d85b34fa73a35e6
F20110404_AAAAON yang_j_Page_096.tif
ad78af52c88dcb49aa0d531ca9c9e9c5
72de82afa78b8d0dcda8563beed4258d2070576c
6058 F20110404_AAAANZ yang_j_Page_097thm.jpg
e5259518c79dbc55138a6bb3a55ecd5e
14e4761d03518e2cc9f21c5ca756d0bf1f4b8d51
82590 F20110404_AAAAPC yang_j_Page_020.jpg
790a3eaebe13a2ba207703d6145feb1f
c30be9dd5f317ee40dfeaf6bd045ab16ce69df45
F20110404_AAAAOO yang_j_Page_105.txt
dec565a57fd0e1bcd4cc9b28b5ebace7
fa8b5a4674c1bb7f43e9a06b08f5d626951e8eeb
65501 F20110404_AAAAPD yang_j_Page_051.jpg
65cc6d049bd5721b9b29ca8a67e654a3
101c44cc162bbdad3eae428da82500a75f6d7ed5
2328 F20110404_AAAAOP yang_j_Page_125.txt
53af6f559af25e7656d9a2d312be997b
362ffe853aa0d69e799c5f89b4dfa815e98c14c4
576 F20110404_AAAAPE yang_j_Page_002thm.jpg
0d1eafa5f314a7fad910535733b70669
e4de2bad410e929f1b5d14949c66763a623369d4
977911 F20110404_AAAAOQ yang_j_Page_080.jp2
88c087e59c33d60f4d43c2f5ec3019b7
6766a9d19faf4decb29824fd568eb103e474595e
19931 F20110404_AAAAPF yang_j_Page_041.QC.jpg
5c2a2be9541348cb90133036669a6370
67756c0ac1e372b267c815efe0709867c640d8f2
5150 F20110404_AAAAOR yang_j_Page_056thm.jpg
e03fbddfe73a1a9edded9afb146eff89
b8fa52ae7f0457f434965e5512ed6213d76ad976
97394 F20110404_AAAAPG yang_j_Page_148.jpg
0b26607e4e95309f6a7d1e764d7a4965
b2851283279caa6967b3243bafa54c54714a3db1
6456 F20110404_AAAAOS yang_j_Page_150thm.jpg
139bd0dd2831ae5809454b874f70256a
c90478df7debdaf09a108e87fd22e9ac3fa41c20
34534 F20110404_AAAAPH yang_j_Page_116.jpg
1b1eac292b0cbed485f2dff93d694d4d
3e954d3bb3ee1656d02da50518da7d553fefc294
48527 F20110404_AAAAOT yang_j_Page_020.pro
af9050718099f3fd037e3e227c6d797e
21e5385010de79abf85480494e469b99a687abad
1051936 F20110404_AAAAPI yang_j_Page_034.jp2
4df41882acc0851dbfab74bfeeed8692
19ee96fc5c0ad06de8472caad677be4f48938c04
5683 F20110404_AAAAOU yang_j_Page_115thm.jpg
a9a0b51a55e401d2f27731b42e33efb2
b7d014a52ae56115b38907b70499e7b0ac9ea105
F20110404_AAAAPJ yang_j_Page_101.jp2
01623968b7f319f6322744e740c1951e
21ecfc7c60f62e68a3dac1b2767d092a39cc52b3
6084 F20110404_AAAAOV yang_j_Page_100thm.jpg
72b11c0775c0132f30da07490153e1d8
abcb732c8af4341c6190230d2e047f8e8520f1a5
689875 F20110404_AAAAPK yang_j_Page_157.jp2
162c9a1bfb47896c54e143c330f8d8a4
818570b70d68984add38b67528856afb9a0bf236
F20110404_AAAAOW yang_j_Page_022.tif
c392fb438225581b61eddf02ec82b121
b5f41a1ee835f6fabf7eaacef154a7ce46054141
F20110404_AAAAPL yang_j_Page_092.tif
2c2c46a609e9d4d0445b6520f8d7d19e
4f85f168c940dfb9fa01ecebc157bb8d13fef86e
24564 F20110404_AAAAOX yang_j_Page_081.QC.jpg
04674e6bb0d1ae9604d06ac61d64e8fc
198879a9924f291da2053e0ec748792e1ff8be21



PAGE 1

NATURE-BASED TOURISM IMPACTS IN I-LAN, TAIWAN: BUSINESS MANAGERS’ PERCEPTIONS By JOE YING CHIN YANG A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLOR IDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 2006

PAGE 2

Copyright 2006 By Joe Ying Chin Yang

PAGE 3

I dedicated this paper to my parents, Ch in-Hsin Yang and Sung-I Tseng Yang & my wife, Yu-Mei Chen

PAGE 4

iv ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I wish to acknowledge my dissertation committee for their guidance, time, and efforts to their students: Dr. Taylor Stein, f aculty advisor and committee chair; Dr. Janaki Alavalapati, Dr. Marilyn Swis her, Dr. Clyde Kiker and Dr. Stephen Holland. I also wish to acknowledge Dr. Kai-Li Chen, Professo r of National I-Lan University, for her thorough advising and documenting support. In addition, I wish to express my a ppreciation to the following people and organizations for their contributions to making this dissertation possible: Shi-Ning Rou of Yuca CPA in I-Lan for lo cal connections and essential guidance for this study Lien-Hsing Yu, I-Lan County Director of Land Administration, for supporting existing county document and data Te-Hsin Chen, Deputy Director of Bureau of Business and Travel, I-Lan County for his assistance and guidance. Ms Cheng-Jiao Ho of the I-Lan Tourism Association for advising and assisting my interviews Tsai-Kun Lin, Assistant Mana ger of the I-Lan Farmer s’ Association for his guidance and providing farming information Ms Li-Wen Hsu, formal Director of ILan Tourism Ambassadors Association, for her guiding and providing data Ms Fen-Ju Kuo of Kun-Shan Univ ersity for Chinese editing Juao-Ming Hsu of Kun-Shan University for statistical analysis performed All the fieldworkers and respondents in I-L an who participated in the qualitative and quantitative parts of this study.

PAGE 5

v Qiong Wang of the University of Florid a for statistical analysis performed Tseng-Tien Hwang, for all his faith in my abilities. His support during my studies has been very valuable. My parents and sister Suzie and her fam ily for their continuous full support and encouragement My wife, YuMei, for her patience and fu ll support during this dissertation process All the teachers, students and administra tors from the Department of Tourism, Recreation and Sport Management and the School of Forest Resources and Conservation, University of Florida

PAGE 6

vi TABLE OF CONTENTS page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS.................................................................................................iv LIST OF TABLES.............................................................................................................ix LIST OF FIGURES...........................................................................................................xi ABSTRACT......................................................................................................................x ii CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................1 Statement of Purpose and Objectives...........................................................................3 Research Questions.......................................................................................................3 Scope of the Study........................................................................................................4 Significance of Study....................................................................................................5 Definitions.................................................................................................................... 7 2 LITERATURE REVIEW.............................................................................................8 Nature-based Tourism..................................................................................................8 Attitudes and Perceptions of Tourism Impacts.............................................................9 Social Exchange Theory.............................................................................................12 The Difference and Similarities between Exchange and Economic Theories....14 Relationship between Exchange and Economy...................................................15 Social Exchange Theory in Tourism..........................................................................16 Involvement in Community Development.................................................................19 Relevant Research to I-Lan........................................................................................23 Studies in Economic Impact................................................................................23 Studies in Leisure Farming and Bed and Breakfast Lodging..............................25 3 METHOD...................................................................................................................27 Study Site....................................................................................................................2 7 Natural Environment...........................................................................................27 The History of I-Lan............................................................................................29 Demographic Structure and Population Trend in I-Lan......................................30 Economic Development in I-Lan........................................................................30 Tourism Development in I-Lan...........................................................................31

PAGE 7

vii Stage 1 (1981-1989): Exploration, involvement and development.............32 Stage 2 (1989-1997): Development of cultural tourism and major tourism activities.......................................................................................32 Stage 3 (1997-2005): Consolidation of major tourism activities.................33 Major Tourism Types..........................................................................................34 Leisure farms................................................................................................34 Events and tour spots....................................................................................35 Tourism Strategies...............................................................................................37 Research Design.........................................................................................................37 Survey Instrument.......................................................................................................40 Development of Survey.......................................................................................40 Initial interviews...........................................................................................41 Impact survey...............................................................................................42 Development of final questionnaire.............................................................44 Data Collection...........................................................................................................45 The Sample..........................................................................................................45 Collecting Data....................................................................................................46 Data Analysis..............................................................................................................46 Variables..............................................................................................................46 Factor Analysis....................................................................................................47 4 RESULTS...................................................................................................................52 Description of Sample................................................................................................52 Socio-Demographic Characteristics....................................................................52 Business Characteristics......................................................................................53 Summary.....................................................................................................................81 5 DISCUSSION AND SUGGESTION.........................................................................82 Lessons Learned from I-Lan.......................................................................................90 Theoretical Implications.............................................................................................95 Future Research..........................................................................................................96 Conclusion..................................................................................................................98 APPENDIX A INITIAL INTERVIEW DATA AN D TOURISM IMPACT SCALE......................100 B INITIAL SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE.................................................................104 C QUESTIONNAIRE RESOURCES..........................................................................106 D FACTOR ANALYSIS..............................................................................................112 E FORMAL SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE...............................................................120 F OVERALL TOURISM IMPACTS.........................................................................127

PAGE 8

viii LIST OF REFERENCES.................................................................................................132 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH...........................................................................................145

PAGE 9

ix LIST OF TABLES Table page 3-1 Production Output of Business Entity in I-Lan County, 1970-2001........................31 3-2 Items selected for Initial Survey of Nature-Based Tourism Impacts.......................43 3-3 Reliability Analysis for Economic Impacts..............................................................50 3-4 Reliability Analysis for Social/Cultural Impacts.....................................................51 3-5 Reliability Analysis for Environmental Impacts......................................................51 4-1 Frequency of Respondents’ So cio-Demographic Characteristics............................53 4-2 Respondents’ Type of Business, Le ngth of Business and Organization..................54 4-3 Relationships between type of Business and Sales Revenue...................................55 4-4 Distribution of Respondents’ Pe rceptions of County Government..........................56 4-5 Distribution of Respondent s’ Level of Involvement................................................57 4.6 Overall Perceptions of Costs/Benefits of Tourism Impacts.....................................60 4-6-1 Correlation in between Overall Impact Factors.......................................................63 4-7 Significant Level between Socio-De mographics and Type of Business..................64 4-8 Relationship between Gender and Major Types of Business...................................64 4-9 Variables in Model...................................................................................................65 4-9-1 Multiple Regression Results of Attitudes toward Government...............................66 4-10 Multiple Regression Results of Past Pa rticipation in Tourism Planning over the Past 12 Months.........................................................................................................66 4-11 Multiple Regression Results of Willing to Participate in Tourism Planning over the next 12 Months...................................................................................................67 4-12 Multiple Regression Results of Implementation of Tourism Planning....................67

PAGE 10

x 4-13 Multiple Regression Results of Particip ation in Government Tourism Projects.....68 4-14 Multiple Regression Results of Cont ributing Money to Tourism Planning.............68 4-15 Variables in Model...................................................................................................69 4-16 Multiple Regression Results of Social/cultural Benefit ...........................................70 4-17 Multiple Regression Results of Economic Benefit 1 ................................................70 4-18 Multiple Regression Results of Environmental Benefit ...........................................71 4-18-1 Multiple Regression Results of Attitudes toward Government.............................72 4-18-2 Multiple Regression Results of Willing to Participate in Tourism Planning over the next 12 Months...........................................................................................72 4-18-3 Multiple Regression Results of Used Tourism Projects over the last 12 Months.................................................................................................................73 4-19 Variables in Model...................................................................................................73 4-20 Multiple Regression Results of Social/cultural Benefit ...........................................74 4-21 Multiple Regression Results of Economic Benefit 1: Job & Sales Revenue ............74 4-22 Multiple Regression Results of Environmental Benefit ...........................................75 4-23 Independent and Dependent Variables in Model.....................................................76 4-24 Multiple Regression Results of Social/cultural Benefit ...........................................77 4-25 Multiple Regression Results of Economic Benefit 1 ................................................78 4-26 Correlation between Socio-Demographics Business Characteristics and Level of Involvement..............................................................................................................79

PAGE 11

xi LIST OF FIGURES Figure page 1-1. Conceptual Model of Costs/Benefits of Tourism Impacts, Type of Involvement, and Level of Involvement..........................................................................................5 1-2. Three major Elements for Touris m Development in I-Lan: Local Industry, Environment and Culture...........................................................................................6 3-1. Map of Study Site......................................................................................................28 3-2: Seven Zones of I-Lan County....................................................................................29 3-3. Dong-Shan River Water Park ( I-Lan County Government Webpage 2005).............36 3-4. Jiaosi Hot Spring (I-Lan County Government Webpage 2005)................................36 3-5. Conceptual Model of Costs/Benefits of Nature-Based Tourism (NBT) Impacts, Type of Involvement, and Level of Involvement.....................................................39 3-6. Flowchart of Survey Design.....................................................................................41

PAGE 12

xii Abstract of Dissertation Pres ented to the Graduate School of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy NATURE-BASED TOURISM IMPACTS IN I-LAN, TAIWAN: BUSINESS MANAGERS’ PERCEPTIONS By Joe Ying Chin Yang August 2006 Chair: Taylor V. Stein Major Department: Forest Resources and Conservation Nature-based tourism (NBT) is an emerging industry in Taiwan. In Taiwan’s export-import oriented economy, I-Lan County has served as a leader – promoting NBT since the 1980s. Based on I’Lan’s experien ce in NBT, this dissertation reports on research that examines the tourism business owners’ perceptions of the social, economic, and environmental impacts nature-based tourism has had on I-Lan County. The framework of this study uses social exch ange theory to examine perceptions of costs/benefits. Data were collected in fall, 2005 (N=286), from fifteen types of business managers in I-Lan County. Perceptions of NBT imp acts were assessed through examination of participants’ socio-demographic characteristic s and type and level of involvement in tourism planning. Results indicate that 83% of respondents were raised in I-Lan and 41% operated their business between 2 to 6 years. Most business owners repor ted that NBT had a

PAGE 13

xiii moderate impact on their business – contributi ng approximately 30% of their annual sales and 31% of customers. Participants believed benefits to the social/cultural environment were the most apparent impact in I-Lan, fo llowed by environment and economic benefits. Environmental, social/cultura l and economic costs were not considered major problems. Neither gender nor education related to participants’ percepti on of impacts, but participants who were raised in I-Lan rated economic costs higher than newer residents. The findings show that social/cultural bene fits are the most apparent in I-Lan and these perceptions were likely shaped by I-Lan’s strong comm itment to NBT over the last several decades. The reviving of cultural id entity and cultural r ecognition in the region symbolizes the struggle of local culture ve rsus the dominant Chinese culture, which has been the mainstream culture in Taiwan since 1950s Another major finding in this study is th at participants’ pe rceptions of the government are more important in determini ng perceptions of benefits than actual interaction with the gov ernment. It indicates that th e county government might change its role from top-down decision-making style to co-partnering with local business people. The county can also alleviate its own financial burden by re leasing some of its tourism activities to private sectors and use private s ector resources for sustainable nature-based tourism development in I-Lan. Results show that with a better under standing of business owners’ perceived impacts, county tourism planners can improve the collaborative management of naturebased tourism in I-Lan.

PAGE 14

1 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION Many nations promote nature-based tourism to promote and sustain both nature and economics (Hearne & Salinas, 2002). Taiwan, wh ich has had much success expanding its economy over the last 40 years, is beginni ng to look toward to nature-based tourism (NBT) to continue its economic growth wh ile improving its environmental integrity. In Taiwan’s export-import oriented ec onomy, most of its counties have relied on establishing manufacturing plants and commercial companies for their economic development; however, I-Lan County has set a di fferent tone. It promoted tourism as its primary economic activity. In fact, I-Lan County was the first tourism-oriented county in Taiwan in the 1980s. Over the past twenty years, I-Lan has con tinued to attract people’s attention to its tourism opportunities and environmental prot ection. While other c ounties in Taiwan began to experience the serious environmen tal deterioration and pollution problems of industrialization and commercia lization, they have taken no te of I-Lan’s achievement. The major tourism events in I-Lan, such as a Children’s Festival and Green Expo, have been ranked the first and third, respectivel y, among top ten mega tourism events in Taiwan since 1999 (Lee, 2003) Tourism generates 16-20% of county’s ec onomic output, as much as $1.2 billion annually, and creates 46,000 jobs (I-Lan C ounty Government Report, 2004). I-Lan’s county government has led the way for tourism development in the county. Many successful events were created and deve loped by the county government. The local

PAGE 15

2 economy relies heavily on this government-led tourism, and local businesses are an important part of the overall county tourism development. Business associations usually have a close relationship with county govern ment and government agencies; and they also have influence on tourism developmen t (I-Lan County Government Report, 2004). But, what has really happened in I-Lan in these years? Since tourism development in ILan is twenty years old, it is an appropriate time to evaluate the impacts tourism has on the county’s businesses and stakeholders. Most tourism studies in I-Lan focus on a single sector (e.g., leisure farming) or special events (Green Expo, Children’s Festiv al). Research has not looked at tourism’s effect on the entire county. Other tourism studi es have focused on vi sitors or residents and only briefly examined local businesses. For these reasons, instead of focusing on residents’ perceptions of tourism impact, this study aims to examine NBT impacts on tourism related business managers’ percep tions for I-Lan County and attempts to understand the role that business managers pl ay in county government’s tourism decision making process. When examining tourism impacts, with th eir dual roles as business operators and residents, business managers can provide uni que perceptions about the critical issues related to tourism impacts. T hus, this study will use fifteen types of business managers as units of analysis, and the study area will c over the entire I-Lan County. The study will use existing literature, govern ment data, interviews, survey s and observations to achieve its research objectives. By examining busine ss managers’ perceptions of NBT impacts, we can understand the factors and elem ents that influence NBT’s economic, social/cultural and environmental impacts. The findings of this study wi ll be valuable for

PAGE 16

3 county government and researchers when planning, managing and evaluating tourism development in I-Lan. Statement of Purpose and Objectives The purpose of this study is to understand regional business managers’ perceptions of economic, social/cultura l, and environmental costs and benefits of NBT. The investigation of stakeholders’ perceptions of tourism impacts enables researchers and county government to better unde rstand the attitudes, belief and values of the people who implement the tourism industry in the county. Therefore, this study will provide implications for regional governments in de veloping countries which are transitioning from traditional extrac tive industries to NBT. This study differs from others in the same area of study in two general perspectives. First, the study assesse s factors influencing fifteen types of business managers’ percepti ons in the entire county. Second, the study examines the NBT development in I-Lan, wh ere NBT is at its inception stage for the entire country. The overall objectives of this study include to understand stakeholders’ perceptions and attitudes regarding economic, social/cultural, environmental and other factors for NBT in I-Lan and examine the relationship among stakeholde rs’ socio-demographic characteristics, type and level of involvement in t ourism and their relation to perception of NBT’s costs and benefits. Research Questions This study will attempt to an swer the following questions: 1. What are the stakeholders’ perceptions of economic, social/cultural and environmental costs/benefits of nature-based tourism? 2. How do stakeholders’ socio-demographic char acteristics (e.g., gende r, age, level of education, location of residence, length of owning business) relate to their

PAGE 17

4 involvement in tourism planning (as charac terized by type of involvement, attitude towards the government, and level of involvement)? 3. How does stakeholders’ involvement in na ture-based tourism (as characterized by type of involvement, attitude towards th e government, and level of involvement) relate to their perceptions of costs/benefits? 4. How do stakeholders’ socio-demographic a nd business characteristics relate to perception of costs/benefits? 5. How do stakeholders’ socio-demographic ch aracteristics and level of involvement relate to their perception of costs/benefits? Scope of the Study Based on data from both I-Lan County and central Taiwan gove rnments, several business entities including hotel/motel, re staurant/food, gift/souve nir stores, leisure farms/bed &breakfast, buses, car/motorcycl e rental, whale-watching boaters, travel agency, advertising designs, printing, fina ncing institute and other tourism related business (I-Lan County Statistical Abstract, 2004) were purposely chosen to take part in this study. In other words, the results ca nnot be inferred to a larger population. Socio-demographic characteristics, busine ss characteristics, attitudes toward the government, type of involvement and level of involvement will be selected as the indicators by which perception of costs and benefits of nature-based tourism will be measured. These form major components of th e conceptual model, which will guide this study (Figure 1-1). Due to issues of time a nd costs of surveys, a one-time measure of each outcome variable will be used. Qualitativ e data from observations and interviews will be used to supplement the major findings from the overall survey, which was designed to answer the research questions.

PAGE 18

5 Figure 1-1. Conceptual Model of Costs/Be nefits of Tourism Impacts, Type of Involvement, and Level of Involvement Significance of Study When Taiwan pursued economic development through developing manufacturing industries over the past forty years, I-Lan had little involvement in this movement. Its economic development has always been 10 to 20 years behind other Taiwan counties (Shi, 1994). In the 1980s, rather than accepting th e traditional manufacturing industry, which had been pushed hard by the central gove rnment, I-Lan chose a tourism development policy as its direction for economic devel opment and stressed environmental protection as part of this development. According to the county tourism plan, t ourism resulted in the combination of “Local industries” and “Local humanities and cultural environment.” In the past, tourism planning was largely based on supply-demand theory, which focused mainly on environmental resources in terms of supply without considering the relationship between resources and local residents. Accordi ng to I-Lan’s Tourism Comprehensive Plan Sociodemographic Type of Involvement Level of Involvement Perceived costs & benefits

PAGE 19

6 (1996), the most important issues ought to be the role of local residents and their involvement in tourism when c onsidering recreat ional resources. According to the county plan, the combina tion of integrating and assisting local industries is the local government’s fundamental task for tourism development. I-Lan is a pioneer in Taiwan’s tourism development hist ory. Since I-Lan has not followed Taiwan’s traditional industrial development path, some look on I-Lan as backward with an antidevelopment attitude that is based on “nostalgia” (Chen, 2003). From another perspective, I-Lan has evaluate d its options and chosen a unique path of development. It does not want to follow an “over-developmen t” philosophy but is choosing to rethink and reconstruct its path using tourism as the tool (Chen, 2003; Shen, 2002). The county government promotes “Tour ism I-Lan,” and also promotes “Environment I-Lan” and “Cu lture I-Lan” as county policies. Through developing tourism, I-Lan tries to find a solution for reviving local industrie s while attempting to consider both environmental protection and cultural preservation (I-Lan County Tourism Comprehensive Plan, 1996). Figure 1-2 illu strates the relation am ong local industries, local environment and local culture in I-Lan. Figure 1-2. Three major Elements for Touris m Development in I-L an: Local Industry, Environment and Culture Local Industry Environment Culture

PAGE 20

7 Nature-based tourism is a new concept in Taiwan. From Taiwan’s perspective, it is meaningful to understand the county’s role a nd its transformation from a primary fishing, agricultural society into a recr eation and tourism society. In f act, I-Lan County is the first county that spent money to professionally rese arch and identify guidelines for its county planning (Chen, 2003, Lee, 2003); however, a study of stakeholders’ perceptions of nature-based tourism’s impacts is needed. Definitions The following definitions are used in this study: Nature-based tourism: Tourism, which depends on nature and enhances nature (Weaver, 1998). In this paper, nature-based tourism is defined as outdoor tourism activities in natural areas such as lake, mountains, forests, wetlands, waterfalls, beaches, natural trails and engaging in leisure farming, whale-watching, birdwatching, kayaking, biking, walking, etc. Perception: Perception in humans describes the process whereby sensory stimulation is translated into organize d experience (Lindsay and Norman, 1977) Tourism impact: Tourism affects indivi duals, social groups, economies and the environment. Tourism impacts usually are measured by economic, social, cultural and environmental aspects (Mathieson and Wall, 1982) Costs/benefits: Tourism impacts can be an alyzed in positive (b enefits) and negative (costs) ways in terms of economic, social/cultural and environmental aspects (Ap, 1992). Stakeholder: A stakeholder in an organi zation is any group or individual who can affect or be affected by the achievement of the organization’s objectives (Freeman, 1984). Involvement: An action of information s earching or extended problem solving behavior (Bettman 1979; Engel and Black well 1982), which could be measured by time and/or money (Havitz and Dimanche, 1990).

PAGE 21

8 CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW Nature-based Tourism Nature-based tourism is concerned with the direct enjoyment of some relatively undisturbed phenomenon of nature (Valentine 1992). Eagles (1997) stated that naturebased tourism had its roots in the desire of people to experi ence nature in their leisure time. This form of tourism refers to travel mo tivated totally or in part by interests in the natural history of a place, where visits comb ine education, recreation and often adventure (Laarman & Gregersen 1996). Many researchers stress the importance of appropriate management for sustainable NBT development. Stein (2001, p. 6) points out that “like any use of rural and natural areas, nature-based tourism has the same pot ential to change, alter, and degrade the environment as other industries.” Buckle y and Pannell (1990) ar gue that NBT could result in low environmental impact, and gain high sustainable economic return if well planned and managed. Buultjens and Davis (2001) argue that nature-based tourism has the potential to cause significant ecosystem da mage without effective management. Stein (2001) argues that natural areas are unique unto themselves and when humans enter into the mix, no single guideline can provide for a best solu tion. The challenge for researchers is to identify and analyze the impacts of NBT to better manage for those impacts.

PAGE 22

9 Attitudes and Perceptions of Tourism Impacts This study uses business stakeholders’ pe rceptions to examine NBT impacts in ILan County. Attitudes and perceptions of touris m impacts have played an important role in tourism studies. Researchers have used perceptions of reside nts and tourists to understand tourism impacts in many tourism destinations. For instance, Hong (2001) studied I-Lan tourism development by using the concepts of power network and county commissioners’ charisma to analyze the economic development in I-Lan. Hong argued that although the deve lopment of agriculture and tour ism in the 1980s and 1990s didn’t improve much of the economic growth in I-Lan compared with other areas in Taiwan, the tourism policy still gained resi dents’ strong support due to residents’ awareness of the importance of environmental protection and the perceptions of maximum benefits of tourism for I-Lan. According to Andereck and Vogt (2000), research about resident attitudes or perceptions of tourism constitutes one of the most systematic and well-studied areas of tourism. Resident attitudes toward touris m—more specifically, perceptions of tourism impacts— have been a subject of research for more than 30 years. Jafari (1986) noted that tourism research focused on the positive as pects of tourism impacts in the 1960s, the negative aspects in th e 1970s, and a more balanced appr oach in the 1980s. Research in the 1990s has shifted focus to the study of re sidents at the community level. Studies of residents’ attitudes toward tourism have often been conducted in rural communities where they search for opportunities to ga in economic viability (Andereck and Vogt, 2000). For example, Pizam (1978) investigated residents’ perceptions of the impacts of tourism in Cape Cod, Massachusetts. The st udy found that a much larger portion of the resident and the entrepreneur sample felt an overall negative effect from the impact of

PAGE 23

10 tourism than those who felt an overall pos itive effect. The most negative attitudes towards tourism on the Cape were reside nts employed in non-tourism enterprises, followed by residents employed in tourism bus iness, residents who were unemployed and non-tourism business owners; while the tourism business owners expressed the most positive attitudes. Belisle and Hoy (1980) studied residents’ perception of tourism at Santa Marta, Colombia. They found that in developing count ries, the economic benefits of tourism might not be as great as often thought, wh ereas the environmental and social impacts from tourism were detrimental. The study f ound that positive impacts of tourism were reported more than twice as often as the leve l of negative impacts of tourism. Among five independent variables, distance from touris m destination, economic status, education, age and sex, only distance from tourism destination significantly affected the perception of tourism impact. Liu and Var (1986) studied resident attit udes toward tourism impacts in Hawaii. They found that residents st rongly agreed that touris m provides many economic and cultural benefits, but were ambivalent about environmental benefits. Residents regard environmental protection as being a more im portant priority than tourism’s economic benefits, but they were not willing to lower th eir standard of living to achieve this goal. The leakage of economic benefits is a major issue many residents face, and researchers have used elements of leakage to study the economic benefits of NBT. For instance, Weaver and Lawton (2001) studied resi dents’ perceptions of tourism impacts in Australia and used local businesses as controlled by locals to measure the economic leakage. The researchers found that local resi dents did not perceive significant economic

PAGE 24

11 leakage. Andriotis & Vaughan (2003) studied residents’ attitudes toward tourism development in Crete and used tourism money moving to businesses outside the region as measures of economic leakage. This study f ound that economic leakage was apparent and perceived negatively. Kao (1994) and Chen a nd Ko (1994) studied tourism impacts in Taiwan and found that resident s in tourism destinations pe rceived leakage of economic benefit as a negative economic impact. Researchers who conducted these studies made the argument that residents’ perceptions of and attitudes toward tourism impacts were as important as the actual impacts, if not more so. In most studies, perceptions of impacts or attitudes were measured using a series of agreement sc ales (McCool and Martin, 1994; Weaver and Lawton, 2001; Deccio and Baloglu, 2002; Andere ck and Vogt 2000; Sirakaya, Teye and Somez, 2002; Andriotis and Vaughan, 2003; Mc Gehee and Andereck, 2004). According to Mathieson and Wall (1982), th ere are three percei ved impacts of tourism: 1) economic, 2) physical, and 3) social. This study will ex amine the stakeholders’ perception of NBT impacts in economic, social/cultural and e nvironmental aspects, and the measurement will be made using agreement scales. Statements of perceptions in tourism impact in this study will be mostly adapted from Ap and Crompton (1998) a nd Weaver and Lawton (2001) (See Appendix B) There are several studies about residents’ perceptions of tourism impacts in Taiwan. Kao (1994) studied reside nts’ perceptions of tourism imp acts at Kuan-Yin and found that residents perceived overall tourism’s benefits exceeded its costs. Positive economic impacts included improving transportation, improving public utilities, increasing recreational facilities, incr easing income, not increasing price of goods. Negative

PAGE 25

12 impacts included increasing prices of real estate and leakage of economic revenues. Positive social impacts included promoting local history and culture and maintaining public safety. Negative impacts included the disruption of residents’ daily life. Chen and Kao (1994) indicated that resi dents perceived that large companies received the most benefit from tourism, but residents still saw increases in their personal incomes associated with tourism. They al so noticed several negative social effects including changing social norms, increasing crime, and widening the gap between the rich and the poor. Studies from Chen (2003), Lin (2003) and P. T. Ho (2004) indicated that residents perceived more positive im pacts than negative impacts, especially economic impacts. They were most concer ned with negative environmental impacts followed by social/cultural negative impacts. Social Exchange Theory Social exchange theory emerged in th e 1950s as a way to better understand interchanges between individuals and organi zations. According to social exchange theory, exchange occurs between individuals who are known to each other, as well as between the anonymous traders of economic exchange (Ben-Porath 1980). Social exchange is based on the exchange of rewa rds and costs to quantify the values of outcomes from different situations for an individual (Thibaut and Kelley, 1959). Bagozzi (1979, p.434) stated that exchange involves “a transfer of something tangible or intangible, actual or symbolic, betw een two or more social actors.” Social exchange theory is based on the c oncept that people are reward-pursuing and punishment-avoiding, and people are motivated to action by expectation of profits. Rewards are not only the monetary returns, but may be social or psychological means (Napier and Bryant, 1980). Skidmore (1975) sugg ests that individuals will likely engage

PAGE 26

13 in an exchange under three conditions: 1) the result of rewards are valued, 2) the exchange will produce valued rewards, and 3) perceived rewards exceed perceived costs. Yuki (1994) points out that social excha nge combines both material benefit and psychological benefit. Material benefit in cludes salary. Psychological benefit includes position, loyalty and trust. Foa and Foa (1974) have developed an ex change theory using six categories to describe the resources: love status, information, money, goods and services. Based on Foa and Foa’s theory, of the dimensions of particulatism and conc reteness underlie the six categories, and resources pe rceived as similar are more likely to be exchanged than dissimilar resources. An important aspect of an exchange between individuals not directly included in Foa and Foa’s theory is resour ce scarcity. Becker (1976) argues that the fundamental economic approach to human beha vior is the allocation of scare means (or resources) to satisfy competing ends. Br inberg and Castell ( 1982) argue that the availability (or scarcity) of a resource influences the pa tterns of exchange. Social exchange theory is a framework for explica ting movement of resources, during imperfect market conditions, between networks via a social process (Emerson, 1987). Research shows that trust is positively associated w ith economic performance in the sense that trust greatly affects the performance of a society’s institutions, including firms and governments. For example, a study by La Porta, Lopez-de-Silanes, Shleifer, and Vishny (1997) showed that both economic and social performance is positively affected by trust in exchange and other soci al relations. The higher level of trust among actors, the more efficient the combine actions.

PAGE 27

14 Studies show that mutual trust has significant positive effects on economic performance (e.g., sales on large organizations ) as well as on social (and government) efficiency and public participation. Research also found that higher le vels of trust also have positive effects on GNP growth, so a soci ety with high trust is more likely to have faster GNP growth than other societies (L a Porta, Lopez-de-Silanes, Shleifer, and Vishny, 1997). Fukuyama (1996) observed that industrialized societies such as the United States, Japan, and Germany have been capable of bu ilding an efficient corporate economy as a result of social cooperation by high levels of trust. These findings suggest that mutual trust within large economic organizations repres ent a major factor of their success in the market, which is measured by the volume of exchange. On the other hand, low trust or lack of it appears to have negative impacts on economic as well as non-economic performance (La Porta, Lopez-de-S ilanes, Shleifer, and Vishny, 1997). The Difference and Similarities between Exchange and Economic Theories According to Emerson (1962, 1972), social exchange theory differs from traditional study of exchange in economics. The major difference is that neoclassical economic theory views the actor (a person or a firm) as working with a market rather than with other actors. In the various forms of soci al exchange theory, the exchange relation between two specific actors is the central concept of the theory. Social and economic theories of exchange might look similar, but they remain radically different in their conceptual core. Economic sociology regards exchange transact ions as embedded in or governed by institutions, cultural va lues, and social relations rather than as self-regulating mechanisms (Pressman & Montecinos, 1996). According to Weber (1968), from a sociological

PAGE 28

15 viewpoint, the market is not just an exch ange mechanism but also a complex social structure. Exchange is in essence a special case of social action, with not only formal rationality but also extra-economic rationality. Relationship between Exchange and Economy Exchange has been accepted by many mark eting scholars as the core concept of marketing (Bagozzi 1975; Hunt 1976; Ko tler 1984). Alderson (1957, p. 15) stated “Marketing is the exchange, which takes pl ace between consuming groups and supplying groups.” Because of marketing’s close associ ation to economics, di stinguishing between marketing and economics is sometimes difficul t. Sahlins (1972) stated that mutual exchange began in primitive so cieties where exchange rates were set by social contract and equilibrium was established by reciprocit y. Reciprocity is the process whereby this mutual exchange of acceptable te rms is actualized. It is a so cial interaction in which the movement of one party evokes a compensa ting movement in some other party. The economy as the realm of exchange is implicated in the socio-sphere as the most complex domain (Boulding, 1970). Accord ing to Kreps (1997), actors in economic exchange, as well as other social relations are guided both by ex trinsic and intrinsic motivation. The first is in utility/profit seeking by following the law of supply and demand and other economic laws, and the second in altruism, the sense of duty, and the like. Intrinsic motivations express non-econom ic considerations, internal values and rules, norms and economic ince ntives interact (Kreps, 1997) in exchange as well as in other actions including household behavi or (Bergstrom 1996; Lindbeck 1997). The pertinence of various fo rms of altruistic behavior in an economy often is considerable, as indicated by the incidence of charity in the modern economy. Research (Rose-Ackerman, 1996) indicates that ove rall, 73% of Americans make voluntary

PAGE 29

16 contributions (survey in 1993) to different types of charities. Research on private charity reports that most donors are guided by generous impulses a nd thus experience intrinsic benefits from the act of giving rather than extrinsic (monetary) payoffs (Rose-Ackerman, 1996). Social Exchange Theory in Tourism Due to limited explanation in previous studies about the reason for people’s positive or negative attitudes toward tour ism (Kayat, 2002), Ap (1992) introduced a social exchange model to explain perceptions of tourism. Social exchange theory has been considered an appropriate framework in understanding reside nts’ perceptions of tourism (Ap 1990; Nash 1989; Long, Perdue a nd Allen 1990), and it has been adopted as the framework for the conceptual model presented in this paper (See Figure 1). Ap (1992) developed a social exchange model for the understanding of residents’ perceptions of tourism. In terms of tourism, social exchange theory explains the exchange of tangible or intangible resour ces that residents and tourists may give and receive in the host-guest context. Residents ar e willing to enter into exchan ge with tourists if they receive more benefits than costs (Jurowski, Uysal and Williams, 1997). Based on social exchange, researchers assumed that economic benefits derived from tourism development in exchange for social and envi ronmental impacts (Harrill, 2003). Sutton (1967) used social exchange to de fine tourism relationships between hosts and guests. He suggested that the relati onship is asymmetrical and unbalanced in character. Pearce (1989) supports the concept of asymmetry to expl ain hosts’ negative perceptions of tourists, And st ates “… that marked asymmetry of frequent, transitory contact with the opportunity for exploitation and interact ion difficulties due to large cultural differences are the important elements shaping a negative host reaction to tourists

PAGE 30

17 (1989, p 85). Mathieson and Wall (1982) also stat e that the tourist-host relationships are unequal and unbalanced in character. Turner ( 1986) suggests that hosts will engage an exchange if they can obtain some bene fit without receiving unacceptable costs. The concept of reciprocity or equality is probably the most central to social exchange theory. Reciprocity in exchange m eans that each actor will provide benefits to the other equitably and with units of exchange that ar e important to the actors. Reciprocity suggests that the resource exch ange is roughly equal, and reciprocity is interpreted and used differently by exchange theorists (Ap, 1992). Several studies have shown that three main elements of the exchange process can be identified, economic, environmental, and social/cultural, in terms of resident perception of tourism impacts – costs and benefits (King, Pizam, and Milman 1993; Milman and Pizma, 1988; Long, Perdue a nd Allen 1990; Schluter and Var 1988). For instance, Jurowski, Uysal and Williams (1997), using social exchange theory, presented a study to examine attitudes towards tourism amo ng residents in five counties at the Mount Rogers National Recreation Area, Virginia. Th ey found that residents’ perceptions of economic, social and environmental impacts depend on four independent variables: 1) economic gain, 2) community resource use, 3) community attachment, and 4) natural environment. Gursoy, Jurowski and Uysal (2002) criticized Jurowski, Uysal and Williams’ (1997) model and aggregated the costs and benefits factors into three categories: economic costs/benefits, social costs/benef its and environmental costs/benefits. They proposed a new model that expanded on the findings of Jurowski Uysal and Williams’ (1997) study by segregating the impacts into costs and benefits and then examining the

PAGE 31

18 influence of these two on support. They also added two new construc ts: the state of the local economy and the level of community concern. Gursoy and Rutherford (2004) proposed and tested a new model which expa nds on the findings of the models proposed by Jurowski, Uysal and Williams (1997) and Gursoy, Juroski and Uysal (2002) by breaking down the perceived impact into five areas: 1) economic benefits; 2) social benefits; 3) social costs; 4) cultural benefits; a nd 5) cultural costs. Deccio and Balogue (2002) examined nonhost community residents’ perceptions of the spillover effects of the 2002 Winter Olym pic Games in Salt Lake City, Utah. They found that residents, who are environmenta lly conscious, did not support the Olympics; those who are economically dependent on tour ism and those who par ticipate in outdoor activities generally supported the Olympics. In addition, they noted that the level of community attachment of residents did not in fluence the perception of the Olympics or support for the Olympics. Sirakaya, Teye a nd Somez (2002) used social exchange model to study residents’ support for tourism deve lopment in the Centra l Region of Ghana. They used seven factors to examine resident s’ attitudes about economic, social/cultural, and environmental aspects, while also asked questions about personal involvement in the tourism decision-making process. The findings of their study support the results of other studies in developed nations th at residents’ support for t ourism development is based on their perception of costs and benefits. Andriotis and Vaughan (2003) used social exchange theory to examine the identification and explanati on of the attitudes of urba n residents toward tourism development on Crete. They found that within communities there are segments expressing different levels of support/conc ern for various tourism impacts (economic,

PAGE 32

19 socio-cultural, and environmental). In additi on, they also noted that level of education can determine residents’ attitudes. Highly educated respondents were more likely to express concern about the impacts of tourism. McGehee and Andereck (2004) used social exchange theory to examine factors predicting rural residents’ support of touris m in communities in Arizona. They found that personal benefit has a significant relationshi p with tourism impact. Older people tend to perceive tourism more negatively. Respondents, who lived in the co mmunity as children, were more likely to perceive tourism imp acts negatively. There is positive relationship between tourism planning and both support for additional tourism and tourism’s negative impacts. In Taiwan, social exchange theory has been applied in psychology, management, information technology and tourism studies. For instance, T.C. Chen (2004) studied relationships among factors affecting customers’ choice, social exchange antecedents and loyalty in travel agency. Involvement in Community Development Involvement in community development plays an important role in tourism development. Engel and Blackwell (1982) stated that involvement could be measured by the time spent, the number of alternatives examined, and the extent of the decision process. Bettman (1979) stated level of involve ment as a mediating variable in the search for information. Assael (1992) argued that involvement means understanding a person’s consumer behavior and decision-making pro cess. Stone (1984) defined involvement as time and/or intensity of effort expended in undertaking of activities. Several researchers discussed measures of involvement including amount of time spent, frequency of participation and e xperience (Bryan, 1979; Donnelly, Vaske and

PAGE 33

20 Graefe, 1986; McFarlane, 1994; McIntyre and Pigram, 1992; Scott and Godbey, 1994; William & Huffman, 1986). Havitz and Dimanc he (1990) stated that time and money expended could explain level of involveme nt. Fesenmaier and Johnson (1989) used behavioral measures of involvement in Te xas and they include length of planning time devoted to decision-making as the indicat or. In recreation, in volvement could be measured by frequency of participation, m oney spent, ownership of equipment, and number of memberships (Kim, Scott and Crompton, 1997). Researchers show that there are strong linkages between the degrees of community participation and the effectiveness of touris m development. For example, Stein, Anderson and Thompson (1999) examined community bene fits associated with Minnesota State Parks. Using the benefits-based management framework, they found that park mangers and planners needed more interaction with community residents. They suggested that park managers and planners needed to: 1) pr ovide benefits related to specific community needs; 2) balance community and visitor needs; and 3) offer communities valuable partnerships with park s to provide benefits. Jacobs (2002) examined the grassroots environmental movement in Latin America and European countries, and found that Braz ilians residing in the urban periphery link their own local environmental concerns to global consideration and concern for environmental issues is closely related to a wide range of community involvement. Kull (2002) studied community-based natural re sources management in Madagascar, and argued that the success of the community -based approach depends upon the real empowerment of local resource users and attention to legitimacy of local institution. The

PAGE 34

21 empowerment of local community resident s can bring the success of environmental issues when dealing with diffe rent level of governments. Stem, Lassoie, Lee, Deshler, and Schelhas (2003) conducted research in Costa Rica and argued that nature-based tourism offers communities an opportunity to improve their well-being and economic livelihood. It also encourages people in the community to conserve their forests and wildlife. Stein, Anderson and Kelly (1998) studied stakeholders’ values to apply ecosystem mana gement at Red River Basin, in Minnesota and North Dakota landscape. They found that community members va lued the landscape for a variety of non-economic and economic reasons. Community members perceived that the landscape not only generated income but also affected their quality of life. Simpson, Wood and Daws (2003) studied th e relationship between governments and communities and suggested that the challenge for government is to enable the processes of capacity building, partic ipation and community ownership without creating unnecessary pressures on the time, personal ener gy and the finances of residents of rural communities. Providing resources to support th ese processes will increase the long-term benefits for rural communities. Agrawal and Gibson (1999) argued that in examining community development and conservation, a focus on: 1) multiple intere sts and actors within communities, 2) how these stakeholders influence d ecision-making, and 3) the intern al and external institutions that shape the decision-making process, are more meaningful than a focus on community itself. Haywood (2000) stated that community participation in tourism planning is a process of involving all relevant and interested parties (local government officials, local citizens, architects, developers, business pe ople, and planners) in such a way that

PAGE 35

22 decision-making is shared. According to Ha ywood, there are three goals of community tourism planning: 1) to identify the possibili ties and choices about fu ture tourism within the community, 2) to examine each possibility carefully in terms of probable impacts, and 3) to reflect the preferences of people, whose lives and livi ng environment are influenced by the decision made, in tourism planning. Resident involvement in tourism decisionmaking appears to influence the level of support and attitude toward tourism and tourists (Cooke, 1982). When residents are involved with various community tourism ac tivities, they are more favorable toward community change and development (Allen and Gibson, 1987; Ayers and Potter, 1989; Rosentraub and Thompson, 1981). Madrigal (1 993) studied two Arizona communities and found that residents with positive percep tions of tourism believed that they could influence tourism decisions. The involvement in tourism decision-making and the empowerment of local community members has been practiced in I-Lan. For example, the involvement in tourism decision-making process for township s in I-Lan such as Shan-Shin and YuanShan, where local communities were able to incorporate input from local residents and share the process of decision-making in t ourism planning, reflected a linkage between environmental issues and tourism (I-La n County Government Report, 2002). The empowerment of local community resident s can bring the success of environmental issues when dealing with different level of governments. For instance, in I-Lan, the fiftytwo acre wetland near the LanYang River mouth was originally to be established as an industrial park by Taiwan centr al government. However, due to strong resistance from both local residents and count y government based on fears of environmental pollution,

PAGE 36

23 the area was established as a wetland protec tion zone in 1998 (I-Lan County Government Report, 2002). Relevant Research to I-Lan With the support of I-Lan county governme nt, many researchers in Taiwan have studied a variety of issues in I-Lan. There are more than 100 theses and dissertations regarding I-Lan issues, and about fifty pape rs studying tourism in I-Lan. The following are some research projects related to tourism impact. Studies in Economic Impact Chen (1998) used the travel cost met hod to study the value Chi-Lan forest recreation and the results s howed that the average re creation value was NT$223.6 per visitor. Lin and Tang (1999) conducted visitor surveys in th e Fushan Botanical Garden and found that visitors’ primary motivation wa s appreciation for the environment. They also found that sightseeing, learning about trees, and taki ng a walk were the most preferred activities in the ga rden. Li (2000) studied the re creational resource use and pricing strategies at Wu-Lo Keng Scenic Park and found that I-Lan residents agreed to pay a small portion of admission fees or cleaning fees for using the park. Chen, Wang, Huang and Lin (2002) used the travel cost method to study the economic value of recreational benefits at Fu shan Botanical Garden and concluded that the total annual economic benefits for the garden reached NT$22,830,000 (US$681,492). K.L. Chen (2002) used expenditure regressions to estimate 2001 I-Lan Green Expo and found the direct economic benefit to be NT$64,350,000 and total benefit to be NT$189,780,000. Chen and Chang (2003) studied the economic impacts of leisure agriculture and industria l culture in I-Lan. They found that the total econo mic benefit for I-Lan was-between NT$2,700,000 and NT$189,780,000 fo r eight major cultural activities

PAGE 37

24 in 2000-2002. Intangible benefits we re found to be-between NT$920,000 and NT$98,380,000. K.L. Chen (2004) examined the economic impact of the Green Expo in I-Lan and found that 64 businesses increased their sales revenue and 236 were unchanged. Hong (2000) examined the perception of I-L an’s “anti-development” attitude to study local government’s strategies and choi ces in economic development. The findings show that I-Lan’s economic growth was stil l far behind most of the other counties in Taiwan after twenty years of tourism de velopment. Hung used Thailand, Hong Kong and Switzerland as examples to explain tourism’s contribution to their societies. The findings showed that productivity of tourism contai ns a smaller portion of economic revenue for an industrial country such as Switzerland comp ared to developing countries like Thailand. The reason was that the tourism industry produced low profits compared to the manufacturing industry, with high pr oductivity resulting in high profits. Shen (2002) argued that sin ce the 1980s, the non-position party resisted pressure from the authoritarian ce ntral government and industrialization for its economic development. Adapted from Shen (2002), T.S. Chen (2003) studied the formation and promotion of tourism policy in I-Lan. He argue d that in order to form the tourism policy, the county government gathered professional elites, local communities, local industries and local activists in a long-term inter action and mutual cons ent and accumulated experiences to establish a unique “alternative development” style in Taiwan. Kuo (2004) studied tourism development and local governan ce in I-Lan, and argued that I-Lan still was ahead of other areas in tourism, but th at the county government should include more private sector and local non-profit organi zations involvement in tourism for its sustainable development.

PAGE 38

25 Y.L. Chen (2004) examined the Jiaosi hot spring industry and regional change and concluded that I-Lan regional development has been gradually entra pped into the pattern of development of Taiwan’s west coast. Th e development of “EP, Culture, Tourism” by the county government has not created a new and productive direction for I-Lan. Instead, the government has repackaged the existi ng system under the pressure of economic stagnation in the 1980s. The development of the Jiaosi Hot Spring has resulted in a scarcity of hot spring res ources, the region’s environmental decline, and a general imbalance of local industry development. Studies in Leisure Farming and Bed and Breakfast Lodging F.J. Chen (2002) examined the demand for leisure housing as a result of construction of the Pei-I Highway. Using scenar io analysis, Chen suggests that after the completion of Pei-I Highway in 2006, there will be an increase in the demand for people from other counties for leisure activities in I-Lan. Specifically this will include an increasing demand for leisure housing by 34%, increasing demand for membership clubs by 20% and increasing demand for leisure centers by 46%. Yang (2003) studied visitors’ evaluation of B&B’s in I-Lan. In an evaluation of B&B facilities, visitors most desire kitchen and barbecue facilities, followed by parking space, and emergency lighting equipment. In an evaluation of services, visitors desired provision and arrangement of breakfast, transportation service, and arrangement of special events. In an evalua tion of environmental landscapes visitors desired indoor and outdoor trees, yard landscaping, and surroundi ng landscapes. For recr eational activities, visitors preferred feeding animals, a nd participating in folk festivals. H.Y. Chen (2004) studied how the personality of B&B managers affects their role in decision-making at the Dong-Shan River leisure agricultural area in I-Lan. The

PAGE 39

26 findings concluded that agreeableness was one of the most important personality characteristics in determining their role in decision-making. This was followed by consciousness, extroversion, openness and neuroticism among characteristics of managers’ personality. Yu (2004) used B&B’ s in I-Lan to study the meaning of home. The findings concluded that the meaning of home in B&B’s is established under the effects of ideology, the meaning of obj ect, and the personal relationship. Chu (2004) studied leisure farming and marketing in I-Lan County. The findings indicated that the driving forces of the “operational basis” for leisure farms were the current operating situation and competitiveness. The driving forces of future development for leisure farms were market segmenta tion, innovation, resour ces integration and establishment of evaluation system. Huang (2004) used an analytic hierarchy process to establish an evaluation model for Taiwan leisure agriculture. The findings showed that natural resources attractions were the most important. This was followed by integrating, creating customer-value, and the potential market. Recreational safety was th e most important element within “natural resources attractions.” Liu (2005) studied the environmental design of leisure agricultural areas from the viewpoint of ecological design in I-Lan. The fi ndings indicated that managers in leisure farms focus more on making profits and often make environmentally unfriendly decisions when balancing ecological concerns and comm ercial benefits. On the other hand, most owners in leisure agricultural areas are still devoted to tradi tional agricultural production; thus, they have flexible choices rega rding ecological design, which is more environmentally friendly.

PAGE 40

27 CHAPTER 3 METHOD The purpose of this research was to examine I-Lan business managers’ perceptions of nature-based tourism impacts and to understand the relationship among sociodemographic characteristics, le vel of involvement and their perception of impacts. This chapter includes a description of the study site research design, survey instrument, data collection, and data analysis. Study Site Natural Environment The study area is I-Lan County, Taiwan. Approximately 463,000 people live in the 2,143 square kilometer county, which is located in the northeast corner of Taiwan Island. I-Lan is in the shape of a triangle opening to ward the northeast. It faces the Pacific Ocean on the east, and is surrounded by mountains on the west, south and north. Because of its geographic location, it has limited access to th e other areas in Taiwan (Figure 3-1). Three quarters of the county is mountainous Combined with its wet climate, the county’s rivers and creeks form a unique landscape in I-Lan. Due to the rugged environment, large-scale economic developm ent is limited. I-Lan is situated in a subtropical climate with an av erage annual temperature of 22o C year round and 210 average annual days of rain. It has the mo st humid area in Taiwa n. In winter northeast seasonal winds are as strong as light typhoons, which affect wint er tourism, especially for whale watching activities.

PAGE 41

28 Map of Taiwan Map of I-LanCounty Map of Taiwan Map of I-LanCounty Figure 3-1. Map of Study Site I-Lan is one of Taiwan’s major commercial fishing areas. In a ddition, it is one of northern Taiwan’s major agricu ltural production areas and it also has the largest forested area in northern Taiwan. I-Lan is full of diverse natural attractions, which include beaches, offshore islands, tall mountains, fore sts, lakes, waterfalls, hot springs and unique cold springs. Furthermore, due to its low development, I-Lan’s natural landscape is well preserved. Based on I-Lan’s geography, the county is zoned into seven areas (Figure 3-2): 1. Central Plain Area: Includes the cities of I-Lan, Jiaosi, C huang Wei, WuJih and Lou-Dong; 2. Northern Lan Yang River: Includes the c ity of Yuan-Shan as well as important natural attractions that include Lan Ya ng River, Te-Tz-Ko River, Wu-Feng-Chi waterfall, Jiaosi Hot Spring, Yuan -Shan Hot Spring, and Lake Dragon; 3. Southern Lan Yang Rive: Includes the cities of Shan-Hsin, Dong-Shan as well as Dong-Shan river, Wu-Lou-Kun, Lake Plum;

PAGE 42

29 4. SuAo, NanFangAo areas: Include the city of SuAo and the natural area known as Cold Spring; 5. 5. Northern Tou-Cheng coastal area: Includes the two natural attractions known as Turtle Island and Tou-Cheng beach; 6. 6. Dong-Ao, Nan-Ao area: Includes mos tly rural areas along the scenic coast of I-Lan; and 7. 7. Northern Yu-Lan Lan-Yang River Va lley area: Includes the cities of TaiPing Shan and Ming-Chi as well as the Chi-Lan Forest Recreation Scenic areas and current residence of the remaining Atayal people (I-Lan County Tourism Comprehensive Plan, 1996). 7 6 4 3 1 2 5 Figure 3-2: Seven Zones of I-Lan County The History of I-Lan I-Lan was originally named Kavalan and was named by the Atayal people (aborigines in Taiwan) who had lived in the re gion for more than three thousand years. In 1750, the Ching dynasty took I-Lan as part of Chinese sovereignty. Forty-six years later

PAGE 43

30 Wu-Sha and his followers came to I-Lan and established agriculture throughout the area. The Chinese quickly overwhelmed the Atayal and took control of the ILan area. The Atayal were forced to move to coasta l Hua-Dong and surrounding mountain areas. In 1895, Japan took Taiwan from Ching dynasty after winning the war and ruled Taiwan from 1895 to 1945 (I-Lan Government Report, 2004). Industry remained low in I-Lan during Japanese rule (Shi, 1994) and the I-Lan economy was suppressed (T.S. Chen, 2003). Demographic Structure and Population Trend in I-Lan The population in I-Lan has been decreasi ng since the 1960s. Most of the outflow can be attributed to young peopl e, who mostly move to the Ta ipei metropolitan area. Of the 462,200 people currently livi ng in I-Lan, 18% have a colle ge degree, 24% have a high school diploma, and 29% only went to school between 6-9 years (I-L an County Statistical Abstract, 2004). As an added indication th at the young adults are leaving I-Lan, the county’s dependency ratio has decreased from 47.90% in 1994 to 44.62% in 2004 and the aged index has increased from 34.8 % in 1994 to 59.8 % in 2004 (I-Lan County Government Report, 2005). Economic Development in I-Lan After the Communist Revolution in 1949 and subsequent establishment of the Chinese Nationalists in Taiwan, the country be gan the development of light industry. In the 1970’s through 1980’s, Taiwan focused on exporting products, which continued to expand its economy (Tsai, 1986). In the 1990s,Taiwan’s economic structure has further improved as it developed state-of-the-art information technology, electronics, and transportation (Kop, 1992, p21). In general, ove r the past forty years, Taiwan’s economy

PAGE 44

31 has gradually transformed from labor-inten sive industry (i.e., ag riculture and light industry) to capital-intensive industry (Wu, 1989,p 76). Over this same time period, I-Lan County lagged behind the rest of Taiwan in the development of industry; however, I-Lan’s econ omic structure started to change in the 1990s. Agriculture and manufacturing dec lined steadily throughout the 1990’s while commerce, financing, real estate and the se rvice sectors, increased almost 90% from 22.1% (1991) to 41.5% (2001). These emergi ng industries provide an output of $NT 68.1 billion, which was a 300% growth from the $N T 17 billion produced in 1991 (Table 3.1). These three entities only slightly changed from 1986 to 1991; but, they changed drastically from 1991 to 2001. The growth of tourism in the 1990s has been the major driving force for the fast growing of the third business entity in I-Lan (Lee, 2003). Table 3-1. Production Output of Busi ness Entity in I-Lan County, 1970-2001 Unit: $NT million Year Total Output Primary Secondary Third Output % Output % Output % 1970 5,658.75 1,193.44 21.09 4,465.31 78.91 1976 13,133.21 3,207.68 24.42 7,407.00 56.40 2,518.53 19.18 1981 32,548.87 4,374.43 13.44 21,652.93 66.53 6,521.52 20.04 1986 57,149.16 8,798.49 15.40 36,222.52 63.38 12,128.15 21.22 1991 79,214.97 11,557.97 14.59 50,155.00 63.32 17,502.00 22.09 1996 162,311.86 10,431.32 6.43 91,812.95 56.57 60,067.59 37.01 2001 165,141.00 8,776.00 5.31 87,785.00 53.16 68,058.00 41.53 Sources:1. 1970-2004 Agriculture Annual Report, Commission of Agriculture Affairs, Executive Yuan 2. I-Lan County Comprehensive Space Plan 2005 Tourism Development in I-Lan Three stages of tourism development can be categorized in I-Lan since 1981: Stage 1 (1981-1989): Exploration, involvement and development; Stage 2 (1989-1997): Development of cultural tourism and major t ourism activities; and Stage 3 (1997-2005): Consolidation of major tourism activities.

PAGE 45

32 Stage 1 (1981-1989): Exploration, involvement and development In the 1980’s, Chen Ding-Nan, I-Lan c ounty commissioner, advocated the issue of tourism development and implementation of environmental protection as major county policies. With strong support from local residents, the county government had successfully resisted the pressure from bot h central government and large manufacturing companies, which often pushed county governments to establish more industrial and manufacturing plants. Three issues demonstrat ed I-Lan county government and residents’ attitudes towards environmenta l protection: 1) Strong resist ance to a proposed fire-power plant in 1986; 2) Strong resi stance to a petrochemical plant in 1987 and 1991; and 3) Support for the establishment of water-bird pr otection zones at the proposed fire-plant location in 1993 (I-Lan County Governme nt Report, 1992; Lin, 1994: 45-54). In order to promote tourism and mainta in environmental protection in I-Lan, Chen’s priority was to improve the infrastruc ture for recreation and tourism. He began to plan for building sport parks in I-Lan C ity and Lo-Dong. With detailed and thorough plans, Chen was able to obtain funding for the construction from both central and provincial governments (I-Lan County G overnment Report, 2000). During Chen’s commission tenure from 1981 through 1989, he completed the establishment of both ILan and Lo-Dong sport parks and began constr uction of facilities at Dong-Shan River and Wu-Lo-Kung scenic areas. The design and qu ality of the park brought much attention to I-Lan and also attracted visitors from other counties in Taiwan (Chen, 2003). Stage 2 (1989-1997): Development of cultural tourism and major tourism activities Yu, His-Kun, the county commissioner after Chen (1989-1997), continued to improve the infrastructure, and focused on reviving and preserving the local culture. Through integration of cultural tourism ac tivities and local industry, Yu developed

PAGE 46

33 marketing programs to promote major tour ism activities. From 1991-1997 Yu launched a series of traditional cultural activities, such as “The Grappling with Ghosts Competition” at Tou-Cheng, which had not occurred sin ce the early 1950’s. I-Lan county government also created many cultural activities, such as developing the county hist oric hall, the first county historic hall in Taiwan, in 1992; holding Happy I-Lan Year in 1994; and establishing the I-Lan Study Conference in 1996. Yu also launched many tourism activities around Dong-Shan River, such as ra fting activities in Dong-Shan River, and recreational activities at D ong-Shan River Water Park, holding International Collegiate Regatta in 1994, and developing Childre n’s Festival in1996. Through these major tourism activities, I-Lan began to establis h a unique and important tourism image. Stage 3 (1997-2005): Consolidation of major tourism activities The next county commissioner, Liu, Sho-Cheng (1997-2005), followed in the footsteps of Chen and Yu. He continued to promote major tourism activities and created new ones, such as Green Expo in 2000, Green Onion and Garlic Festival in 2001, and Chiao-Hsi Hot Spring Festival in 2003. As a result, “Culture, I-Lan” and “Tourism, ILan” have become the official county policie s over the past twenty years (I-Lan County Government Report, 2002). According to the Taiwan Tourism Bureau (2003), domestic tourism has grown over the past twenty years in Taiwan. The number of visitors increased from 30 million (1988) to over 100 million (2001), and the number of scenic attractions also increased from 50 (1988) to 263 (2001). The market share of the Taiwan domestic tourism reflects the progress of its tourism development in I-Lan. I-Lan’s market shar e changed little from 2.7% in 1986 to 2.4% in 1991; however, the fi gure jumped from 4.2% in 1993 to 5.1% in 2001, with a total of 5,100,000 visitors annually in I-Lan.

PAGE 47

34 Major Tourism Types There are two different types of nature-bas ed tourism in I-Lan: 1) leisure farms and 2) events and tour spots (T.S. Chen, 2003). These are described below. Leisure farms. There are 27,742 acres of farmlands (13% of total land area) in I-Lan; the number of people working in agricultu re is 142,466, or 30.6% of the total population (I-Lan County Statistical Abstract, 2004). The primar y crops are: Cheng (2001, p. 27) defines leisure farming as “using farm village’s natural ecology, humanities as resources, and through special planning, designing and mana ging to provide agri cultural feature of recreational activities and occasions for the public .” It is an industry that puts agricultural production, agricultural manuf acturing and living services together. Leisure farming combines tangible and intangible resources of agriculture and farm village within a leisure context to provide entertaining a nd educational experiences for visitors. In recent years, I-Lan’s leisure farms have become destinations for visitors from metropolitan areas especially from Taipei. As part of the county’s major events, such as I-Lan International Ch ildren’s Folklore & Folk-game Fe stival and Green Expo, farmers have expanded the quantity and improved the quality of leisure farms. Currently, there are 100 leisure farms within I-Lan, that attr act 1,820,000 visitors annually, with total annual sales revenues of NT$ 2,252,5 20,000 (Wu, Chen and Lin, 2004). Meanwhile, the growing bed and breakfas t (B&B) business is another category within leisure farms. The Council of Agri culture (COA), the highest administrative agency in charge of agricultural affairs in Taiwan, defines B&B’s as lodging that “ uses residential rooms as a family’s sideline business and integrates local culture, natural landscaping, ecosystem, environmental resour ces, fishery and farming activities to

PAGE 48

35 provide country lifestyle for vi sitors to stay-over” (COA,2004, p. 2). In 2001, Taiwan’s government established Bed & Breakfast Mana gement Regulation, which incorporated B&B’s natural surrounding into planning in order to attract visitors and help sustain surrounding farm villages, mountain and fore st areas, and aboriginal villages (CAO, 2004). The majority of B&B visitors are single, young (80% between age 20-39), higher educated, and has a middle cla ss in income (NT$ 500,000). The reasons visitors stay at B&B’s are based on reasonable rates and thei r proximity to nature. There are around 500 B&B in I-Lan in 2005 (Chen, 2003). Events and tour spots. Events and tour spots include points of in terest in each township. The Green Expo, Children’s Festival, Collegiate Regatta a nd whale-watching tours are some of the county’s most popular events and tour even ts. Some of the county’s major tourism regions include: Wu-Lo-Kung Scenic area, which is 400 acres and located at New Town River. It is the place where the county hosts Green E xpo each year. It is a recreational park with facilities for barbecuing, family outdoor activities and camp ing. It attracted 487,500 visitors in 2004 (I-Lan County Statistical Abstract, 2004). Dong-Shan River Scenic Area contains the Dong-Shan River Water Park, which was established in 1994. It was the first “water” theme park in Taiwan. The park plans incorporate “water and green,” by cr eating several different shapes and depth of water zones. It is a popular place fo r families, and the park and its surrounding river area have been used to host th e International Children’s Festival and International Collegiate Regatta (See Figure 3-3). The area attracted 1,121,936 visitors in 2004 (Bur eau of Business & Travel, I-Lan County, 2005).

PAGE 49

36 Figure 3-3. Dong-Shan River Water Park (I-Lan County Govern ment Webpage 2005) Wu-Shi Fishing Harbor, located in Northe rn I-Lan, has been a traditional fishing harbor for the last century. It recently became the major station for Turtle Island tours and whale and dolphin watching t our-boats. The emerging whale-watching business began in 1999 in IL. There are 12 whale-watching boats at Wu-Shi that hosted 140,800 visitors and made NT $84,509,400 in sales revenues in 2004 (Bureau of Agriculture Affa irs, I-Lan County, 2005). Jiaosi Hot Spring Area hosts 1,400,000 vis itors a year (Taiwan Domestic Tourism Report, 2003) and made NT$4 billion between 1999 and 2001. Visitation has increased 15% annually. Younger visitors are frequenting the springs, and college students have become the major clients (Ho, 2004) (see Figure 3-4). Figure 3-4. Jiaosi Hot Spring (I-L an County Government Webpage 2005)

PAGE 50

37 Tourism Strategies I-Lan has focused on two approaches to improve nature-based tourism in the county: 1) interpretation and 2) package tour programs. Interp retation is recognized as an important strategy in sustainable touris m development (Ballantyne, & Uzzell, 1994; Moscardo, 1996). The I-Lan Tourism Ambassador Association (TBA) was established in 1996, which aims to train local tour operators to interpret natural and cultural sites. There are four categories of service in TBA: a) Tr avel service consulting in I-Lan, b) Travel itinerary, schedule planning & designing for visitors/groups, c) Tour guiding & interpretation for package tours, d) Traini ng & educating for tour guides & interpreters. The interpretation includes natural flora and fauna, history of the tour area, local culture and the concept of environmental protection. Currently, there are over one hundred fifty trained tour guides and in terpreters in the association (I-Lan TBA, 2004). Package tour programs (PTP) became popular after the Children’s Festival in 1996 (Chen, 2003). Business owners across different sectors combined thei r activities to create a series of package tour programs. For ex ample, a two-day one night tour program includes visiting Tai-Ping Forest Recreati on area, a leisure farm, whale watching, a winery, I-Lan Old street, Fu-Shan botanical Ga rden and a night at the Jiaosi Hot Spring hotel. Research has not shown the impacts of PTP, but business owners and the county government are hopeful they will increase the distribution of benefits throughout the county. Approximately one-third of tourism -related business owners are involved in PTP (I-Lan County Government, 2005). Research Design This study used a three-phase approach to answer its research questions. First, individual interviews were used to identify nature-based tourism’s current role in I-Lan

PAGE 51

38 and existing impacts of nature-b ased tourism. Second, a short survey that focused entirely on perceived impacts was given to a small sa mple or business managers to validate the impact indices to be used in the final pha se of research. Finally, the primary data gathering technique was an on-site survey of I-Lan business managers. The research design for this study was cr oss-sectional strategy. Conceptual Framework The conceptual model used in this study combined the model of Gursoy and Rutherford (2004) and other models regardi ng socio-demographic ch aracteristics, types of involvement and level of involvement (Figure 3.5). The model illustrates the flow of this research. Based on past research, people’s socio-demographic make-up and experience with tourism likely effect how they perceive the costs and benefits of tourism. Th erefore, socio-demographic and business characteristic (e.g., length of owning busine ss, respondents’ organi zation) variables are likely an important component of this study alon g with two intervening variables: 1) type of involvement and 2) level of involvement. Based on this conceptual model, this study examined the interaction between socio-de mographic and business characteristics and level of involvement and their relations to perceived costs and benefits of tourism impacts. Type of business was not included in the analysis due to the large diversity of businesses working in the nature-based tourism industry.

PAGE 52

39 Figure 3-5. Conceptual Model of Costs/Be nefits of Nature-Based Tourism (NBT) Impacts, Type of Involvement, and Level of Involvement Socio-demographic and business characteristics. Socio-demographic and business characteristics that will be ex amined in this study are based on past research. Specifically, this study will examine gender, ag e, education, respondents’ organization, where they were raised, locat ion of residence, a nd length of time they owned the business. Type of involvement. The type of involvement particip ants have with nature-based tourism is potentially an important factor in how they evaluate NBT’s impacts. This study interviewed people from 15 types of businesses (I-Lan County Government Report, 2002, K.L. Chen 2002, 2004). It also examined their economic dependence on NBT using four economic descriptors re lated to NBT: 1) sales revenue, 2) percent of business revenue, 3) percent of customers, and revenue changes over the last five-years (K.L. Chen, 2002, 2004). Level of involvement. Members of the business co mmunity can have varying levels of involvement in county tourism planning. Based on re spondents’ attitudes toward government (I-Lan County Touris m Comprehensive Plan, 1996) and four choices, participants were as ked to indicate their level of involvement with tourism: 1) decision maker, 2) tour provider, 3) tourist, an d 4) no involvement (Smith and Krannich 1998). Type of Involvement Food/Restaurant Gift/grocery Hotel, leisure farms Supermarket Car/bus rental Taxi/ Bus Printing Whale-watching Travel agencies Financing institutes Sales revenue % of NBT revenue % of NBT customers % of change Socio-demos & Business characteristics Gender Age Education Raised in I-Lan Residence Length of Business Organization Perceived costs/benefits of tourism impacts Economic benefits Economic costs Social/cultural benefits Social/cultural costs Environmental benefits Environmental costs Level of Involvement Attitudes toward gov’t Decision-maker Part of tour programs Tourist No involvement

PAGE 53

40 Perceived costs and benefits of tourism impacts. The largest part of this study focused on business managers’ perception of economic, social/cultural, and environmental impacts. The majority of the items that compiled this list came from individual interviews with I-Lan busin ess managers. Based on past research, researchers worded each impact so each was consistent within the questionnaire and with other tourism impact studies. Th ey were also placed into appropriate categories (i.e., economic, social/c ultural, and environmental). (Ap &Crompton 1998, McCool & Martin 1994, I-Lan Count y Tourism Comprehensive Plan.1996, Gilbert &Clark 1997, Snaith & Haley 1999, Weaver & Lawton 2001, T. S. Chen, 2003). Items were validated using a short im pact study and a total of 42 items were used in the final questionnaire. Research Questions The following questions are addressed in this research: 1. What are the stakeholders’ perceptions of economic, social/cultural, and environmental impacts of nature-based tourism? 2. How does their level of involvement in t ourism planning relate to their perception of nature-based tourism’s impacts? 3. How does stakeholders’ socio-demographic and business characteristics relate to their level of involvement in tourism planning 4. How does stakeholders’ socio-demographic and business characteristics relate to their perception of impacts? 5. How does stakeholders’ socio-demographic and business characteristics and level of involvement relate to th eir perception of impacts? Survey Instrument This research used both qualitative and quantitative approaches to answer the research questions. First, individual interv iews were conducted to identify stakeholders’ perceptions of impacts through an open freeflowing discussion. S econd, a questionnaire was used to gather quantitative data. Development of Survey The survey design includes three steps: 1) initial interviews, 2) impact survey, and 3) conducting the formal survey (Figure 3.6).

PAGE 54

41 Figure 3-6. Flowchart of Survey Design Initial interviews The researcher conducted 15 interviews w ith I-Lan business managers involved in nature-based tourism in June 2004. They were asked questions rega rding general issues of tourism impact. Next, the re searcher interviewe d five more managers by phone in July and August 2005. Respondents included county authorities, local business people, and researchers (Appendix A). Each respondent was asked to list nature-b ased tourism’s ten most important economic, social/cultural and environmental impacts. They were instructed to include both negative and positive impacts. Content analysis was used to analyze the responses. The primary goal of the interviews was to identify the most pervasive impacts, as defined by stakeholders. To 1. Initial interviews of tourism stakeholders 2. Impact survey 3. Conduct survey for business managers in I-Lan Initial questionnaire design Final survey design Including pilot test

PAGE 55

42 achieve this goal, researchers used statistical rules of consistency to identify how often an impact needed to be mentioned in order for it to be included in the scale. Based on the consistency of economic, soci al/cultural and envi ronmental items listed by respondents, the acceptable scale for items in each category was set. Items were included in the scale if 80% of respondents listed that item as an economic impact, 70% listed the item in the social/cultural category, a nd 66% listed it in the e nvironmental category. Upon eliminating and combining similar items, pa st literature was used to word the item consistently with past studies (Weaver and Lawton, 2001; Ap and Comptom, 1998; Andriotis & Vaughan, 2003; and Chen, 2003). Th e final list of impacts composed 16 economic impacts, 13 social/cultural impacts, and 13 environmental impacts (Table 3-2). Impact survey Questionnaires were e-mailed to 26 part icipants in the fall 2005. Six new participants who did not partic ipate in previous interviews were also included. Twentyone participants returned usable questionnaires (Appendix A). Items were measured using a 5-point index with two-dimensional variables, the positive and negative, where 1= Not an impact and 5= Very important Impact (See Appendix B). To analyze the results, the researcher used mode rule for consistency to eliminate lesser important impacts. Based on 21 res pondents’ answers and 5-point index on each item, the researcher identified the mode for each item such as 3 (11), where 11 respondents rated 3 on the item. The pr ocedures included several steps: 1. Identify the mode for each item. 2. Keep items rated 2, 3, 4 and 5 with mode equa l to or larger than nine. Nine is set as standard for reflecting 50% of participants’ responses. 3. Eliminate items with modes smaller than nine, items without a single mode, and inconsistently mentioned items. For instance, item” improved transport

PAGE 56

43 infrastructure” was eliminated for inc onsistency mentioned items, where six respondents chose 2, five chose 3 and five chose 4. 4. To keep proper items, checking the s econd largest number for items with mode number 9 or fewer. Add up second larges t number with the largest number. Keep the item if the total number is more than 13, otherwise eliminated. 5. This resulted in 12 items in the economic cat egory, 10 items in social/cultural, and 11 items in environmental. Table 3-2. Items selected for Initial Su rvey of Nature-Based Tourism Impacts Impact Type Statement 1.Revenues for business increased 2. More local employment 3. Wages & fringe benefits increased 4. Increased quality of shops, hotels and restaurants 5. More leisure farms & bed & breakfast businesses 6. Increased the variety of pack age tour programs for visitors 7.More whale-watching business for visitors 8. More tax revenues and expenditure from tourism 9.Improved transport infrastructure 10.More recreational facilities for local residents 11.Improved the quality of Jiaosi hot spring businesses 12.Most tourism businesses controlled by local residents 13.Increased real estates costs 14.Results in fewer available lands for business 15.Increased other counties’ imitation of tourism programs Economic Impacts 16.Competition in hotel/motel getting worse 1.Increases cultural re-recognition 2.More cultural activities 3.Sense of pride 4.Stronger sense of IL attachment 5.Little change in lifestyle of local residents 6.Decreased prostitution in Jiaosi 7.Increased children’s education in local history and literature 8.Increased the learning of native language 9.Increases quality of life of IL residents 10.Focuses too much on attracting visitors 11.Results in unfair resources allocation by county government 12.Disrupt the peace and tranquility of IL Social/ Cultural Impacts 13.Visitors over-convergence in specific seasons 1.Increase environmental education for children 2.Ecosystem has better preserved 3.Increased local residents’ aw areness of the importance of maintaining natural amenities 4.Improvement of local areas’ appearance 5.Increased traffic congestion 6.Results in overcrowding 7.Results in shortage of parking spaces 8.Results in environmental decline in sensitive areas 9.Increased waste of disposable meal boxes 10.Increased air and noise pollution 11.Increased litter and garbage pollution 12.Increased resources waste in advertising and delivery mails Environmental Impacts 13.Increased pollution in sanitation

PAGE 57

44 Development of final questionnaire The final questionnaire in cluded thirteen sections (Appendix E). Sections 1-11 asked participants to rate the perception of impacts using the scales that were defined in the earlier research. Responses to the statem ents regarding impacts used a 5-point index scale ranging from “strongly disagree” (=1) to “strongly agree” (=5). A “no opinion” option was available. The statements were alternately worded positively and negatively way to aviod yeaor nay-sayer bias (A lreck and Settle 1995). Section 12 addressed respondents’ level of involvement in nature -based tourism where managers indicated title/position, and amount of times and money they are involved as a decision-maker, a tour provider, or a tourist in tourism. Section 13 asked participants for descriptive information which included type of bus iness, economic descriptors and sociodemographic characteristics. The survey was first written in English a nd then translated into Chinese by the researcher. The Chinese questionnaire was ed ited by a Ph. D candidate in Chinese at National Normal University and a Chinese pr ofessor at Kun-Shan University (KSU). After making corrections to the survey, a samp le of sixty college students from KSU and fourteen business managers at Tou-Cheng a nd Jiaosi were chosen to pilot test the questionnaire in September and Octobe r 2005. This group recei ved a cover letter explaining the study and asked for their assist ance. The pretest was used to determine content validity of the instrument, flow of questionnaire, accuracy of Chinese translation, and to obtain respondents’ opini ons regarding format and de sign of the questionnaire.

PAGE 58

45 Data Collection The Sample The sample selected for the main questionnaire was business owners/managers’ from fifteen business types (i .e., gift stores, food/restaura nts, grocery/di scount stores, hotels, leisure farms, bed &breakfast, car rental, bus/taxi, whale watching boaters, advertising, printing, travel agencies, farmers associations, savings and loans, banks). All businesses had some relation with nature-bas ed tourism. Potential respondents were distributed over the entire twelve administ rative districts in I-La n County. Specifically they included I-Lan City and its eleven to wnships. Even though the majority of NBT attractions are located in Dong-Shan, Wu-C hich and Lou-Dong, I-Lan City, Lou-Dong and Jiaosi provide most of the supporting businesses and infrastructure (e.g., hotels, food/restaurants, transportati on and travel agencies). Study participants were purposely chosen base d on two factors: 1) their role in the NBT industry, the importance each type of business has in the tourism industry, with certain types (e.g., hotels and travel agenci es) having a more direct role; therefore, receiving more respondents, and 2) the num ber of potential businesses in a specific region, with more participants coming from cities like I-Lan City wh ere there are a higher density of tourism businesses. To gather business managers’ names and cont act information, the researcher used a I-Lan County 2005 phone book, I-Lan Hotel Association membership list, Car/Bus Rental Association list, I-Lan Leisure Farms Development Association list, I-Lan Leisure Agriculture Handbook, Bed & Breakfast rela ted websites, county government travel information, and tourism business information.

PAGE 59

46 Collecting Data The on-site survey was conducted duri ng October to December 2005 in I-Lan County, and 316 managers were interviewed. To obtain more in-depth information from respondents, follow-up interviews were conducte d soon after the initial questionnaire was administered. These respondents included gift, bus, car rental, rest aurant, hotel, leisure farms, bed & breakfast, travel ag ency and financial institutes. A team of five people conducte d the interviews. They incl uded the lead researcher, the researcher’s wife Chen, an experienced field researcher who teaches at Kun-Shan University, and three local college stude nts with training doing interviews. Selfadministered questionnaires were distribu ted using face-to-face interviews and mail between October and December 2005. Two hund red and forty were collected by the interviewers and 76 were collected by mail in some of the more remote communities. By December 13, which was set as the deadline for returning questionnaires, four weeks after mailing of original questionnaire, a total of 316 completed questionnaires were obtained. Thirty of the questionnaires were eliminated due to missing data and responses from people not related to NBT businesses. This resulted in a total of 286 usable questionnaires, a response rate of 90%. Data Analysis SPSS 12.0 for Windows was used to calculate descriptive stat istics, t-tests, regression, one-way ANOVA, and factor analysis. Variables Dependent variables used in this study included the perception of nature-based tourism impacts. Twenty costs and benefits were considered economic items, seven costs

PAGE 60

47 and benefits formed the social /cultural category, and nine costs and benefits formed the environmental category. There were three groups of independent variables (i.e., type of involvement, level of involvement and socio-demographic char acteristics). Type of involvement was measured by identifying the type of business the participant managed and the percent of nature-based tourism that ma kes up the business’ sales revenue and customers. Also, how the business has changed in terms of size and revenue over the la st five years was examined. Four levels of involvement: involv ement in decision-making, involvement as part of tour provider, involve ment as tourist, and no involvement were measured. Sociodemographic characteristics were measured by gender, age, education, living in IL as a child, location of residence, and length of own business. Factor Analysis To better assess tourism impacts, the research er used factor analysis to confirm and improve the final indices used to measure business managers’ per ceptions of economic, social/cultural and environmental impacts. Factor analysis is a class of multivariate statistical methods that define s the underlying structure in a data set matrix. It analyzes the structure of interrelati onships (correlations) among a large number of variables by defining a set of common underlying dimensions, known as factors. With factor analysis, the researcher can first identify the separa te dimensions of the structure and then determine the extent to which each variab le is explained by each dimension (Hair, Anderson, Tatham and Black, 1998, P. 87-88). Additionally, factor analysis reduces the number of statemen ts that can be used to measure a factor, therefore, improving the accu racy of the final indices. In this study,

PAGE 61

48 factor analysis was primarily used to im prove the model fit an d enhance construct validity. Internal reliability of multi-item scales (indices) can be estimated by Cronbach’s alpha to assess the accuracy or precision of the measurem ent (Malhotra, 1999). Following the procedure by Hair et al. (1998), factor analysis was conducte d using exploratory principle components analysis (PCA) and varimax rotation. Cronbach’s alpha tests were conducted to verify economic, social/c ultural and environmental dimensions. Since 58 items used in the questionnaire cam e from a variety of sources calculating Cronbach’s alpha with the factor s helped to specify the items used to measure a specific impact index (e.g., social/cultural benefit or en vironmental cost). The reliability scales of economic costs/benefits, social/cultural costs/ benefits and environmental costs/benefits were tested. The total variance explained by PCA was 66%. There were nine factors with 36 items left in these tables, which eliminat ed items with lower loadings (redundant or unimportant items) (Table 3-3-Table 3-5). Details of nine factors ar e explained as follows. Economic Benefit 1 (ECB1): Includes stat ements regarding increases of sales revenue, job opportunity, wage a nd whale watching business. Economic Benefit 2: Package Tour Programs (ECB2): Includes statements regarding issues of package tours. Economic Cost 1: Land Prices (ECC1): Incl udes statements regarding increases of land prices. Economic Cost 2: Tourism Variability (ECC2): Includes statements regarding tourism seasonality and t ourism resource variability. Economic Cost 3: Leakages (ECC3): In cludes statements regarding economic profit leaking to outsiders. Social/Cultural Benefit: Cultural Id entity and Recognition (SCB): Includes statements regarding tourism affects on cultural identity and recognition. Social/Cultural Cost (SCC): Includes statem ents regarding tourism effects on social norms and behaviors. Environmental Benefit (ENB): Includes statements regarding tourism’s positive environmental changes.

PAGE 62

49 Environmental Cost (ENC): Includes statements regarding tourism’s negative effects on the environment. Factor analysis eliminated several items, which did not contribute to the ability of an index to measure an index type. For exam ple, the items “increasing leisure farms and Bed& Breakfast,” “upgrades the quality of tourism in IL ” and” Increasing quality of shops, hotels and restaurants” were eliminated from the analysis. In contrast, items that did not receive noticeably high means such as ”tourism leaks heavily to outsiders” and ”most tourism profits obtained by big comp anies” stood out as major economic costs after the analysis categorized them into their own factor. Factor analysis shows that two categories are needed to explain economic benefits: 1) job and sales revenue issues; 2) package tour program. ECB2: Package Tour Programs was not used in future analysis of percepti on of impacts. The benefit items within that factor were too specialized fo r purposes of this analysis, a nd only a small percentage of participants (35%) were involved in packag e tours. There were three categories in economic costs: 1) tourism variability; 2) la nd prices, and 3) economic leakages (Table 33). The item ‘increasing whale watching busine sses’ was retained in category of ECB1 due to its importance of representing NBT.

PAGE 63

50 Table 3-3. Reliability Analysis for Economic Impacts Corrected Item Total Correlation Alpha If Item Deleted ECB1 (Economic Benefit 1: job and sales revenue issues) Increasing revenues for business .5779 .6842 Increasing job opportu nities .6970 .6053 Increasing wages & fringe benefits .5583 .6963 Increasing whale watching businesses .3970 .7694 Cronbach’s Alpha = .7541 ECB2 (Economic Benefit 2: Package Tour Program--PTP) Increased the variety of package tour programs .7678 .8997 Upgrades the quality of service of PTP .7904 .8952 Increases customers from PTP .7791 .8976 Increases sales revenues from PTP .7438 .9041 Integrates local industries from PTP .7102 .9069 Increases name-recognition for businesses from PTP .8018 .8940 Cronbach’s Alpha = .9149 ECC1 (Economic Cost 1: Land prices) Increased rent of houses and lands .5897 .6387 Increased in housing and land prices which only happened in tourism development areas .6524 .5596 Increased in housing and land prices, which is related to Pei-I freeway .4803 .7549 Cronbach’s Alpha = .7436 ECC2 (Economic Cost 2: Tourism Variability) Visitors over-convergence in specific seasons .4756 .7994 Over-using tourism resources in peak seasons .6817 .7360 Under-using tourism resources in low seasons .6558 .7446 Affecting the balance of revenue, expenses and willingness of investment .5582 .7757 Resulting in spatial environmen t carrying pressure .5731 .7713 Cronbach’s Alpha = .8042 ECC3 (Economic Cost 3: Leakages) Tourism profits leaked heavily to outsiders .5565 Most tourism benefits obtained by big companies .5565 Cronbach’s Alpha = .7113

PAGE 64

51 Social/cultural costs and benefits factor ed into predefined categories of items (Table 3-4). Table 3-4. Reliability Analysis for Social/Cultural Impacts Corrected Item Total Correlation Alpha If tem Deleted SCB (Social/Cultural Benefit: Tourism’s affect on cultural identity & recognition) Increased diversity of cultural activities among different ethnic groups .6461 .8328 Improved autonomy in the community 6780 .8212 Improved the understanding among different communities & cultures .6363 .8375 Cronbach’s Alpha = .8530 SCC (Social/Cultural Cost) Increasing drinking and vandalism .7851 .8466 Increasing prostitution .7793 .8485 Increasing traffic accidents .6771 .8867 Decreasing public safety .7874 .8450 Cronbach’s Alpha = .8889 Environmental costs and benefits factored into predefined categories of items (Table 3-5). Reliability of .9051 in environmen tal cost indicates the internal consistency of these items. Table 3-5. Reliability Analys is for Environmental Impacts Corrected Item Total Correlation Alpha If tem Deleted ENB (Environmental Benefit) Enhancing preservation of ecosystem .4721 .4943 Increasing local residents’ awareness of importance of maintaining natural amenities .4560 .5080 Improving local areas’ appearance .4064 .5699 Cronbach’s Alpha = .6264 ENC (Environmental Cost) Overcrowding .7251 .8902 Increasing traffic congestion .7868 .8815 Increasing shortage of parking spaces .6533 .9002 Increasing litter and garbage pollution .7633 .8845 Increasing air and noise pollution .7989 .8790 Increasing resources waste in advertising and delivery mails .7080 .8931 Cronbach’s Alpha = .9051

PAGE 65

52 CHAPTER 4 RESULTS This chapter describes the results of the I-Lan business owners’ survey using a variety of descriptive and multivariate statistics It will first provide a discussion of the overall sample in terms of the indepe ndent variables (e.g., socio-demographic characteristics, business characteristics, attitudes toward the government, and involvement in tourism planning). It will then examine the relationships between the variables (i.e., independent variables and perception of benefits). Where significant differences are identified, those differences will be discussed in detail. Description of Sample Socio-Demographic Characteristics Results showed that most respondents ( 64.3%) were between 36-55 years old (with a mean of 43 years) and 59% were male and 41% were female. (Table 4-1) A little more than one-third of respondents (36.1%) po ssessed a high school/vocational diploma and 44% had a college degree or higher. The portion of respondents with a college degree (44%) was higher than that of the county data (18%), which might indicate tourism development attracts better educated people. Most participants (83%) lived in I-Lan as children. There were 26% respondents w ho resided at I-Lan City, the largest administrative district and also the major commercial center in I-Lan (Table 4-1).

PAGE 66

53 Table 4-1. Frequency of Respondents’ Socio-Demographic Characteristics Variable Category Percent1 Male 59 Gender Female 41 20-35 26 36-45 34 46-55 30 Age 56-75 10 Less than high school 20 High school /vocational 36 Technical/associates degree 27 Education College graduate & advanced degree 17 Yes 83 Raised in I-Lan No 17 IL City 26 Lou-Dong 16 Jiaosi 15 DongShan 9 YuanShan 9 Tou-Cheng 6 Su-Ao 5 ChaungWei 4. Wu-Jih 4 Ta-Tung 3 Shan-Hsin 2 Nan-Ao 1. Residence Other 7 1 N=286 Business Characteristics The 347 respondents were categorized in 16 business types (Table 4-2). Almost three quarters of respondents managed hotels (18%), restaurants (16%), B&B’s (15%), leisure farms (12%) and gift shops (11%). Ten percent of respondents chose more than one type of business, with the largest overl ap between people saying they were employed in leisure farms, B&B’s, and restaurants. On average, the participants owned a bus iness in the community for 13.8 years, with 41% owning a business between 2-6 year s. About 38% of respondents, who owned a gift shops worked at the National Center for Traditional Arts. Almost half of the

PAGE 67

54 participants (46%) were members of Busi ness Organizations (e.g., I-Lan County Hotel Association). Forty-three percen t of participants were not me mbers of an organization or association. Table 4-2. Respondents’ Type of Busine ss, Length of Business and Organization Variable Category Percent (%) Gift 11 Market 3 Food 16 Taxi/Bus 2 Hotel 18 Leisure Farm 12 B&B 15 Adv/printing 2 Rental 7 Whale watching 2 Travel Agency 3 Farmers Ass. 5 S&L 1 Bank 4 Type of Business (N = 347) Other 3 Less than 2 years 11 2-6 years 41 7-15 years 24 16-30 years 16 Length of Owning Business (N = 263) 31150 years 9 Local official/consultant 0 Representative 0 Reps of Tourism Assoc. 11 Private Reps/ Org 46 Organization (N = 263) Independent Businesses 43 The financial success and role NBT tourism plays in receiving financial revenues was evaluated in terms of total sales revenue percent of sales and customers from NBT, and change in sales revenue in the last 5-years. Almost one third of the respondents re ported making less than NT$1,200,000 (USD 40,000) and 13.6% reported more than NT $50,000,000 (USD 1,680,000) in annual sales revenue. Sales revenue data show that busin esses made an average of 30% of annual sales and 31% of customers from NBT. Whale watching businesses had the highest percentage of sales (59.3%) and customers (56.4%) from NBT. Gift shops (37.5% of

PAGE 68

55 revenue and 38.8% of customers) and B&B ( 35.5% of revenue and 38.0% of customers) had the next highest percents from NBT (Table 4-12). More leisure farm, B&B a nd gift store businesses have increased their sales revenue rather than decreased over the last fi ve years. Since touris m has also grown over this period, this might indicate that these bus inesses gain more from tourism than other businesses. For all business type s, 56% of respondent s reported increases in sales revenue and 43% reported decreases (Table 4-3). Table 4-3. Relationships between ty pe of Business and Sales Revenue Type Sample Size (n) Percent of Sales that derives from NBT Percent of Customers that derives from NBT Percent Increase in Revenue over the Last Five Years Percent Decrease in Revenue over the Last Five Years Whale 8 59.3 56.4 10.0 15.0 Gift 33 37.5 38.8 24.7 23.3 B&B 51 35.5 38.0 26.0 36.3 Printing 5 32.3 29.4 11.0 17.5 L. Farm 38 31.4 33.5 20.0 26.3 Food 46 27.7 27.5 24.0 22.0 Market 9 26.8 26.8 30.0 25.0 Bus 5 16.0 18.0 20.0 10.0 Hotel 58 30.6 31.3 15.4 23.8 Car Rent 5 29.3 31.5 18.3 19.6 Travel 9 28.6 30.9 35.0 11.5 Farmers A 11 22.5 15 S&L 2 15.0 Bank 9 20.0 21 Mean 30 31 N=265; 56% of respondents reported increase in sales and 43% of them reported decrease Attitudes Toward Government and Level of Involvement Generally, most participants have pos itive attitudes towards the government and how it is working with stakeholders in tour ism planning. Over 75% of respondents agreed that county government invited them to a ssist in tourism planning and knew their concerns (Table 4.4) and 60% of respondents agreed that they could influence tourism

PAGE 69

56 planning. When the three items where combined into an overall Attitudes Toward Government index (reliability = .895 3), the index had a mean of 3.65. Table 4-4. Distribution of Respondents’ Perceptions of County Government Percent1 Strongly Disagree Disagree No opinion Agree Strongly Agree Mean SD Statement (Attitudes toward county government) County government invites you to participate in tourism planning 1.7 6.6 15 65.4 11.2 3.78 .80 County government knows your concerns and issues of tourism planning 1.7 10.5 16.8 61.2 9.8 3.67 .86 County government accepts your opinions 2.4 7.7 21 58.7 10.1 3.66 .85 You influence county tourism planning 2.8 14 23.8 50 9.4 3.49 .94 1 N = 261; Mean = 3.65 2.2 9.7 19.2 58.8 10.1 3.65 Although attitudes toward the government’s in clusion of stakehol ders into planning are high, most participants do not actively wo rk with the government. Nearly 50% of the respondents had never participated in touris m planning either as a decision maker or provider of county tourism progr ams. Only 6% of them had participated more than 10 times in tourism planning in the past 12 months. Nearly 56% of respondents had participated in tourism activiti es as tourists in the past 12 months, and about 30% of respondents had participated in tourism planning as decision ma kers or tour providers in the past 12 months. Nearly 60% of responde nts had never donated money to tourism planning or activities in the pa st 12 months, but 5% of them had contributed more than NT$50,000 in the past 12 months (Table 4-5).

PAGE 70

57 Table 4-5. Distribution of Res pondents’ Level of Involvement Percent1 Never Participated 1 – 5 times 6 – 10 times 11 – 20 times More than 20 times Statement (Decision Maker) How many times have you participated in local government’s tourism planning, as a major decision-maker, in the past 12 months? 52.4 34.3 7.3 3.5 2.4 How many times are you willing to participate in local government’s tourism planning, as a major decision-maker, over the next 12 months? 24.5 50.7 14.3 4.5 4.3 Total 38.5 42.6 10.8 4 3.4 Percent2 Statement (Tour Provider) Never Participated 1 – 3 times 4 – 6 times More than 6 times How many times have you participated in implementing local government’s tourism activities, as a tour provider, in the past 12 months? 56.3 31.1 7.3 4.9 How many times have you used local government’s tourism projects, as a tour provider, in the past 12 months? 51.7 36.4 6.3 4.9 Total 54 33.8 6.7 4.9 Percent3 Statement (Tourist) Never Participated 1 – 6 times 6 – 20 times More than 20 times How many times have you participated in local government’s tourism activities, as a tourist, over the last 12 months? 33.6 55.9 7.7 2.1 Percent 4 Statement (Donation) No Money 1 3000 3000 – 10,000 10,000 – 50,000 More Than 50,000 How much money have you contributed in local government’s tourism planning or activities, over the last 12 months? NT$ 59.8 12.2 15.7 6.6 4.5 1 N = 256 2 N= 259 3 N= 259 4 N= 258

PAGE 71

58 Research Question 1: Overall Pe rceptions of Benefits and Costs Stakeholders have similarly high perceptions of NBT’s benefits, with all the groups having means between 3.6 and 4.2. In terms of individual factors, Economic benefit 2 (ECB2) package tour program had the highest mean (4.2), followed by Social/cultural Benefits (SCB) (4.1) while social/cultural Cost (SCC) (3.0), and Economic 3: Leakages (EC3) (2.9) ranked last (Table 4-6). Social /cultural benefits group ranked at the top among other benefits groups, followed by environmental benefits group and economic benefits Respondents perceived the most benefit fr om the Social/cultural Benefit group, which might be related to the county governme nt’s promotion of cultural activities since 1990s. This might also help to explain re spondents’ low percepti on of socio-cultural costs. Respondents also perceived tourism variability and rising land prices as major economic costs. Leakage outside the county wa s the lowest perceived impact. This might indicate that respondents perceived rising la nd prices as the most important concern, (mean 4.23), but they didn’t perceive l eakage of tourism profit as a big problem. Although ECB 2 package tour program (PTP) ha d the highest mean, survey data showed that only 38% of respondents participated in PTP, and many respondents failed to answer the specific PTP question. Thus, this paper wi ll not further analyze costs and benefits of PTP. Overall, respondents perceived lower cost th an benefit in economi c, social/cultural and environmental groups except ECC1 (mean3.9) and ECC2 (mean 3.7). Especially, respondents perceived much lower cost in en vironmental cost, social cost and economic cost3 (tourism leakages) than the re lative benefit groups (Table 4-6).

PAGE 72

59 With NBT benefits receiving rather high scores, respondents apparently have a strong positive perception of nature-based tour ism; therefore, the analysis will focus on respondents’ perceptions of bene fits – rather than costs. Also, when models focusing on cost were analyzed, the concep tual model explained little.

PAGE 73

60Table 4.6 Overall Perceptions of Co sts/Benefits of Tourism Impacts Percent N Mean Strongly Disagree Strongly Agree 1 2 3 4 5 ECB2 (Economic Benefit 2: Package Tour Program--PTP) 168 4.20 0 2 6 63 27 Increased the variety of package tour programs 171 4.21 0 1 4 58 27 Upgrades the quality of service of PTP 169 4.17 0 3 5 63 28 Increases customers from PTP 169 4.22 0 1 4 66 29 Increases sales revenues from PTP 167 4.04 0 5 10 62 23 Integrates local industries from PTP 167 4.13 0 1 8 65 25 Increases name-recognition for businesses from PTP 167 4.19 0 1 7 64 28 SCB (Social/Cultural Benefit: Tourism’s affect on cultural identity & recognition) 286 4.06 2 18 15 56 8 Increased diversity of cultural activities among different ethnic groups 286 4.10 1 9 7 71 12 Improved autonomy in the community 286 4.01. 2 18 13 58 9 Improved the understanding among different communities & cultures 286 4.09 2 28 26 40 4 ENB (Environmental Benefit) 286 3.80 2 16 15 55 13 Enhancing preservation of ecosystem 286 3.40 3 22 18 46 11 Increasing local residents’ awareness of importance of maintaining natural amenities 286 3.98 0 10 12 64 14 Improving local areas’ appearance 286 4.00 1 6 10 61 22 ECB1 (Economic Benefit 1: job and sales revenue issues) 286 3.60 1 15 17 59 9 Increasing revenues for business 286 3.83 1‘ 9 7 71 12 Increasing job opportunities 286 3.55 2 18 13 58 9

PAGE 74

61Table 4.6 Continued Percent N Mean Strongly Disagree Strongly Agree 1 2 3 4 5 Increasing wages & fringe benefits 286 3.14 2 28 26 40 4 Increasing whale watching businesses 286 3.81 0 5 20 65 10 ECC1 (Economic Cost 1: Land prices) 286 3.90 1 7 10 60 22 Increased rent of houses and lands 286 3.69 1 12 16 59 12 Increased in housing and land prices which only happened in tourism development areas 286 3.91 1 6 11 64 18 Increased in housing and land prices, which is related to Pei-I freeway 286 4.23 1 2 5 57 35 ECC2 (Economic Cost 2: Tourism Variability) 286 3.70 1 12 17 55 15 Visitors over-convergence in specific seasons 286 4.05 0 8 7 56 28 Over-using tourism resources in peak seasons 286 3.54 0 18 21 51 10 Under-using tourism resources in low seasons 286 3.61 1 14 19 54 12 Affecting the balance of revenu e, expenses and willingness of investment 286 3.72 1 9 19 58 13 Resulting in spatial environment carrying pressure 286 3.68 1 10 20 56 13 ENC (Environmental Cost) 286 3.40 3 21 15 47 15 Overcrowding 286 3.35 2 25 20 42 11 Increasing traffic congestion 286 3.59 2 18 13 53 14 Increasing shortage of park ing spaces 286 3.69 2 15 14 51 18 Increasing litter and garbage pollution 286 3.50 4 21 12 49 14 Increasing air and noise pollution 286 3.43 4 22 14 47 13 Increasing resources waste in advertising and delivery mails 286 3.47 2 23 18 39 18

PAGE 75

62Table 4.6 Continued Percent N Mean Strongly Disagree Strongly Agree 1 2 3 4 5 SCC (Social/Cultural Cost) 286 3.0 5 32 25 33 5 Increasing drinking and vandalism 285 3.16 4 26 27 38 5 Increasing prostitution 286 3.23 3 24 28 38 7 Increasing traffic accidents 286 2.70 7 47 19 23 4 Decreasing public safety 286 3.0 7 30 24 34 5 ECC3 (Economic Cost 3: Leakages) 286 2.90 6 29 38 27 1 Tourism profits leaked heavily to outsiders 286 2.99 4 24 44 27 1 Most tourism benefits obtained by big companies 286 2.81 8 33 32 26 1

PAGE 76

63 Correlation in between overall impact groups Results showed that ECB1 (Economic bene fit1: job and sales revenue issues) was significantly correlated with ECC (Economic cost), SCB (social/cultural benefit) and ENB (Environmental benefit) (Table 4-6-1). ENB was positi ve significantly correlated with ECB1, SCB, and SCC, while ENB was ne gative significantly corr elated with ENC. All benefits were positively correlated w ith each other, which brought high mean of SCB (4.1) and ENB (3.8). ECB1 (3.6) was positively correlated with ECC, which might explain the high mean of ECC (3.5).Respondent s’ perception of high economic costs also was co-respondent with their perception of lower economic benefits compared with social/cultural and environmental benefits. ENC (3.4) was negatively correlated with SCC (3.0), which might indicate that wh en respondents focused less in negative social/cultural impact, they turned their attention to negative environmental impact Table 4-6-1. Correlation in be tween Overall Impact Factors ECB1 ECC SCB ENB ENC SCC ECB1 Pearson Correlation 1 .298(**) .256(**) .258(**) .037 .059 Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .000 .532 .318 N 286 286 286 286 286 286 ECC Pearson Correlation 1 .235(**) .103 .260(**) .009 Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .081 .000 .882 N 286 286 286 286 286 SCB Pearson Correlation 1 .240(**) .005 .183(**) Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .934 .002 N 286 286 286 286 ENB Pearson Correlation 1 .253(**) .263(**) Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 N 286 286 286 ENC Pearson Correlation 1 -.413(**) Sig. (2-tailed) .000 N 286 286 SCC Pearson Correlation 1 Sig. (2-tailed) N 286 ** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

PAGE 77

64 Research Question 2: Socio-demographic Relationship with Tourism Involvement Using the conceptual model, it was nece ssary to understand if different types of people in I-Lan (based on socio-demographic characteristics) have different attitudes toward the government and type and level of involvement in tourism. This section will describe how specific socio-de mographic characteristics relate to these variables. Type of Involvement. From the General Linear Model Multivariate test (Table 47), there was no significant difference betw een socio-demographic characteristics and type of business. However, there was a signi ficant relationship be tween gender and type of business (p= .052) at the p=0.1 level. Table 4-7. Significant Le vel between Socio-Demographi cs and Type of Business Variable F Error df Sig Age 1.37 1.000 .545 Gender 152.11 1.000 .052 Education 2.20 1.000 .470 Raised in I-Lan as children 5.06 1.000 .266 Length of owning business 1.30 1.000 .570 Residence 2.80 1.000 .439 General Linear Model: Multivariate test Significant level P < .10 All male respondents were involved in bus and whale watching businesses while 62% and 56% of respondents were female in travel agencies and farmers’ associations respectively (Table 4-8) Table 4-8. Relationship between Ge nder and Major Types of Business Whale Bus TravelCar Rental B&B Hotel L. Farm Gift Food Farm Asso. Male 100 100 38 72 69 64 64 54 54 44 Female 0 0 62 28 31 36 36 46 46 56 N =258; unit: percent

PAGE 78

65 Attitudes toward government and level of involvement. Results show that there is little relati onship between socio-demographic variables and participants’ attitudes toward the governme nt and involvement in tourism planning. The model used to examine level of i nvolvement is specified as follows: Yi = a + b1X1 + b2X2 + …+ bkXki Y1 = a + b1X1 + b2X2 + … + b8X8 (Table 4-9) Where subscript i denotes the ith observati on in the sample, Y is the outcome of the attitudes toward government a nd level of involvement, a is a constant, b1, b2 … bk are the coefficients associated with each e xplanatory variable X1, X2, ….Xki. The explanatory variables used to explain attitudes toward government and level of involvement in the model include Organizati on (X1)respondents’ organization, Gender (X2) Male, female, Age (X3) 20-75, Education (X4), Child (X5) Raised in IL as children, Residence (X6) respondents’ re sidence, LBZ1 (X7) operating business less than one year, LBZ2 (X8) operating business more than one year. Table 4-9. Variables in Model Dependent Variables Independent Variables M1 Govall (Y1) attitudes toward government Or ganization (X1)respondents’ organization, Gender (X2) Male, female, Age (X3) 20-75, Education (X4), Child (X5) raised in IL as children, Residence (X6) respondents’ residence, LBZ1 (X7) operating business less than one year, LBZ2 (X8) operating business more than one year M 2 Passtime(Y2) past pa rticipated in tourism planning over the past 12 months Same as above M 3 Futrtime (Y3) willing to participate in tourism planning in the next 12 months Same as above M 4 Implemt (Y4) implementation of tourism planning, Same as above M 5 Partake (Y5) used tourism projects over the last 12 months Same as above M 6 Tourist (Y6) participating in tourism activities as a tourist Same as above M 7 Donate (Y7) donating money to tourism planning. Same as above

PAGE 79

66 Results showed that there were no si gnificant relationships between sociodemographics and attitudes toward governme nt. The model predicted or explained only 2% of the variance in Govall (Table 4-9-1) Table 4-9-1. Multiple Regression Results of Attitudes toward Government Variable B SE t Sig. Constant 4.112 .677 6.076 .000 Organization -.052 .066 -.783 .434 Gender -.038 .109 -.348 .728 Age .004 .005 .662 .509 Education -.013 .050 -.260 .795 Raised in I-Lan as children -.118 .142 -.826 .410 Residence .017 .017 .969 .334 Owning business less than one year -.095 .234 -.408 .684 Owning business more than one year .000 .003 .055 .956 Significant level at P < 0.05, r2 = .016 Respondents’ organization was significantly related to particip ating in tourism planning in the past 12 months. The model pred icted or explained 24% of the variance in Passtime (Table 4-10). Respondents who repres ented tourism associations participated more in tourism planning. Table 4-10. Multiple Regression Results of Pa st Participation in Tourism Planning over the Past 12 Months Variable B SE t Sig. Constant 3.409 .665 5.128 .000 Organization -.468 .065 -7.172 .000 Gender -.157 .108 -1.458 .146 Age .009 .005 1.753 .081 Education .037 .049 .767 .444 Raised in I-Lan as children -.043 .140 -.309 .758 Residence .026 .017 1.540 .125 Owning business less than one year -.075 .230 -.327 .744 Owning business more than one year -.001 .003 -.254 .800 Significant level at P < 0.05, r2 = .239 Respondents’ organization was significantly related to willingn ess to participate in tourism planning over the next 12 months. The model predicted or explained 12% of

PAGE 80

67 variance in Futrtime (Table 4-11). Respondent s who represented tourism associations were willing to participate more in tourism planning over the next 12 months. Table 4-11 Multiple Regression Results of W illing to Participate in Tourism Planning over the next 12 Months Variable B SE t Sig. Constant 4.688 .800 5.859 .000 Organization -.388 .079 -4.945 .000 Gender -.193 .129 -1.491 .137 Age -.007 .006 -1.149 .252 Education .002 .059 .037 .970 Raised in I-Lan as children .067 .168 .400 .690 Residence .015 .020 .713 .476 Owning business less than one year -.272 .277 -.984 .326 Owning business more than one year .001 .003 .299 .765 Significant level at P < 0.05, r2 = .116 Respondents’ organization and residen ce were significantly related to implementation of tourism planning. The mode l predicted or explai ned 15% of variance in Implemt (Table 4-12). There was no corre lation between organi zation and residence Table 4-26). Table 4-12. Multiple Regression Results of Implementation of Tourism Planning Variable B SE t Sig. Constant 2.613 .669 3.907 .000 Organization -.352 .066 -5.369 .000 Gender .065 .108 .601 .549 Age .009 .005 1.742 .083 Education .083 .049 1.691 .092 Raised in I-Lan as children -.056 .141 -.395 .693 Residence .039 .017 2.279 .024 Owning business less than one year -.210 .231 -.908 .365 Owning business more than one year .001 .003 .222 .824 Significant level at P < 0.05, r2 = .152 Respondents’ organization and education were significantly related to participating in government tourism programs. The model pr edicted or explained 19% of variance in Partake (Table 4-13). There was no correla tion between organization and education (Table 4-26).

PAGE 81

68 Table 4-13. Multiple Regression Results of Participation in Government Tourism Projects Variable B SE t Sig. Constant 2.787 .638 4.368 .000 Organization -.398 .063 -6.355 .000 Gender .050 .103 .481 .631 Age .007 .005 1.472 .142 Education .125 .047 2.662 .008 Raised in I-Lan as children .081 .134 .607 .544 Residence .008 .016 .490 .624 Owning business less than one year -.197 .220 -.893 .373 Owning business more than one year -.001 .003 -.307 .759 Significant level at P < 0.05, r2 = .186 Respondents’ organization was significantly related to donating money to tourism activities. The model predicted or explained 24% of the variance in Donate (Table 4-14). Respondents’ who represented tourism associat ions and private organizations contributed more money to tourism planning. On th e other hand, respondents who represented individual businesses donated le ss money to tourism planning. Table 4-14. Multiple Regression Results of Contributing Money to Tourism Planning Variable B SE t Sig. Constant 3.442 .901 3.818 .000 Organization -.665 .088 -7.518 .000 Gender -.012 .146 -.082 .935 Age .004 .007 .568 .571 Education .100 .066 1.519 .130 Raised in I-Lan as children .198 .190 1.045 .297 Residence -.034 .023 -1.487 .138 Owning business less than one year .300 .311 .965 .336 Owning business more than one year .001 .004 .366 .714 Significant level at P < 0.05, r2 = .236 Research Question 3: Tourism Involvem ent’s Relationship with Perception of Benefits Four benefit groups were used to examine relationships between perceived benefits and respondents’ attitudes toward the government and items referring to the four levels of involvement: 1) decision-maker, 2) tour pr ovider, 3) tourist and 4) no involvement. The model used to examine perceptions of costs/benefits is specified as follows:

PAGE 82

69 Y1 = a + b1X1 + b2X2 + b3X3 + b4X4 + b5X5 + b6X6 + b7X7 (Table 4-15) Where subscript i denotes the ith observation in the sample, Y is the perceived impacts of the outcome, a is a constant, b1, b2 … bk are the coefficients associated with each explanatory variable X1, X2, ….Xki. The explanatory variables used to explain NBT’s impacts in the model include attitudes toward the government (X1), past participated in tourism pla nning in the past 12 months (X2), willingness to participate in tourism planning over the next 12 months (X3) implementation of tourism planning (X4), used tourism projects over the last 12 months (X5) participation in tourism activities as a tourist (X6), and donation of money to tourism activities (X7).The nine factors derived from factor analysis were the dependent variables in the model. Table 4-15. Variables in Model Dependent Variables I ndependent Variables ECB1: Economic benfit1: job and sales revenue issues Govall (X1):attitudes toward the government; Passtime (X2)-Past participation in the pass 12 months, Futrtime (X3) willing to participate in tourism planning over the next 12 months, Implemt (X4) implementation of tourism planning, Partake (X5) Used tourism projects over the last 12 months Tourist (X6) participated as a tourist over the last 12 months and Donate (X7) contributing money to tourism planning. SCB: Social benefit Same as above ENB: Environmental benefit Same as above Results showed that participants’ att itudes toward the government and their reported participation in tourism were weakly related to their per ceptions of benefits (Tables 4.16-4.18). The three models did show that many significant relationships existed between the dependent variables and part icipants’ perception of benefits. Where significance was shown, only small amount s of variance were explained.

PAGE 83

70 Attitudes toward the government and participation in tourism planning in the next 12 months were significantly related to social /cultural benefit. The model predicted or explained 12% of variance in SCB (Table 416). Respondents who interacted more with county government and respondents who were w illing to participate in tourism planning over the next 12 months perceived more social /cultural benefits than other respondents. There was no correlation between attit udes toward the government and willing to participate over the next 12 months (Table 4-26). Table 4-16. Multiple Regression Results of Social/cultural Benefit Variable B SE t Sig. Constant 3.119 .171 18.28 .000 Attitudes toward the government .162 .041 3.943 .000 Past participation ove r the last 12 months -.066 .049 -1.328 .185 Willing to participate over the next 12 months .102 .041 2.475 .014 Implemented tourism activities over the last 12 months .016 .066 .240 .811 Used tourism projects ov er the last 12 months .060 .065 .923 .357 Participated as a tourist over the last 12 months .058 .051 1.142 .254 Contributed over the last 12 months .006 .033 .173 .863 Significant level at P < 0.05, r2 = .12 The model predicted or explained 4% of variance for particip ants’ perception of Economic Benefit 1 (ECB1): Job and Sales Revenue (Table 4-17). Table 4-17. Multiple Regression Results of Economic Benefit 1 Variable B SE t Sig. Constant 3.038 .211 14.38 .000 Attitudes toward the government .111 .051 2.178 .030 Past participation ove r the last 12 months -.020 .061 -.319 .750 Willing to participate over the next 12 months .055 .051 1.084 .279 Implemented tourism activities over the last 12 months -.020 .082 -.247 .805 Used tourism projects ov er the last 12 months .128 .080 1.593 .112 Participated as a tourist over the last 12 months -.020 .063 -.322 .748 Contributed over the last 12 months -.042 .041 -1.042 .298 Significant level at P < 0.05, r2 = .043

PAGE 84

71 Attitudes toward the government and willingness to participate in tourism planning over the next 12 months were significantly related to perceptions of environmental benefits; however, the model onl y predicted or explained 6% of variance in ENB (Table 4-18). Respondents who interacted more w ith county government and respondents who were willing to participate in tourism planni ng over the next 12 months perceived more environmental benefits than other respondents. Table 4-18. Multiple Regression Results of Environmental Benefit Variable B SE t Sig. Constant 2.953 .220 13.415 .000 Attitudes toward the government .150 .053 2.819 .005 Past participation ove r the last 12 months .032 .064 .505 .614 Willing to participate over the next 12 months .108 .053 2.022 .044 Implemented tourism activities over the last 12 months -.026 .085 -.300 .764 Used tourism projects ov er the last 12 months -.039 .083 -.467 .641 Participated as a tourist over the last 12 months .042 .066 .639 .523 Contributed over the last 12 months -.015 .042 -.356 .722 Significant level at P < 0.05, r2 = .057 In all, attitudes toward the county governme nt is the major factor affecting business managers’ involvement in tourism planning. In all cases, respondents who had more positive attitudes toward the government pe rceived more socia l/cultural benefits, followed by economic and environmental benefits. Respondents’ more willing to participate in decision-making over the next 12 months perceived mo re social/cultural and environmental benefits. Reversed variables measurement In order to better understand the relations hip between level of involvement and respondents’ perception of t ourism impacts, this study used the above models by reversing the dependent and independent vari ables to examine their relationships. The independent variables include ECB1, SCB a nd ENB. The dependent variables include

PAGE 85

72 attitudes toward the government, past partic ipation over the last 12 months, willing to participate over the next 12 months, Impl emented tourism activities over the last 12 months, used tourism projects over the last 12 months, participated as a tourist over the last 12 months, contributed over the last 12 months. Respondents’ perception of SCB and ENB were significan tly related to attitude toward the government (Table 4-18-1). The model predicted or explained 10% of variance in attitude toward the government. There was a significant correlation between SCB and ENB, r (285) = .24, P < .01 (Table 4-6-1). Table 4-18-1. Multiple Regression Results of Attitudes toward Government Variable B SE t Sig. Constant 1.558 .393 3.965 .000 ECB1 (Economic Benefit 1) .102 .071 1.430 .154 SCB (Social/cultural Benefit) .301 .085 3.549 .000 ENB (Environmental Benefit) .149 .068 2.183 .030 Significant level at P < 0.05, r2 = .10 Respondents’ SBC (social/cultural benefit) was significantly related to willing to participate over the next 12 months (Table 4-18-2). However, this model only predicted or explained 6% of variance in willing to participate over the next 12 months. Table 4-18-2. Multiple Regression Results of Willing to Participate in Tourism Planning over the next 12 Months Variable B SE t Sig. Constant -.006 .519 -.012 .990 ECB1 (Economic Benefit 1) .031 .093 .330 .741 SCB (Social/cultural Benefit) .347 .111 3.128 .002 ENB (Environmental Benefit) .162 .089 1.813 .071 Significant level at P < 0.05, r2 = .062 Respondents’ SBC (social/cultural benef it) was significantly related to “used tourism projects over the last 12 months.” However, this model only predicted or explained 5% of variance in used tourism project over the la st 12 months (Table 4-18-3).

PAGE 86

73 Table 4-18-3. Multiple Regression Results of Used Tourism Projects over the last 12 Months Variable B SE t Sig. Constant .086 .428 .200 .841 ECB1 (Economic Benefit 1) .105 .077 1.366 .173 SCB (Social/cultural Benefit) .291 .092 3.150 .002 ENB (Environmental Benefit) .000 .074 -.006 .996 Significant level at P < 0.05, r2 = .052 Results also showed the significant rela tionship between SCB and other variables in level of involvement. However, their pr edicted powers were very low. In all, respondents’ perception of soci al/cultural benefit was strongl y related to their level of involvement. That indicated if they perceive d benefit from social/cultural aspect they would be likely to involve in tourism planning. Research Question 4: Socio-demogr aphics and Business Characteristics Relationship to Perceptions of Benefits The model used to examine perceptions of NBT benefits is specified as follows: Yi = a + b1X1 + b2X2 + b3X3 + b4X4 + b5X5 + b6X6 + b7X7 (Table 4-19) Table 4-19. Variables in Model Dependent Variables I ndependent Variables Model 1 (ECB1: Economic benfit1: job and sales revenue issues) Organization (X1 )respondents’ organization, Gender (X2) Male, female, Age (X3) 20-75, Education (X4), Child (X5) raised in IL as children, Residence (X6) respondents’ residence, LBZ1 (X7) operating business less than one year, LBZ2 (X8) operating business more than one year M 2 (SCB: Social/cultural benefit) Same as above M 3 (ENB: Environmental benefit) Same as above As shown below (Tables 4-20 through 4-22) age and if they operated their business longer than one year seem to have the bigge st affect on perception of benefits; however, they explain only small percents of the variance.

PAGE 87

74 Only respondents’ organizati on was significantly related (p< .05) to Social/Cultural Benefit (SCB). The model predicted or explai ned 5% of variance in SCB (Table 4-20). Table 4-20. Multiple Regression Results of Social/cultural Benefit Variable B SE t Sig. Constant 3.956 .551 8.466 .000 Organization -.104 .046 -2.287 .023 Gender .021 .075 .284 .776 Age .002 .004 .693 .489 Education .010 .034 .289 .772 Raised in I-Lan as children .071 .097 .732 .465 Residence .021 .012 1.780 .076 Owning business less than one year .109 .163 .667 .505 Owning business more than one year .000 .002 .230 .818 Significant level at P < 0.05, r2 = .045 Respondents’ age and if they operated th eir business longer th an one year was significantly related (p < .05) to perception of Economic Benefit 1 (ECB1): Job and Sales Revenue. However, the model only predicted or explained 5% of the variance for this variable (Table 4-21). Table 4-21. Multiple Regression Results of Economic Benefit 1: Job & Sales Revenue Variable B SE t Sig. Constant 3.445 .551 6.248 .000 Organization -.006 .054 -.108 .914 Gender -.120 .088 -1.364 .174 Age .009 .004 2.052 .041 Education .011 .040 .279 .780 Raised in I-Lan as children .042 .114 .368 .713 Residence .002 .014 .152 .880 Owning business less than one year -.038 .192 -.197 .844 Owning business more than one year -.006 .002 -2.440 .015 Significant level at P < 0.05, r2 = .053 There were no significant relationship (p<0.1) between all socio-demographic variables and environmenta l benefits (Table 4-22).

PAGE 88

75 Table 4-22. Multiple Regression Results of Environmental Benefit Variable B SE t Sig. Constant 4.161 .577 7.29 .000 Organization -.003 .056 -.058 .954 Gender -.095 .092 -1.030 .304 Age .006 .004 1.440 .151 Education .027 .042 .648 .518 Raised in I-Lan as children -.147 .120 -1.231 .220 Residence -.006 .015 -.383 .702 Owning business less than one year -.212 .201 -1.055 .293 Owning business more than one year -.004 .002 -1.527 .128 Significant level at P < 0.05, r2 = .032 Research Question 5: Interaction of Soci o-demographic Charact eristics and Level of Involvement to Perception of Benefits Regression and a one-way ANOVA were us ed to examine how the respondents’ socio-demographics interacted with their attitudes to ward the government and level of involvement related to thei r perception of benefits. The model used to examine perceptions of NBT benefits is specified as follows: Yi = a + b1X1 + b2X2 + …+ bkXki Y1 = a + b1X1 + b2X2 + b3X3 + … + b14X14 + b15X15 (Table 4-23) Where subscript i denotes the ith observation in the sample, Y is the perceived impacts of the outcome, a is a constant, b1, b2 …bk are the coefficients associated with each explanatory variable X1, X2, ….Xki. The explanatory variables used to explain NBT’s impacts in the model include attitudes toward the government (X1), past participated over the past 12 months (X2), willingness to participate in tourism planning over the next 12 months (X3) implementation of tourism planning (X4), used tourism projects, (X5) participation in tourism activities as a tourist (X6), contribution to tourism activities (X7), respondents’ organization(X8) Gender (X9), Age (X10), Education (X11), raised in IL as children (X12), respondents’ residence(X13) operating business less than one year (X14), and operating business more than one year(X15)

PAGE 89

76 Table 4-23. Independent and De pendent Variables in Model Dependent Variables I ndependent Variables Model 1 (ECB1: Economic benfit1: job and sales revenue issues) Govall (X1)-attitudes toward government, Passtime (X2)-past participated in tourism planning over the past 12 months, Futrtime (X3) wiling to participate in tourism planning over the next 12 months, Implemt (X4) implementation of tourism planning, Partake (X5) used tourism projects over the past Tourist (X6) participating in tourism activities as a tourist and Donate (X7) contribution to tourism planning. Organization (X8)respondents’ organization, Gender (X9) Male, female, Age (X10) 20-75, Education (X11), Child (X12) raised in IL as children, Residence (X13) respondents’ residence, LBZ1 (X14) operating business less than one year, LBZ2 (X15) operating business more than one year. M 2 (SCB: Social/cultural benefit) Same as above M 3 (ENB: Environmental benefit) Same as above Attitudes toward government, participating in tourism planning over the past 12 months, and willingness to participate in tourism planning over the next 12 months were significantly related to the perception of Social/cultural Benefit (SCB). The model predicted or explained 16% of the variance in SCB (Table 4.24). There was a significant correlation between participating in tour ism planning over the past 12 months and willingness to participate in tourism planning over the next 12 months, r (280) = .60, P < .01 (Table 4-26). In other words, respondent s who participated in tourism planning over the past 12 months would be willing to partic ipate in tourism planning over the next 12 months. However, these variables showed opposite a ffects on the perception of SCB. There was a significant correlation be tween perception of governme nt and participating in tourism planning over the past 12 months, r (285 ) = -.19, P < .01 (Table 4-26), which also

PAGE 90

77 explained the opposite affects on the perception of SCB. Peop le who stated that they participated more in decision-making perc eived less SCB. If they were willing to participate more, they pe rceived more benefits. Table 4-24. Multiple Regression Results of Social/cultural Benefit Variable B SE t Sig. Constant 2.840 .518 5.481 .000 Perception of government. .174 .044 3.965 .000 Past participation ove r the last 12 months -.121 .061 -1.984 .048 Willing to participate over the next 12 months .135 .046 2.948 .004 Implemented tourism over the last 12 months -.012 .077 -.153 .878 Used tourism projects ov er the last 12 months .093 .079 1.174 .242 Participated as a tourist over the last 12 months .059 .055 1.084 .280 Contributed over the last 12 months -.019 .038 -.494 .622 Organization -.078 .051 -1.542 .124 Gender .020 .074 .268 .789 Age .002 .004 .491 .624 Education .000 .033 .010 .992 Raised in I-Lan as children .076 .095 .800 .425 Residence .016 .012 1.394 .165 Owning business less than one year .182 .157 1.160 .247 Owning business more than one year .001 .002 .280 .780 Significant level at P < 0.05, r2 = .161 Attitudes toward the government, age, a nd if they operated their business longer than one year were significantly related to Economic Benefit 1 (ECB1): Job and Sales Revenue; however, the model onl y predicted or explained 10% of the variance in ECB1 (Table 4-25). There was a significant co rrelation between age and operating their business longer than one year, r (267) = .16, P < .05(Table 4-26). There was no correlation between age and pe rception of government. Respondents who were older than 35 tended to operate their business longer th an that of younger respondents. However, respondents who operated their bus iness longer than one year di d not perceive more jobs and sales revenue benefits.

PAGE 91

78 Table 4-25. Multiple Regression Results of Economic Benefit 1 Variable B SE t Sig. Constant 2.730 .630 4.331 .000 Perception of government. .126 .053 2.349 .020 Past participation ove r the last 12 months -.099 .074 -1.336 .183 Willing to participate over the next 12 months .065 .056 1.169 .243 Implemented tourism activities over the last 12 months .020 .093 .213 .831 Used tourism projects ov er the last 12 months .105 .096 1.095 .275 Participated as a tourist over the last 12 months .032 .066 .488 .626 Contributed over the last 12 months -.051 .046 -1.092 .276 Organization -.020 .062 -.329 .742 Gender -.113 .090 -1.260 .209 Age .009 .004 2.096 .037 Education .020 .041 .500 .617 Raised in I-Lan as children .046 .115 .397 .692 Residence -.006 .014 -.438 .662 Owning business less than one year .044 .190 .233 .816 Owning business more than one year -.006 .002 -2.661 .008 Significant level at P < 0.05, r2 = .103

PAGE 92

79Table 4-26. Correlation between Soci o-Demographics, Business Characteri stics and Level of Involvement ORGANIZ ATION PASSTI ME FUTRT IME IMPLE MT PARTA KE TOURIST DONA TE GENDER AGE EDU CHILD RESID ENCE LBZ1 LBZ2 GOV ALL ORGANIZ ATION Pearson Correlation 1 .440(**) .322(**) .345(**) .384(**) -.243(**) .449(**) .177(**) -.148(*) -.024 -.017 .005 -.128(*) .004 -.050 Sig. (2tailed) .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .003 .015 .694 .787 .935 .034 .952 .405 N 277 277 272 276 275 275 274 277 266 277 271 277 274 268 277 PASSTIME Pearson Correlation 1 .601(**) .650(**) .570(**) .343(**) .525(**) -.161(**) .185(**) -.044 .031 .086 .075 -.007 .191( **) Sig. (2tailed) .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .006 .002 .463 .609 .147 .207 .913 .001 N 286 281 285 284 284 283 286 275 286 280 286 283 277 286 FUTRTIME Pearson Correlation 1 .555(**) .471(**) .315(**) .444(**) -.115 .004 .015 .016 .010 .013 -.007 .066 Sig. (2tailed) .000 .000 .000 .000 .054 .954 .808 .794 .868 .834 .905 .271 N 281 281 280 280 279 281 271 281 275 281 279 273 281 IMPLEMT Pearson Correlation 1 .785(**) .390(**) .484(**) -.056 .138(*) .042 -.010 .131(*) .022 .029 .160( **) Sig. (2tailed) .000 .000 .000 .350 .023 .481 .867 .027 .714 .637 .007 N 285 284 284 283 285 274 285 279 285 282 276 285 PARTAKE Pearson Correlation 1 .432(**) .527(**) -.077 .084 .117(*) .084 .037 .032 .009 .180( **) Sig. (2tailed) .000 .000 .194 .167 .050 .162 .535 .588 .886 .002 N 284 283 282 284 273 284 278 284 281 275 284 TOURIST Pearson Correlation 1 .298(**) .033 -.014 .118(*) .013 -.040 -.031 .027 .112 Sig. (2tailed) .000 .578 .814 .047 .825 .501 .609 .654 .059 N 284 282 284 273 284 278 284 281 275 284 DONATE Pearson Correlation .298(**) 1 -.079 .074 .114 .100 -.076 .113 .035 .097 Sig. (2tailed) .000 .184 .223 .055 .095 .204 .060 .564 .105 N 282 283 283 272 283 277 283 280 274 283 GENDER Pearson Correlation .033 -.079 1 .219(**) -.031 .072 -.024 .156(**) -.035 -.067 Sig. (2tailed) .000 .598 .231 .682 .009 .564 .259

PAGE 93

80Table 4-26 Continued ORGANIZ ATION PASSTI ME FUTRT IME IMPLE MT PARTA KE TOURIST DONA TE GENDER AGE EDU CHILD RESID ENCE LBZ1 LBZ2 GOV ALL N 286 275 286 280 286 283 277 286 AGE Pearson Correlation 1 .377(**) .029 .048 .072 .156(*) .099 Sig. (2tailed) .000 .630 .427 .235 .010 .101 N 275 275 271 275 273 268 275 EDU Pearson Correlation 1 .138(*) -.058 .107 .037 -.084 Sig. (2tailed) .021 .328 .073 .541 .156 N 286 280 286 283 277 286 CHILD Pearson Correlation 1 .041 .064 -.141(*) -.042 Sig. (2tailed) .491 .289 .020 .480 N 280 280 277 271 280 RESIDENC E Pearson Correlation 1 -.041 -.071 .074 Sig. (2tailed) .493 .238 .214 N 286 283 277 286 LBZ1 Pearson Correlation 1 .165(**) -.010 Sig. (2tailed) .006 .867 N 283 277 283 LBZ2 Pearson Correlation 1 .013 Sig. (2tailed) .828 N 277 277 GOVALL Pearson Correlation 1 Sig. (2tailed) N 286 ** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).

PAGE 94

81 Summary Social/cultural benefits were the most hi ghly perceived benefits group, followed by economic benefits; however, all three-benefit gr oups had fairly close means (all between 3.6 and 4.1). All costs were perceived as be ing lower than benefits. Attitudes toward county government affected respondents’ per ceptions in economic, social/cultural and environmental benefits. Sales revenue shows that 30% of annual sales and 31% of customers were from NBT. Whale watching business ha s the highest mean scores of percentage of sales from NBT and the highest percentage customers fr om NBT, followed by gift shops and B&B. Leisure farm, B&B and gift store businesses have increased their sales revenue rather than decreased over the last five years. Older respondents perceived more econom ic benefit than younger respondents. Male respondents participated more in tourism planning than female respondents. Respondents’ organization was significantly re lated to their level of involvement. In terms of involvement, it appears that atti tudes toward the governments’ ability to work with stakeholders was one of the ma jor variables that influences people’s perception of benefits. Occasionally, other vari ables associated with tourism involvement would be significant, but these were rare. Ther efore, one of the majo r results of this study pertains to stakeholders’ perception of interaction and coll aboration rather than direct involvement in tourism planning. Results in reversed multiple regression indicated that respondents’ perception of so cial/cultural benefit was significantly related to respondents’ level of involvement in tourism planning.

PAGE 95

82 CHAPTER 5 DISCUSSION AND SUGGESTION The purpose of this study was twofold. Fi rst, it was to unde rstand stakeholders’ perceptions of economic, social/cultural envi ronmental and other factors for nature-based tourism in I-Lan. Second, it was to examin e the relationships am ong stakeholders’ sociodemographic characteristics, type and level of involvement in tourism and their relations to perceptions of naturebased tourism’s costs and benefits. This chapter will revisit each of the five research objectives and highlight major findings for each objective. Next, it will summarize implications for planning and future research. Research Question 1: Perception of Impacts Results show that respondents perceived the social/cultural benefits higher than environmental and economic benefits, as well as all costs. In fact, social/cultural costs were the least reported costs. The I-Lan County government has engaged in culture activities as major tourism activities since 1990s. For example, the county held the Grappling with Ghosts Competition at Tou-Ch eng in 1991, Come back! Turtle Island in 1991, Building I-Lan House in 1994, Happy I-Lan Year since 1994, holding International Collegiate Regatta in 1994 and Children’s Fe stival in1996. These activities were often co-sponsored by local businesses, which activated the local industry. In the recent past, the central Taiwan government had suppressed many such cultural activities. Integrating cultural activitie s with tourism might likely have increased the sense of local sprit and cu ltural identity for participa ting tourism businesses. These are possible reasons why socio/ cultural benefits had such high means. I-Lan was ranked

PAGE 96

83 the first in “sense of pride” among 21 coun ties and cities in Taiwan in 1996 and 1997 surveyed by Foreseeing Magazine, and was also ranked the first as “the most favorable living place in Taiwan” in several recent su rveys (Lee, 2002). Furthermore, these cultural activities have successfully attracted visito rs and generated sales revenue for local business. Results also show that environmental benefit ranked second followed by economic benefits. The county government has stressed the importance of environmental protection (EP) when engaging tourism since 1980s. Th e county rejected polluting manufacturing plants being built in I-Lan (Lee 2003, Chen 2003). The county also established and implemented environmental protection standa rds and regulations in the 1980s and 1990s, which later became environmental protection po licies for the central Taiwan government (Hong, 2001, Lee, 2003, Chen 2003). Using an EP monitoring system, the county has been able to detect manufact uring plants that violated th e EP standards (I-Lan County Government 2000, Hong, 2000, Chen, 2003). As a result, the environment in I-Lan is well conserved compared to other areas in Taiwan. This relates to why I-Lan is so popular among nature-based tourists. Results show that economic benefits ranked last in benefits, which might reflect the economic structure in I-Lan. Past research re vealed that the economic benefits generated from tourism are a small portion of the econom y due to tourism’s labor intensive and low profit feature (Hong, 2001). Thus, the economic benefit derived from tourism in I-Lan has been unable to offset its economic gap. In addition, overall group impacts (Table 4-6) show that ECC1 (Economic cost1: land pri ces; mean 3.9) and ECC2 (Economic cost2: tourism variability; mean 3.7) are slightly higher than ECB1 (ec onomic cost1: job and

PAGE 97

84 sales revenue issues; mean 3.6), which might explain the respondent s’ perception of low economic benefit compared with their percep tion of social/cultura l and environmental benefits. The positive correlation between ECB1 and ECC (Table 4-6-1) also indicates the weak economic benefit. The family income and the unemployment rate in I-Lan describe the economic situation in I-Lan. I-Lan’s family inco me was ranked 14 among Taiwan’s 21 counties (DGBAS, 2003), and the unemployment rate in I-Lan has always been 5%-15% higher than that of other areas in Taiwan (DGBAS 2002). Also, tourism in I-Lan has reached a consolidation stage. The number of visitors has remained the same or has slightly decreased since 2001. I-Lan has gradually lost its advantage in tourism due to competition from other countie s (initial survey, 2005) Another explanation for the ranking might be individual responde nt’s perception in economic versus group or whole society’ s perceptions in so cial/cultural and environmental issues. Perceptions of economic issues are usually related to short-term, direct and personal experience, while percep tions of social/cultural and environmental issues are usually related to long-term, indire ct or related to whol e society’s experience instead of personal experience. Several respond ents asked the researcher how to answer the questionnaire regarding social/cultural a nd environmental items. They were not sure if they should rate the question based on thei r own experience or based on I-Lan society’s viewpoints. This might explain the high mean of social/cultu ral benefits, which was rated upon group perception instead of respondent’s individual perception. When answering economic items, respondents would rate th ese items based on their own personal

PAGE 98

85 perceptions not I-Lan society’s perceptions. Thus, the results in economic benefits appear to be lower than social/cultural and environmental benefits. Research Question 2: Socio-demographic characteristics and type of involvement Results show that most socio-demographic characteristics have little role in affecting the type of involvement I-Lan busin ess managers have in tourism. However, traditional gender roles continue to exist. For example, males were significantly more likely to operate businesses like whale watching and females were more likely to be operating travel agencies. Results also show that males have significantly more positive attitudes towards the governme nt’s involvement of stakehol ders in planning, probably because males are more involved in decision-making positions. Results also show that well-educated re spondents participated more in the four levels of involvement. Survey data show that 44% of respondents have a college degree, which is much higher than c ounty average (18%) (Table 41). It also means that respondents with better educati on are likely to be non-natives, who bring capital to invest in I-Lan. As investors, these respondents would tend to participate more in tourism planning. Respondents’ organization was related to le vel of involvement. This confirms that people who are involved in t ourism associations or other private business organizations are more likely to take part in the governme nt’s tourism program, either as a decisionmaker or actively participati ng in government sponsored pr ograms. Almost half of the participants (43%) are invol ved in independent businesse s and are not members or business organizations or tourism associations These participants believe the government

PAGE 99

86 is open to their participation in tourism programs; although, they apparently do not take advantage of these opportunities. Research Question 3: Tourism Involvem ent’s Relationship with Perception of Benefits More than 48% of respondents did not pa rticipate in county tourism planning over the last 12 months and only 6% of respondents participated more than 11 times in the past 12 months. There is a need for the county to better understand w hy stakeholders do and do not participate. Using the so cial exchange theory as the underlying context, this study used perception of benefits to help understand business peop le’s involvement in tourism planning. A key finding related to participation in tourism planning was the generally positive attitudes most participants had of the government’s ability to interact with stakeholders and integrate their desires into planning. The fact that they have these positive attitudes toward the government, but do not actively work with the government shows that stakeholders have a complex re lationship with the gove rnment in terms of tourism planning. Attitudes toward the government and willingness to participate in decision making had small affects on respondents’ perception of social/cultural benefits. Even with these weak relationships, this result does highlight the uniqueness of social/cultural benefits and shows that business managers’ attitudes towards collaboration are more important than actual behaviors (e.g., participating in decision-making, taking part as tourists, and donating money) when examining their perceptio n of benefits. Since these relationships were positive (more positive attitudes toward the government and higher willingness to participate resulted in higher perception of so cial/cultural benefits), these results might indicate that when people do participate, thei r perception of benefits might even decline.

PAGE 100

87 Both economic and environmental benefits do no t appear as significant as social/cultural benefits. The reversed multiple regression in involve ment also indicates perception of both social/cultural and environm ental benefits affect res pondents’ attitudes towards government. Respondents’ perception of social /cultural benefits affects all level of involvement even though most of them are weak relationships. These findings indicate that particip ants’ attitudes and behavior towards participation need to be better understood. Nearly 34% of respondents have never participated in tourism activities as tourists and 56 % of them have only participated in the programs 1-6 times over the last 12 mont hs. Business managers are apparently not interested in these tourism programs as business ventures or as tourists. This can partly be explained for a variety of reasons. Specifi cally, business managers do not see these activities directly providing the benefits, and they believe their own tourism activities are more likely to provide these benefits. Also, managers might not believe these programs are valuable. For example, the number of visitors to the Green Expo and Children’s Festival in 2005 both dropped 10% and 30% respectively from 2004 pa rticipation rates. Business mangers might see these two events as losing their ability to attract new or repeated visitors. So, although they see nature -based tourism providing overall benefits to the county, the specific county programs mi ght not be providing these benefits. Nearly 60% of respondents have never donated money to tourism planning and only less than 5% of respondents have donate d more than NT$50,000 to tourism planning, which reflect that the concept of donation ha s not prevailed for business managers in ILan. Most respondents are not willing to contribute any money to tourism planning

PAGE 101

88 because they do not perceive any benefit fo r such action. Donation is not a part of traditional social/cultural norm in Taiwan. Research Question 4: Socio-demographics Relationship to Perceptions of Benefits Socio-demographic and business characteristi cs did little to ex plain respondents’ perception of benefits. Results show there were no significant relationships among sociodemographic and business characteristics with perception of environmental benefits. This corresponds with past research that found that most socio-dem ographics do not relate to participants’ perceptions of impact (e.g. Belisle and Hoy 1980; Liu and Var 1986; Allen, Perdue and Long 1993; Brayley and Var 1989; Davis, Allen, and Cosenza 1988; Madrigal 1993, 1995; Pizam 1978; Ryan, Scotland, and Montgomery 1998). Although socio-demographic relationships did not relate to perception of benefits, business characteristics did explain sma ll amounts of variance. Organization and residence of the business were significantly related to social/cultural benefits. Also operating a business longer than one year wa s significantly related to the perception of economic benefits. Research Question 5: Interaction of Soci o-demographic Charact eristics and Level of Involvement to Perception of Benefits The models were most predictive when a ll variables were incl uded within a single model. Although they showed no significant relationships fo r the environmental benefit group, the models did explain 16% of the varian ce for social/cultural benefits and 10% of the variance for economic benefits. Results show that attitudes toward the government and age were positively related to economic benefits that described job a nd sales revenue issue. However, operating a business longer than one year was negativ ely related to economic benefit 1.

PAGE 102

89 Although respondents who had more positiv e attitudes towards the government were more likely to perceive social/cultural benefits; actual interaction with the government programs, in terms of past pa rticipation in decision-making, visiting programs as a tourist, and donating to tourism programs, were not significantly related to perceptions of these benefits. As stated earlier, this highli ghts the finding that participants’ perception of the government is more importa nt in determining perceptions of benefits than actual interaction with the government. Pa st research in social exchange reveals that higher level of trust people have with a decision-maker has a positive affect on GNP and social performance (La Porta et al 1997). This could be the case in I-Lan. Business managers had positive perceptions toward the government, but they lost trust with the government when they in teracted with the government. Other research (Madrigal 1993) shows that residents with positive perceptions of tourism believe that they could influence t ourism decisions. Business managers in I-Lan could lose trust with the government as they become more involved in the government’s tourism programs (as decision-makers or part icipants). This could result in a gradual eroding of support for NBT in I-Lan – at least as a county initiative. Respondents who were older than 35 percei ved more benefits from job and sales revenue, which might indicate that these ol der respondents have operated their business longer and they generate more sales reve nue and perceive more job opportunities. Another explanation is that older respondents have more mo ney to invest in tourism; thus, they are able to earn more sales revenue. Respondents who have operated businesses longer than one year had a negative relationship to economic benefits. This ag ain highlights how beha vior in the tourism

PAGE 103

90 field contradicts peopl e’s attitudes toward tourism’s benefits. Actual involvement in tourism lessened people’s perceptions of ec onomic benefits. They have perhaps seen decreases in economic benefits. Based on th e collected data and follow-up interviews, business managers’ expressed that they did not generate more sales revenue, even though they have more customers due to competition and higher operating costs. These operating costs include aggressive price-cu tting within busine ss sectors and paying kickbacks to tour guides. Newer business ma nagers have not noti ced these decreases; therefore, they do not perceive more or less economic benefit. Lessons Learned from I-Lan Based on existing data, observation and fo llow-up interviews, there are several points to be addressed. NBT is the right direction: Ninety percent of respondents in followup interviews agreed that nature-based tourism was good for I-Lan and should continue to be developed as a tool for sustainable development. Tourism in I-Lan should be positioned in nature-based tourism, which would be a sustainable way for I-Lan. Country side landscape and well preserved environment would be our advantage co mpared with other areas in Taiwan (Male. 51, restaurant owner). There were only domestic visitors in I-Lan and no international visitors. There was major competition with hotel businesses, which reduced the hotel rates sharply. County government should ma nage B&B properly. There were 500 B&B in I-Lan and most of them were unregistered, which would negatively affect our environment. Nature-based tourism would be good for I-Lan, which would be our advantage compared to othe r counties (Male, 55, hotel manager). Though nature-based tourism would be th e right direction for I-Lan, county government needs to manage well in e nvironmental sensitive areas by setting standards of carrying capac ity to control visitors. Also establishment of evaluation system for nature-based touris m was needed (Female, 55, car rental & travel agency).

PAGE 104

91 As mentioned earlier, when I-Lan began to initiate tourism in the 1980s, it also stressed the importance of environmental protection. The sense of environmental protection was rising as the county struggled with rejec ting polluting manufacturing plants in the 1980s and 1990s (Hong, 2001; Chen, 2003). Results show that most business managers (78%) are aware that they need to keep a well-managed environment for continuing their tourism businesses. Resu lts also show that e nvironmental cost was not a major concern for respondents. County data show that environmental disasters such as mudslides and water pollution are rare in I-Lan ( I-Lan County Government, 2002). The cultural activities enhanced the cultural identity and cultural recognition in ILan. For example, the I-Lan county government established the first county historical museum in Taiwan in 1994 and National Ce nter for Traditiona l Art (I-Lan County Government, 2004). These cultural centers not on ly boosted the local sp irit, but they also made I-Lan a unique cultural place in Taiw an. Business managers and county officials stressed that I-Lan should be positioned as Ta ipei’s back-garden. I-L an needs to keep its “small and pretty” countryside landscape, recr eational environment and also exhibit its unique local culture to attract people from Taipei area (Chen, 2003; Yu, Director of I-Lan County Land Administrati on, 2004 in interview). Role of County Government For the last twenty years, county governm ent has been in charge of all of the major tourism activities in I-Lan. Accordi ng to this study’s findings, most business managers have positive attitudes toward the government’s ability to work with them in tourism planning. However, actual interac tion with the government did not show that

PAGE 105

92 their perceptions increased, and there was even some evidence that perceptions of benefits decreased. Tourism planning and development has become a heavy burden for the county (Chen, T.S. 2003). Working with the governme nt might not be as rewarding for I-Lan business managers as they might think it could be. Although these results do not show working with the county has a significantly negative impact on respondents’ perception of benefits, it certainly does not help. County government has controlled and mana ged most tourism resources in I-Lan over the last twenty-years. While tourism development has reached its consolidation stage (Lee, 2003; Shen, 2002), the county governme nt needs to release its resources and invite more private sector involvement in tourism (Kuo, 2004). Several respondents discussed the need to involve the private sector better. When the Children’s Festival just started in 1996 and 1997, the county government asked local businesses to support by allocati ng tickets to each business association to promote the activity for collecting admission fees. After a few years later, when visitors of the Children’s Festival reached 1,000,000, the county government would not release any tic kets to us in advance or offer any discount for local businesses (Male, 43, hot spring hotel owner). County government didn’t really listen and understand what we needed. Instead they just did what they thought the right things such as Green Expo, which has been fading and is unable to attract more vi sitors due to similar activities in other counties. These major events needed to be held in a permanent, sustainable way instead of tearing down the installation and decoration each time after the event (Male, 36, B&B owner). County government operated the large-scal e events beyond I-Lan’s ability, which would affect its tourism in the long-run. There were really no unique tourism resources in I-Lan compared with other counties in Taiwan where Tainan with cultural resources and Hualien with scenic resources (Male, 55, restaurant owner).

PAGE 106

93 These comments support the study’s findings that businesses have positive attitudes toward tourism and the government, but they would like to pursue these benefits as independent businesses – not in co llaboration with the government. Better communication between the county government and local business managers is needed The county government is missing a valuable opportunity. It has worked hard to promote and develop tourism, but the busine sses that should benefit from these tourism programs are not actively taking part in program s or their planning. In fact, when they do take part, it does not improve their percepti on of benefits. I-Lan should work to improve how they interact and communicate with busin esses to ensure that stakeholders have positive experiences with the government in tourism planning; thereby, improving their overall perception of tourism’s impact in I-Lan. Research has shown that governments can influence cooperation and collaboration between businesses (Lee, 2002; Shen 2003; Chen 2003). Since this study showed businesses are more likely to interact indepe ndently rather than with the government, there may be opportunities for the government to provide opportuni ties for businesses to form more valuable partnerships. In the pa st, some of I-Lan’s hotels formed strategic alliances because there was a perception that the I-Lan govern ment was supporting leisure farms and B&B’s to the detriment of hotels. One respondent characterized the conflict: It was unfair for us when county government fully promoted leisure farming and B&B. Leisure framing and B&B could obt ain managerial and financial support from both central and county government. It was easier to setup a leisure farm or B&B business with loose regulations and lower taxes. On the other hand, hotel businesses paid higher taxes and had to follow much more regulations, which increased our cost. The county government should try to know what our problems

PAGE 107

94 were and help us (Female, 38, hotel ma nager; male, 43, hotel owner; male, 50, hotel manager). Instead of supporting specific industries, such as leisure farms and B&B’s, I-Lan could work collaboratively between industr ies to ensure benef its are distributed equitably. Pei-I Freeway impact Pei-I freeway (30.8 km) was completed and opened on June 16, 2006 after fifteen years of construction, which shortened the tr avel distance from three hours to 40 minutes between Taipei and I-Lan. A major section in the freeway is the world’s fourth longest tunnel—Shu-Shan tunnel (12.8 km). Based on survey data and follow-up interviews, over 90% of respondents expressed mixed feelings ab out the freeway. They agreed that Pei-I would bring visitors and help their economy. On the other hand, they were also worried about the negative impacts on social/cultu ral values and damage to the fragile environment, which will undoubtedly follow. Visitors are able to use I-Lan as a mid-poi nt stop for further travel to Hua-lien in one day without staying overnight at I-Lan Some hotel managers expressed their concerns about future business. In addition, housing and land prices will be affected by Pei-I as well. Results showed that over 92% of respondents agreed th at the increase in housing and land prices was related to the Pei-I freeway. Since the opening of Pei-I freeway will change I-Lan’s overall ou tlook in economic, so cial/cultural and environmental aspects, future research will ne ed to be conducted to identify and measure these impacts.

PAGE 108

95 Theoretical Implications The important theoretical implications of this study are that its findings confirm the usefulness of social exchange theory in e xplaining business managers’ perceptions of tourism impacts. Social exchange theory assu mes that engaging in exchange includes the rational estimation of costs and benefits that structure economic exchange (Meeker 1971). The benefits will likely combine both m onetary and psychological benefits but in many cases research shows that the economic benefits usually are the primary concern for the host community. In tourism, social exchange assumes that residents in host communities will engage in tourism activities if they perceive that tourism benefits exceed tourism’s costs. In other words, social exchange assumes that residents’ perceptions of tourism’s impact based on tr ade-offs in between economic benefits and social/cultural and environmental costs. The findings show that business manage rs perceived more social/cultural, economic, and environmental benefits than costs. The correlations between impact factors show that the economic benefits gr oup was correlated with social/cultural and environmental benefits (Table 4-6-1). The re spondent’s perception of economic benefits might be based on their individua l experience, but their percep tions of social/cultural and environmental benefits might be from soci ety’s standpoint. The fi ndings highlights the complicated ways people perceive costs a nd benefits. Apparently, the importance of benefits can be learned (as is the case of social/cultural a nd environmental benefits), and override the traditional high value of economic benefits. This has important practical and theoretical implications. Since this study was not designed to pr edict future behavior, just measure existing attitudes, this aspect of the theory is of minor importance in terms of this study’s overall findings. Fu rthermore, since this study us ed only a single theoretical

PAGE 109

96 framework to examine the tourism impacts, the findings that show supporting the theory are not a big idea. Second, the findings of this study indicate re ciprocity in social exchange is not a major issue among study participants. This might indicate that the majority of respondents either did not know or not rea lly care about reciprocity due to high percentage of respondents choos ing” no opinion” in reciprocit y issues. For example, 44% of respondents chose “no opinion” on the it em ”tourism profits leaked heavily to outsiders,” and 32% of them chose “no opi nion” on the item “most tourism benefits obtained by big companies” (Table 4-6, ECC3). Thirty-one percen t of respondents chose “no opinion” on the item “allocating tourism resources unevenly among townships,” and thirty-two percent of them chose “no opinion” on the item “widen the gap between the rich and the poor” (Appendix F, Economic cost s: item 34 and 37). The reason might be that most respondents did not perceive the possible unfairness of allocation of tourism resources, that it was unknown to them. Future Research This study did not test the relationship be tween type of busin ess and levels of involvement. Further studies about economic fact ors relating to levels of involvement and type of business are needed. Results did show a small difference between economic factors and types of business; however, due to th e diversity of business types and small sample size for many of these types, it wa s difficult to statistically analyze the relationship. Since this study only examined the relationship between sociodemographics and level of involvement and th eir interaction in rela ting to perception of tourism impact, it would be meaningful to examine the relationship between type of

PAGE 110

97 involvement and level of involvement and unde rstand whether there ar e any relationships between them. Longitudinal studies are recommended to examine changes in business managers’ perceptions of nature-based tourism impact s. Perception of tourism impacts is dynamic and constantly changing as th e tourism environment changes. To better understand longterm business managers’ perception, it is r ecommended that researchers regularly survey business managers in reference to major changes in the tourism environment. For example, the Pei-I Freeway will bring change s to I-Lan’s tourism and research should monitor this change over time. The opening of the freeway marks the end of I-Lan’s geographic isolation image and it also opens the doors for tourism and businesses in the region as well. Though it is not certain what kind of impact Pei-I will have on I-Lan, the study of freeway impact on I-Lan’s tourism is needed. Package tour program (PTP) has been pr acticed across business sectors since 1996 in I-Lan but has not been studi ed. Results show that 38% of respondents had participated in PTP and of these respondents, 90% agreed that PTP helped their business. However, respondents’ data also showed that many re spondents failed to answer specific items regarding PTP, which made it difficult to anal yze. PTP has become an important part of tourism in I-Lan, and future study in this fi eld is needed. Future study needs to design clear, unconfused questions for PTP partic ipants. Also, packaging tour businesses together in other parts of the world is a key strategy to im prove the ability of businesses to obtain benefits and should be more heavil y studied in a variety of tourism-dependent regions.

PAGE 111

98 In terms of type of business, further st udy could combine similar type of business and select larger samples in each type of business. For examples, many travel agencies, which brought visitors to I-L an, were located outside the region. Sampling should include these non-local operators especially in the Taipei metropol itan area. Some local tour bus companies also functioned as travel agencies For example, they worked together in grouping visitors, and they often share resour ces and profits. Some advertising/printing firms in Taipei have long-term business re lationships with I-Lan County Government. They are heavily involved in the marketing aspects of tourism – designing and printing posters, brochures, and pamphlets for major t ourism events. Financial institutions, such as bank, savings & loans and farmers’ asso ciation have similar function and services; thus, they could be categorized in the same type to make a larger sample. Conclusion The findings show that social/cultural bene fits are the most apparent in I-Lan and these perceptions were likely shaped by I-Lan’s strong comm itment to NBT over the last several decades. The reviving of cultural identity and cu ltural recognition in the region symbolizes the struggle of local culture ve rsus the influence of Chinese culture, which has been the mainstream cu lture in Taiwan since 1950s. Another major finding in this study is that participants’ perception of the government is more important in determin ing perceptions of benefits than actual interaction with the gov ernment. It indicates that th e county government might change its role from top-down decision-making style to co-partnering with local business people. The county can also alleviate its own financial burden by releasing some of tourism activities to private sectors and use private s ectors resources for sustainable nature-based tourism development in I-Lan.

PAGE 112

99 The results of this study indicate that with a bett er understanding of business owners’ perceived impacts, county tourism planners can improve the collaborative management of nature-based tourism in I-L an. In addition, the findings of this study might provide an implication for tourism deve lopment in other countries, where regional communities seek for tourism as an alternat ive for their economic development without falling into traditional manufacturing type of development.

PAGE 113

100 APPENDIX A INITIAL INTERVIEW DATA AN D TOURISM IMPACT SCALE Table A-1. List of interviewees in I-Lan, Taiwan. June 2004 & August-September, 2005 Gender Title Organization Participatin g in Interview Participating in survey M County Commissioner IL County Gov. M Dept. Director Business & Travel, ILCounty Govt M Director Land Admin. IL County Govt M Director Cultural Admin. IL County Govt M Dept. Director Planning, IL County Gov M Dept Director Agricultural Affairs, IL County Govt F Researcher National IL University F Editor, Researcher IL county historical museum M Teacher Tou-Cheng Elementary School M Director Farmer’s Association F President IL Tourism Ambassador M Director IL Tourism Asso F Secretary IL Tourism Asso M CPA Yu-Ca CPA M Director Wu-Wei Kung Foundation F Owner Jiaosi Spring Mochi M Owner Leisure Farm M Owner Ta-Cheng Hotel M President IL Hotel Association M Manager Li-Kou Travel M Whale-watching New FU-Fung Boat M President Wild-bird Association, I-Lan M President The Society of Wilderness, I-Lan Branch M Owner San-Fu Garden & Leisure Farm, Dong-Shan

PAGE 114

101 Table A-2. Interview Questions for Touris m Impacts in I-Lan, Ta iwan July-August 2005 1. What is your opinion regardi ng tourism development in I-Lan? 2. What are the most important tourism impact s in economic aspect in I-Lan, please list out ten items regarding positive and negative impact? 3. What are the most important tourism impact s in social/cultural aspect in I-Lan, please list out ten items regarding positive and negative impact? 4. What are the most important tourism impact s in environmental aspect in I-Lan, please list out ten items regarding positive and negative impact? 5. What do you think about Pei-I Freeway impact in tourism? 6. What is the direction regarding NBT development in I-Lan? Tourism Impact Scale Ap and Crompton (1998)TABLE A-3. POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE ECONOMIC IMPACTS OF TOURISM THAT HAVE BEEN REPORTED IN THE EMPIRICAL LITERATURE Positive economic impacts Contributes to income and standard of living Improves the local economy Increases employment opportunities Improves investment, development, and infrastructure spending in the economy Increases tax revenues Improves public utilities Improves transport infrastructure Increases opportunities for shopping Negative economic impacts Increased price and shorta ge of goods and services Increased price of land and housing Increased cost of living/property taxes TABLE A-4 POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OF TOURISM THAT HAVE BEEN REPORTED IN THE EMPIRICAL LITERATURE Positive environmental impacts Preservation of the natural environment/does not cause ecological decline Preservation of historic buildings and monuments Improvement of the area's appearance Negative environmental impacts Increased traffic congestion Overcrowding (Carrying capacity) Increased noise pollution and litter

PAGE 115

102 TABLE A-5. POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE SOCIAL AND CULTURAL IMPACTS OF TOURISM THAT HAVE BEEN REPORTED IN THE EMPIRICAL LITERATURE Positive social impacts Improves the quality of life Increases availability of recreation facilities/opport unities Improves quality of fire protection Improves quality of police protection Positive cultural impacts Improves understanding and image of different communities or cultures Promotes cultural exchange (an educational experience) Preserves cultural identity of host population Increases demand for histor ical and cultural exhibits Negative social and cultural impacts Increased prostitution Increased alcoholism Increased smuggling Heightened tension Increasingly hectic commun ity and personal life Creation of a phony folk culture Summarized Responses to Tourism St atements (Weaver& Lawton, 2001) Tamborine Mountain (TM) is a unique destinat ion and should not try to imitate the Gold Coast Tourism creates employment opportunities Tourism has resulted in TM residents havi ng a greater range of choice with regard shopping facilities, etc. Most tourism-related businesses are contro lled by people who live in this community Improving public tourism facilities is not a waste of ratepayers’ money TM offers a high quality tourism product to visitors Overall, tourism increases the quality of life of TM residents Overall, the benefits of tourism to the community on TM outweigh its costs Tourism brings important economic be nefits to the residents of TM The cost of living on TM has not increased because of tourism Most tourists visiting our community are considerate of local people Tourism has increased the pride of TM residents in their community TM could not support itself without tourism There are more recreational oppor tunities available to local residents on TM because of tourism Tourism enriches the cultural a nd social life of TM residents Tourism has contributed positively to the overall appearance of the TM area Because of tourism, roads and other local serv ices are maintained at a higher level than otherwise would be There is no increase in crime on TM because of tourism Real estate prices have not increased on TM because of tourism

PAGE 116

103 Tourism has made TM a more exciting and interesting place in which to live Tourism on TM is not too commercialized Many local residents benefit from the tourism industry on TM The community should do more to promote TM as a destination The tourism industry on TM is being properly managed Tourism has contributed to the preserva tion of the natural environment on TM The residents of TM have adequate c ontrol over the local tourism industry Tourism does not disrupt the peace and tranquility of TM There is no additional litter on TM because of tourism I personally benefit from th e presence tourism on TM Tourism has not created divisi ons among the residents of TM Tourism does not cause traffic congestion on TM

PAGE 117

104 APPENDIX B INITIAL SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE Rate the degree of impact with the items belo w. Use an index of 1to 5, where 1.0 = Not an Impact and 5.0 = Very Important Impact. You may use a “1.0” or a “5.0” or any number in between to tell us your opinion. The larger number indicates more important impact. Please fill the number in ( ). Degree of impact of IL NBT development Please fill the number in ( ) in Economic 1= Not an impact, 5= Very Important Impact Revenues for business increased ---------------------------------( ) More local employment ----------------------------------( ) Wages & fringe benefits increased ----------------------------------( ) Increased quality of shops, hotels and restaurants --------------------------( ) More leisure farms & Bed & breakfast businesses ------------------------( ) Increased the variety of package tour programs for visitors -----------------------( ) More whale-watching business for visitors ----------------------------------( ) More tax revenues and expenditure from tour ism ----------------------------------( ) Improved transport infrastructure ----------------------------------( ) More recreational facilities for local residents ----------------------------------( ) Improved the quality of Jiaosi hot spring businesses ------------------------------( ) Most tourism businesses controlle d by local residents -----------------------------( ) Increased real estates costs ----------------------------------( ) Dear I-Lan business owner, This survey is meant to investigate busine ss owners’ perceptions towards nature-based tourism (NBT) development in I-Lan (IL). Nature -based tourism is the tourism activities, which based on natural, ecological landscapes in I-Lan. For examples, variety of industrial culture activities, Green Expo, Onion & Garlic Festival, fo rest recreational areas, bot anical gardens, lakes, rafting, waterfalls, natural trails, hot springs, co ld springs, leisure farming, orchards, dolphin & whale watching and bird watching et c. Your valuable response is extremely helpful to this study. Responses to this questionnaire will be comp letely anonymous. Your identity will remain anonymous. We greatly appreciate yo u taking time to complete this questionnaire. Joe Yang, Graduate Student, Principal Investigator Taylor Stein, Ph.D., Supervisor School of Forest Resources and Cons ervation, University of Florida

PAGE 118

105 Results in fewer available lands for business ----------------------------------( ) Increased other counties’ imitation of touris m programs --------------------------( ) Competition in hotel/motel getting worse ------------------------------------( ) Degree of impact of IL NBT development Please fill the number in ( ) in Social/cultural 1= Not an impact, 5= Very Important Impact Increases cultural re-recognition ----------------------------------( ) More cultural activities ----------------------------------( ) Sense of pride ----------------------------------( ) Stronger sense of IL attachment ----------------------------------( ) Little change in lifestyle of local resident s ----------------------------------( ) Decreased prostitution in Jiaosi ----------------------------------( ) Increased children’s education in local histor y and literature ------------( ) Increased the learning of native language ----------------------------------( ) Increases quality of life of IL residents ---------------------------------( ) Focuses too much on attracting visitors ----------------------------------( ) Results in unfair resources allocation by c ounty government -------------( ) Disrupt the peace and tranquility of IL ----------------------------------( ) Visitors over-convergence in specific seasons -------------------------------( ) Degree of impact of IL NBT development Please fill the number in ( ) in Environmental 1= Not an impact, 5= Very Important Impac t Increase environmental education for childre n ------------------------------( ) Ecosystem has better preserved ----------------------------------( ) Increased local residents’ awareness of the importance of maintaining natural amenities ----------------------------( ) Improvement of local areas’ appearance ----------------------------------( ) Increased traffic congestion ----------------------------------( ) Results in overcrowding ----------------------------------( ) Results in shortage of parking spaces ----------------------------------( ) Results in environmental decline in sensitiv e areas ------------------------( ) Increased waste of disposable meal boxes ----------------------------------( ) Increased air and noise pollution ----------------------------------( ) Increased litter and garbage pollution ----------------------------------( ) Increased resources waste in advertising and delivery mails --------------( ) Increased pollution in sanitation ----------------------------------( ) Any other items: Thank you for your cooperation!!

PAGE 119

106 APPENDIX C QUESTIONNAIRE RESOURCES Table C-1. Socio-demographic characteristics from literature reviews Variables Literature Review Gender Pizam (1978), Belisle & Hoy (1980), Lu & Var (1986), Lankford and Howard (1994), Ap & Crompton (1998), Andereck & Vogt (2000), Weaver &Lawton (2001) Age Pizam (1978), Belisle & Hoy 1980 Lu & Var (1986), Lankford and Howard (1994), Ap & Crompton (1998), Andereck & Vogt (2000), Weaver &Lawton (2001) Education Pizam (1978), Belisle & Hoy (1980), Lu & Var (1986), Lankford and Howard (1994), Ap & Crompton (1998), Andereck & Vogt (2000), Weaver &Lawton (2001), Sirakaya, Teye & Sonmez (2002) Living in I-Lan as a child, Brougham and Butler (1981), Davis, Allen and Cosenza (1988), Jurowski, Uysal and Williams (1997), Landford and Howard (1994), McCool and Martin (1994), Sheldon and Var (1984), Um and Crompton (1987), McGehee & Andereck (2004) Residence Brougham and Butler (1981), Davis, Allen and Cosenza (1988), Jurowski, Uysal and Williams (1997), Landford and Howard (1994), Sheldon and Var (1984), Um and Crompton (1987), Faulkner & Tideswell (1997), Sirakaya, Teye & Sonmez (2002), Deccio & Baloglu (2002), McGehee & Andereck (2004) Length of business Lankford (1994), Siegel and Jekus (1995), McGehee & Andereck (2004) Title/position. Chen, K.L. (2001, 2003,2004) 6.

PAGE 120

107 Table C-2. Type of Involvement Variables Literature Review Type of business Chen, K.L (2001,2003,2004), I-Lan County Report (2003) Sales revenue Chen (2001, 2003,2004) % of NBT revenue Chen (2001, 2003,2004) % of NBT customers Chen (2001, 2003,2004) % of change Chen (2001, 2002, 2003, 2004) Table C-3. Level of Involvement Variables Literature Review Decision-maker Smith and Krannich 1998 Part of tour provider Tourist No involvement Smith and Krannich 1998

PAGE 121

108 Table C-4. Perceived economic benefits Variables Section 1. Tourism Impacts Literature Review Economic Benefits a. Increasing revenues for business b. Increasing job opportunities c. Increasing wages & fringe benefits d. Increasing leisure farms and Bed& Breakfast e. Increasing whale-watching businesses f. Increasing quality of shops, hotels and restaurants g. Increasing more competition in hotel/motel h. Increasing quality of life for IL residents Section 3. Local own/operation business a. Most tourism businessesare owned and/or operated by local residents b Outsiders and outside investment have positive impact on IL e. Whether the business owned and/or operated by locals is not important, as long as people continue to invest in IL Section 4. Competition/imitation b Upgrades the quality of tourism in IL c. Brings positive economic impacts for IL Section 5. Resource Allocation a.Used resources mostly in tourism development c. Increasing social welfare benefits d. Narrowing the gap in cities and townships Section 10. Package tour programs a. Increased the variety of package tour programs b. Upgrades the quality of service c. Increases customers d. Improves competition e Increases sales revenues f. Integrates local industries g. Increases name-recognition for businesses Section 11 What percent of your customers come from package tour programs ______________% McCool & Martin (1994) I-Lan County Tourism Comprehensive Plan.(1996) Gilbert &Clark (1997) Ap & Crompton (1998) Snaith & Haley(1999) Weaver & Lawton(2001) Chen,T.S.(2003) Chen, K.L. (2003,2004) Gursoy & Rutherford (2004) Prelim. Interview 2004 Back & Lee (2005) Phone interviews 2005 Andriotis & Vaughan (2003)

PAGE 122

109 Table C-5. Perceived economic costs Variables Section 2. Housing & Land Prices Literature Review Economic Costs a. Increased rent of houses and lands b Increased in housing and land prices which only happened in tourism development areas c. Increased in housing and land prices, which is related to Pei-I freeway d. Decreased the availability of land for tourism Section 3. Local own/operation business c. Tourism profits leaked heavily to outsiders d. Most tourism benefits obtained by big companies Section 4. Competition/imitation a. Brings negative economic impacts for IL d. Results in decline of visitors Section 5. Resource Allocation b. Allocating tourism resources unevenly among townships e. Widening the gap between the rich and the poor Section 6. Visitors’ Impact a. Visitors over-convergence in specific seasons b. Over-using tourism resources in peak seasons c. Under-using tourism resources in low seasons d. Affecting the balance of revenue, expenses and willingness of investment McCool & Martin(1994) I-Lan County Tourism Comprehensive Plan.(2001) Gilbert &Clark(1997) Ap & Crompton (1998) Snaith & Haley(1999) Weaver & Lawton(2001) Chen,T.S.(2003) Chen, K.L. (2003,2004) Gursoy & Rutherford (2004) Prelim. Interview 2004 Back & Lee (2005) Phone interviews 2005 Andriotis & Vaughan (2003)

PAGE 123

110 TableC-6. Perceived Social /cultural benefits & costs Variables Section 7. Community Literature Review Social/Cultural Benefits a. I am definitely part of IL b. What happens in IL is important to me d. I am proud of being an IL resident e. I have an emotional attachment to the IL area f. I prefer hiring IL residents as my employees g. I am willing to invest my time and effort to make IL area an even better place h. I am willing to participate in community activities or community meetings i. I plan to run my business long-term in IL (At least six years from now). j. I support NBT in IL Section 8. a. Increased diversity of cultural activities among different ethnic groups b. Improved autonomy in the community c. Improved the understanding among different communities & cultures d. Improved cultural preservation & enhanced identity McCool & Martin(1994) IGilbert &Clark(1997) Ap & Crompton (1998) Weaver & Lawton (2001) Chen,T.S.(2003) Chen, K.L. (2003,2004) Gursoy & Rutherford (2004) Prelim. Interview 2004 Back & Lee (2005) Phone interviews 2005 Variables Section 1. Tourism Impacts Literature Review Social/Cultural Costs i. Focusing too much on attracting visitors Section 9. Disruption a. Increasing nightlife activities b. Increasing drinking and vandalism c. Increasing prostitution d. Increasing traffic accidents e. Decreasing public safety Ap &Crompton (1998) Weaver & Lawton (2001) Chen,T.S.(2003) Prelim. Interview 2004 Phone interview 2005

PAGE 124

111 Table C-7. Environmen tal benefits & costs Variables Section 1. Tourism Impacts Literature Review Environmental Benefits j. Enhancing preservation of ecosystem k. .Increasing local residents’ awareness of importance of maintaining natural amenities l. Improving local areas’ appearance I-Lan County Tourism Comprehensive Plan. (2001) Ap & Crompton (1998) Weaver (2001) I Prelim. Interview 2004 Phone interview (2005) Variables Section 1. Tourism Impacts Literature Review Environmental Costs m. Overcrowding n. Increasing traffic congestion o. Increasing shortage of parking spaces p Increasing environmental decline in sensitive areas q. Increasing litter and garbage pollution r. Increasing air and noise pollution s. Increasing resources waste in advertising and delivery mails Section 6. Visitors’ Impact e. Resulting in spatial environment carrying pressure Ap & Crompton (1998) Weaver & Lawton (2001) Chen, K.L. (2003, 2004) Prelim. Interview 2004 Phone interview 2005

PAGE 125

112 APPENDIX D FACTOR ANALYSIS Factor Analysis Communalities Raw Rescaled Initial Extraction Initial Extraction ECB1 .617 .345 1.000 .559 ECB2 .901 .721 1.000 .799 ECB3 .914 .606 1.000 .663 ECB5 .462 .118 1.000 .255 Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis. Total Variance Explained Initial Eigenvalues(a) Extraction Sums of Squared Loadings Component Total % of Variance Cumulative % Total % of Variance Cumulative % 1 1.789 61.804 61.804 1.789 61.804 61.804 2 .492 16.985 78.789 3 .368 12.712 91.501 Raw 4 .246 8.499 100.000 1 1.789 61.804 61.804 2.276 56.897 56.897 2 .492 16.985 78.789 3 .368 12.712 91.501 Rescaled 4 .246 8.499 100.000 Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis. a When analyzing a covariance matrix, the initial ei genvalues are the same across the raw and rescaled solution. Component Matrix(a) Raw Rescaled Componen t Componen t 1 1 ECB1 .587 .748 ECB2 .849 .894 ECB3 .778 .814 ECB5 .343 .505 Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis. a 1 components extracted. Rotated Component Matrix(a) a Only one component was extracte d. The solution cannot be rotated. Reliability ****** Method 1 (space saver) will be used for this analysis ******

PAGE 126

113 R E L I A B I L I T Y A N A L Y S I S S C A L E (A L P H A) Mean Std Dev Cases 1. ECB1 3.8322 .7857 286.0 2. ECB2 3.5455 .9494 286.0 3. ECB3 3.1399 .9559 286.0 4. ECB5 3.8112 .6801 286.0 N of Statistics for Mean Variance Std Dev Variables SCALE 14.3287 6.6635 2.5814 4 Item-total Statistics Scale Scale Corrected Mean Variance ItemAlpha if Item if Item Total if Item Deleted Deleted Correlation Deleted ECB1 10.4965 4.1877 .5779 .6842 ECB2 10.7832 3.3423 .6970 .6053 ECB3 11.1888 3.6976 .5583 .6963 ECB5 10.5175 4.9944 .3970 .7694 Reliability Coefficients N of Cases = 286.0 N of Items = 4 Alpha = .7541 Factor Analysis Communalities Raw Rescaled Initial Extraction Initial Extraction SCB11 .407 .256 1.000 .630 SCB12 .474 .335 1.000 .708 SCB13 .368 .304 1.000 .827 SCB14 .432 .273 1.000 .632 Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis. Total Variance Explained Initial Eigenvalues(a) Extraction Sums of Squared Loadings Compone nt Total % of Variance Cumulative % Total % of Variance Cumulative % 1 1.169 69.550 69.550 1.169 69.550 69.550 2 .233 13.885 83.436 3 .194 11.520 94.956 Raw 4 .085 5.044 100.000 1 1.169 69.550 69.550 2.797 69.913 69.913 2 .233 13.885 83.436 3 .194 11.520 94.956 Rescaled 4 .085 5.044 100.000 Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis. a When analyzing a covariance matrix, the initial ei genvalues are the same across the raw and rescaled solution. Component Matrix(a) Raw Rescaled

PAGE 127

114 Componen t Componen t 1 1 SCB11 .506 .794 SCB12 .579 .841 SCB13 .551 .909 SCB14 .523 .795 Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis. a 1 components extracted. Rotated Component Matrix(a) a Only one component was extracte d. The solution cannot be rotated. Reliability ****** Method 1 (space saver) will be used for this analysis ****** R E L I A B I L I T Y A N A L Y S I S S C A L E (A L P H A) Mean Std Dev Cases 1. SCB11 4.1014 .6381 286.0 2. SCB12 4.0105 .6882 286.0 3. SCB13 4.0874 .6064 286.0 4. SCB14 4.0804 .6573 286.0 N of Statistics for Mean Variance Std Dev Variables SCALE 16.2797 4.6653 2.1599 4 Item-total Statistics Scale Scale Corrected Mean Variance ItemAlpha if Item if Item Total if Item Deleted Deleted Correlation Deleted SCB11 12.1783 2.8628 .6461 .8328 SCB12 12.2692 2.6676 .6780 .8212 SCB13 12.1923 2.6541 .8317 .7580 SCB14 12.1993 2.8268 .6363 .8375 Reliability Coefficients N of Cases = 286.0 N of Items = 4 Alpha = .8530 Reliability ****** Method 1 (space saver) will be used for this analysis ****** R E L I A B I L I T Y A N A L Y S I S S C A L E (A L P H A) Mean Std Dev Cases 1. SCB11 4.1014 .6381 286.0 2. SCB12 4.0105 .6882 286.0 3. SCB13 4.0874 .6064 286.0 4. SCB14 4.0804 .6573 286.0 N of Statistics for Mean Variance Std Dev Variables SCALE 16.2797 4.6653 2.1599 4 Item-total Statistics

PAGE 128

115 Scale Scale Corrected Mean Variance ItemAlpha if Item if Item Total if Item Deleted Deleted Correlation Deleted SCB11 12.1783 2.8628 .6461 .8328 SCB12 12.2692 2.6676 .6780 .8212 SCB13 12.1923 2.6541 .8317 .7580 SCB14 12.1993 2.8268 .6363 .8375 Reliability Coefficients N of Cases = 286.0 N of Items = 4 Alpha = .8530 Factor Analysis Communalities Raw Rescaled Initial Extraction Initial Extraction SCC3 .965 .747 1.000 .773 SCC4 .990 .763 1.000 .771 SCC5 1.053 .698 1.000 .663 SCC6 1.113 .889 1.000 .799 Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis. Total Variance Explained Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis. a When analyzing a covariance matrix, the initial ei genvalues are the same across the raw and rescaled solution. Component Matrix(a) Raw Rescaled Componen t Componen t 1 1 SCC3 .864 .879 SCC4 .873 .878 SCC5 .835 .814 SCC6 .943 .894 Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis. a 1 components extracted. Rotated Component Matrix(a) a Only one component was extracte d. The solution cannot be rotated. Component Initial Eigenvalues(a) Extraction Sums of Squared Loadings Total % of Variance Cumulative % Total % of Variance Cumulative % Raw 1 3.096 75.134 75.134 3.096 75.134 75.134 2 .497 12.056 87.189 3 .312 7.567 94.756 4 .216 5.244 100.000 Rescaled 1 3.096 75.134 75.134 3.006 75.140 75.140 2 .497 12.056 87.189 3 .312 7.567 94.756 4 .216 5.244 100.000

PAGE 129

116 Reliability ****** Method 1 (space saver) will be used for this analysis ***** R E L I A B I L I T Y A N A L Y S I S S C A L E (A L P H A) Mean Std Dev Cases 1. SCC3 3.1655 .9826 284.0 2. SCC4 3.2289 .9949 284.0 3. SCC5 2.6972 1.0261 284.0 4. SCC6 2.9965 1.0550 284.0 N of Statistics for Mean Variance Std Dev Variables SCALE 12.0880 12.3632 3.5161 4 Item-total Statistics Scale Scale Corrected Mean Variance ItemAlpha if Item if Item Total if Item Deleted Deleted Correlation Deleted SCC3 8.9225 7.2449 .7851 .8466 SCC4 8.8592 7.2098 .7793 .8485 SCC5 9.3908 7.5039 .6771 .8867 SCC6 9.0915 6.8891 .7874 .8450 Reliability Coefficients N of Cases = 284.0 N of Items = 4 Alpha = .8889 Factor Analysis Communalities Raw Rescaled Initial Extraction Initial Extraction ENB1 1.103 .924 1.000 .837 ENB2 .636 .287 1.000 .452 ENB3 .628 .233 1.000 .372 Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis. Total Variance Explained Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis. a When analyzing a covariance matrix, the initial ei genvalues are the same across the raw and rescaled solution. Component Matrix(a) Initial Eigenvalues(a) Extraction Sums of Squared Loadings Component Total % of Variance Cumulative % Total % of Variance Cumulative % 1 1.444 61.025 61.025 1.444 61.025 61.025 2 .503 21.270 82.294 Raw 3 .419 17.706 100.000 1 1.444 61.025 61.025 1.661 55.360 55.360 2 .503 21.270 82.294 Rescaled 3 .419 17.706 100.000

PAGE 130

117 Raw Rescaled Componen t Componen t 1 1 ENB1 .961 .915 ENB2 .536 .672 ENB3 .483 .610 Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis. a 1 components extracted. Rotated Component Matrix(a) a Only one component was extracte d. The solution cannot be rotated. Reliability ****** Method 1 (space saver) will be used for this analysis ***** R E L I A B I L I T Y A N A L Y S I S S C A L E (A L P H A) Mean Std Dev Cases 1. ENB1 3.3951 1.0502 286.0 2. ENB2 3.8252 .7975 286.0 3. ENB3 3.9825 .7923 286.0 N of Statistics for Mean Variance Std Dev Variables SCALE 11.2028 4.0640 2.0159 3 Item-total Statistics Scale Scale Corrected Mean Variance ItemAlpha if Item if Item Total if Item Deleted Deleted Correlation Deleted ENB1 7.8077 1.6787 .4712 .4943 ENB2 7.3776 2.3201 .4560 .5080 ENB3 7.2203 2.4320 .4064 .5699 Reliability Coefficients N of Cases = 286.0 N of Items = 3 Alpha = .6264 Factor Analysis Communalities Initial Extraction ENC1 1.000 .667 ENC2 1.000 .742 ENC3 1.000 .570 ENC5 1.000 .708 ENC6 1.000 .754 ENC7 1.000 .637 Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis. Total Variance Explained Initial Eigenvalues Extraction Sums of Squared Loadings Component Total % of Variance Cumulative % Total % of Variance Cumulative %

PAGE 131

118 1 4.078 67.961 67.961 4.078 67.961 67.961 2 .742 12.373 80.334 3 .478 7.971 88.306 4 .353 5.878 94.183 5 .180 3.006 97.189 6 .169 2.811 100.000 Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis. Component Matrix(a) Componen t 1 ENC1 .817 ENC2 .861 ENC3 .755 ENC5 .841 ENC6 .868 ENC7 .798 Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis. a 1 components extracted. Reliability ****** Method 1 (space saver) will be used for this analysis ****** R E L I A B I L I T Y A N A L Y S I S S C A L E (A L P H A) Mean Std Dev Cases 1. ENC1 3.3579 1.0303 285.0 2. ENC2 3.5860 1.0090 285.0 3. ENC3 3.6842 .9957 285.0 4. ENC5 3.4912 1.0734 285.0 5. ENC6 3.4246 1.0903 285.0 6. ENC7 3.4737 1.0894 285.0 N of Statistics for Mean Variance Std Dev Variables SCALE 21.0175 26.8553 5.1822 6 Item-total Statistics Scale Scale Corrected Mean Variance ItemAlpha if Item if Item Total if Item Deleted Deleted Correlation Deleted ENC1 17.6596 19.2394 .7251 .8902 ENC2 17.4316 18.9293 .7868 .8815 ENC3 17.3333 20.0399 .6533 .9002 ENC5 17.5263 18.6305 .7633 .8845 ENC6 17.5930 18.2281 .7989 .8790 ENC7 17.5439 18.9532 .7080 .8931 Reliability Coefficients N of Cases = 285.0 N of Items = 6 Alpha = .9051 Factor Analysis Communalities Initial Extraction

PAGE 132

119 GOV1 1.000 .785 GOV2 1.000 .890 GOV3 1.000 .852 Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis. Total Variance Explained Initial Eigenvalues Extraction Sums of Squared Loadings Component Total % of Variance Cumulative % Total % of Variance Cumulative % 1 2.528 84.255 84.255 2.528 84.255 84.255 2 .319 10.617 94.872 3 .154 5.128 100.000 Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis. Component Matrix(a) Componen t 1 GOV1 .886 GOV2 .944 GOV3 .923 Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis. a 1 components extracted. Reliability ****** Method 1 (space saver) will be used for this analysis ****** R E L I A B I L I T Y A N A L Y S I S S C A L E (A L P H A) Mean Std Dev Cases 1. GOV1 3.7762 .7984 286.0 2. GOV2 3.6678 .8573 286.0 3. GOV3 3.6643 .8538 286.0 N of Statistics for Mean Variance Std Dev Variables SCALE 11.1084 5.3110 2.3046 3 Item-total Statistics Scale Scale Corrected Mean Variance ItemAlpha if Item if Item Total if Item Deleted Deleted Correlation Deleted GOV1 7.3322 2.6928 .7559 .9127 GOV2 7.4406 2.3175 .8653 .8207 GOV3 7.4441 2.4021 .8236 .8574 Reliability Coefficients N of Cases = 286.0 N of Items = 3 Alpha = .9065

PAGE 133

120 APPENDIX E FORMAL SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE Dear I-Lan business owner/manager, This survey is meant to investigate busin ess owners’/managers’ perceptions towards nature-based tourism (NBT) development in I-Lan (IL). Nature-based tourism is the tourism activities, which based on natural, eco logical landscapes in I-Lan. For examples, variety of industrial culture activities, Green Expo, Onion & Garlic Festival, forest recreational areas, botanical garden s, lakes, rafting, waterfalls, natural trails, hot springs, cold springs, leisure farming, orchards, dolph in & whale watching and bird watching etc. Your valuable response is extremely helpful to this study. The information participants provide will be used by the county governme nt in the future planning efforts. Your participation is greatly appreciated. All of your responses will be ke pt anonymous. Your identity will remain anonymous. Joe Yang, Graduate Student, Principal Investigator Taylor Stein, Ph.D., Supervisor School of Forest Resources and Cons ervation, University of Florida

PAGE 134

121 Section 1. Tourism Impacts In this part, we would like to know your opinion about nature-based tourism (NBT) development in economic, social/c ultural and environmental impacts in I-Lan (IL). Please indicate how strongly you agree or disagree with the following statements. NBT results in …….. Strongly Disagree Disagree No Opinion Agree Strongly Agree a. Increasing revenues for business b. Increasing job opportunities c. Increasing wages & fringe benefits d. Increasing leisure farms and Bed& Breakfast e. Increasing whale-watching businesses f. Increasing quality of shops, hotels and restaurants g. Increasing more competition in hotel/motel h. Increasing quality of life for IL residents i. Focusing too much on attracting visitors j. Enhancing preservation of ecosystem k. Increasing local residents’ awareness of importance of maintaining natural amenities l. Improving local areas’ appearance m. Overcrowding n. Increasing traffic congestion o. Increasing shortage of parking spaces p. Increasing environmental decline in sensitive areas q. Increasing litter and garbage pollution r. Increasing air and noise pollution s. Increasing resources waste in advertising and delivery mails Section 2. Housing & Land Prices What is your opinion about housing, land pr ices and availability of lands in IL? STATEMENT NBT results in ……… Strongly Disagree DisagreeNo Opinion Agree Strongly Agree a. Increased rent of houses and lands b. Increased in housing and land prices which only happened in tourism development areas c. Increased in housing and land prices, which is related to Pei-I freeway d. Decreased the avai lability of land for

PAGE 135

122 tourism Section 3. Local own/operation business What is your opinion about local own/operation and investment in NBT in IL? For IL, I believe ……. Strongly Disagree DisagreeNo Opinion Agree Strongly Agree a. Most tourism businesses are owned and/or operated by local residents b. Outsiders and outside investment have positive impact on IL c. Tourism profits leaked heavily to outsiders d. Most tourism benefits obtained by big companies e. Whether the business owned and/or operated by locals is not important, as long as people continue to invest in IL Section 4. Competition/imitation What is your opinion about the impact of other county’s tourism competition in IL? STATEMENT Strongly Disagree Disagree No Opinion Agree Strongly Agree a. Brings negative economic impacts for IL b Upgrades the quality of tourism in IL c. Brings positive economic impacts for IL d Results in decline of visitors Section 5. Resource Allocation What is your opinion about re source allocation in IL? STATEMENT NBT results in ……. Strongly Disagree Disagree No Opinion Agree Strongly Agree a. Used resources mostly in tourism development b. Allocating tourism resources unevenly among townships c. Increasing social welfare benefits d. Narrowing the gap in cities and townships e. Widening the gap between the rich and the poor

PAGE 136

123 Section 8. How much do you agree with the following for IL? STATEMENT NBT results in …… Strongly Disagree DisagreeNo Opinion Agree Strongly Agree a. Increased diversity of cultural activities among different ethnic groups b. Improved autonomy in the community c. Improved the understanding among different communities & cultures d. Improved cultural preservation & enhanced identity Section 9. Disruption What is your opinion about level of disruption of residents’ daily life in IL? Section 6. Visitors’ Impact NBT resulting in visitors’ over-con centrated in certain season. Please indicate how strongly you agree or disagree with the following statements. STATEMENT Strongly Disagree Disagree No Opinio n Agree Strongly Agree a. Visitors over-convergence in specific seasons b. Over-using tourism resources in peak seasons c. Under-using tourism resources in low seasons d. Affecting the balance of revenue, expenses and willingness of investment e. Resulting in spatial environment carrying pressure Section 7. Community What are your attitudes about your community? STATEMENT Strongly Disagree DisagreeNo Opinion Agree Stron gly Agree a. I am definitely part of IL b. What happens in IL is important to me d. I have negative feeling for IL area e. I am proud of being an IL resident f. I have an emotional attachment to the IL area g. I prefer hiring IL residents as my employees h. I am willing to invest my time and effort to make IL area an even better place i. I am willing to participate in community activities or community meetings j. I plan to run my business long-term in IL (At least six years from now). k. I support NBT in IL

PAGE 137

124 STATEMENT NBT results in ………… Strongly Disagree DisagreeNo Opinion Agree Strongly Agree a. Increasing nightlife activities b. Increasing drinking and vandalism c. Increasing prostitution d. Increasing traffic accidents e. Decreasing public safety Section 10. Package tour programs If you participate the package tour programs please answer the following. Otherwise skip to Section 12. Participating in package tour programs ……. Strongly Disagree DisagreeNo Opinion Agree Strongly Agree a. Increased the variety of package tour programs b Upgrades the quality of service c. Increases customers d. Improves competition e. Increases sales revenues f. Integrates local industries g .Increases name-recognition for businesses Section 11 What percent of your customers come from package tour programs? ______________%

PAGE 138

125 Section 13 The following questions will help us summarize about I-Lan business owners/managers. The data will remain strictly confidential; you will not be individually identified your answers. a. What types of business do you own/ manage? Please check all that apply. Gift/grocery store Supermarket/discount store Food/restaurant Section 12. Involvement The following questions ask about how involved you are in tourism planning in IL. STATEMENT Strongly Disagree Disagree No Opinion Agree Strongly Agree a. County government invites you to participate in tourism planning b. County government knows your concerns and issues regarding NBT c. County government accepts your opinions d. You influence county tourism planning Please indicate the title/position you hold (check more than one if necessary) e. You serve as a… Consultant of local governments/ public sectors County councilman/township representative Representative of Tourism Association Representative of business/industry organization Other_______________________________________ Please indicate times and money you spend in the following. f. How many times have you participated in local government’s tourism planning, as a major decisionmaker, in the past 12 months? No Time 1 ~ 5 times 6 ~ 10 times 11 ~ 20 times More than 20 times g. How many times are you willing to participate in local government’s tourism planning, as a major decision-maker, over the next 12 months? No Time 1 ~ 5 times 6 ~ 10 times 11 ~ 20 times More than 20 times h. How many times have you participated in implemen ting local government’s touris m activities, as a tour provider, over the last 12 month? Never participated 1 ~ 3 times 4 ~ 6 times More than 6 times i. How many times have you participated in partaki ng local government’s tour ism projects, as a tour provider, over the last 12 month? Never participated 1 ~ 3 times 4 ~ 6 times More than 6 times j. How many times have you participated in local gove rnment’s tourism activities, as a tourist, over the last 12 months? Never participated 1 ~ 6 times 6 ~ 20times More than 20 times k. How much money have you contri buted to local government’s touris m planning or activities over the last 12 months? NT$ No money 1 ~ 3000 3,000 ~ 10,000 10,000 ~ 50,000 More than 50,000

PAGE 139

126 Taxi, bus Hotel Leisure farms Bed & Breakfast Advertising designs Printing Car /bus, motor rental Whale-watching tour boater Travel agency Farmers’ Associations Savings & Loans Banks Other __________________________ b. What is your gender? Male Female c. How old are you? ______________ (Actual age) d. What is your highest level of education? (Please select only one category) Elementary Jr. high school High school/ vocational school Jr. college 4-year college Graduate degree Other professional degree e. Have you lived in IL as a child? Yes No f. How many years has your organization been operated in I-Lan? Less than one year ____________ ; Years: ___________________ g. What is the annual sales revenue for your organization? NT$ 0~1,200,000 1,200,000~3,000,000 3,000,000~5,000,000 5,000,000~10,000,000 10,000,000~30,000,000 30,000,000~50,000,000 More than 50,000,000 h. What percent do your customers generate from nature-based tourism? ________________ % i. What percent does your annual business revenues generate from nature-based tourism? ___________ % j. In the last five years, have your business revenues increased or decreased ? _____________ % k. Any other comments, which you think important impacts of IL NBT? Thank you for your cooperation!

PAGE 140

APPENDIX F OVERALL TOURISM IMPACTS

PAGE 141

128 Table F-1. Frequency Distri bution of Respondents’ pe rceptions of Tourism Impacts Statement Strongly Disagree Disagree No opinion Agree Strongly Agree Mean SD Social/Cultural Benefits 43. I am definitely part of IL 0 0 3 55 43 4.40 .55 47. I have an emotional attachment to the IL area 0 .3 5 54 41 4.36 .59 44. What happens in IL is important to me 0 1 6 57 36 4.28 .63 52. I support NBT in IL 0 3.1 4.5 55 37 4.26 .69 49. I am willing to invest my time and effort to make IL area an even better place 0 0 11 57 33 4.22 .62 51. I plan to run my business long-term in IL(six years) 0 2 14 51 37 4.15 .72 53. Increased diversity of cultural activities among different ethnic groups .3 3 5 70 22 4.10 .64 46. I am proud of being an IL resident* .7 4 12 52 31 4.09 .80 55. Improved the understanding among different communities & cultures 0 1 10 67 22 4.09 .61 56. Improved cultural preservation & enhanced identity 0 4 6 68 22 4.08 .66 54. Improved autonomy in the community 0 4 12 64 20 4.01 .69 48. I prefer hiring IL residents as my employees .3 5 22 48 25 3.93 .83 50. I am willing to participate in community activities or community meetings .7 4.5 31 46 18 3.76 .83 8. Increasing quality of life for IL residents .3 15 21 54 9 3.57 .88 Total 3.80 .69 Cronbach’s = .8957 Economic Benefits 64. Increases customers from PTP 0 .7 2 39 17 4.22 .58 62. Increased the variety of package tour programs 0 .7 2 41 16 4.21 .56 68 .Increases name-recognition for businesses 0 .7 4 37 16 4.19 .60 63. Upgrades the quality of serv ice from PTP 0 2 3 37 17 4.17 .66

PAGE 142

12967. Integrates local industries from PTP .3 .7 5 38 15 4.13 .65 4. Increasing leisure farms and Bed& Breakfast .3 3.1 7 62 27 4.12 .70 66. Increases sales revenues from PTP 0 3 6 36 14 4.04 .72 6. Increasing quality of shops, hotels and restaurants 0 7 14 62) 18 3.91 .76 30.Upgrades the quality of tourism in IL .3 6 10 75 9 3.86 .66 1. Increasing revenues for business 1 9 7 71 12 3.83 .79 5. Increasing whale-watching businesses 0 5 20 65 11 3.81 .68 65. Improves competition 1 8 9 30) 10 3.70 .97 25. Outsiders and outside investment have positive impact on IL 1 13 21 54 11 3.59 .90 2. Increasing job opportunities 2 18 13 59 9 3.55 .95 24. Most tourism businesses are owned and/or operated by local residents 1 20 18 54 11 3.47 .94 31. Brings positive economic impacts for IL 1 19 22 53 6 3.43 .90 36. Narrowing the gap in cities and townships .3 25 23 48 4 3.31 .90 28. Whether the business owned and/or operated by locals is not important, as long as people continue to invest in IL 7 24 22 41 6 3.14 1.08 3. Increasing wages & fringe benefits 2 28 26 40 4 3.14 .96 35. Increasing social welfare benefits 5 32 29 33 1 2.93 .95 Total 3.74 .79 Cronbach’s = .8216 Environmental Benefits 12. Improving local areas’ appearance .7 6 10 61 22 3.98 .79 11.Increasing local residents’ awareness of importance of maintaining natural amenities 0 10 12 64 14 3.83 .80 10. Enhancing preservation of ecosystem 3 22 18 46 11 3.40 1.05 Total 3.73 .88 Cronbach’s = .6264 Economic Costs 22. Increased in housing and land prices, which is related to Pei-I freeway 1 2 5 57 35 4.23 .73 38. Visitors over-convergence in specific seasons 3 8 7 56 28 4.05 .83 21. Increased in housing and land prices which only happened in tourism development areas 1 6 11 64 18 3.91 .79 41. Affecting the balance of revenue, expenses and willingness of investment 1 9 19 58 13 3.72 .85

PAGE 143

13020. Increased rent of houses and lands 1 12 16 59 12 3.69 .86 40. Under-using tourism resources in low seasons 1 14 19 54 12 3.61 .91 34. Allocating tourism resources unevenly among townships 2 6 31 51 9 3.58 .84 23. Decreased the availability of land for tourism .3 12 32 45 11 3.55 .85 39. Over-using tourism resources in peak seasons 0 18 21 51 11 3.54 .90 9. Focusing too much on attracting visitors 2 22 26 43 7 3.32 .95 7. Increasing more competition in hotel/motel 2 27 27 27 31 3.25 1.13 45. I have negative feeling for IL area 5 22 23 45 5 3.25 1.05 32 Results in decline of visitors 2 31 20 40 7 3.20 1.02 27. Most tourism benefits obtained by big companies 1 26 32 33 8 3.19 .96 33. Used resources mostly in tourism development 2 27 25 43 3 3.18 .94 37. Widening the gap between the rich and the poor 2 30 32 32 6 3.10 .95 29. Brings negative economic impacts for IL 2 34 23 37 5 3.10 .99 26. Tourism profits leaked heavily to outsiders 4 24 44 27 1 3.01 .71 Total 3.47 .90 Cronbach’s = .6928 Environmental Costs 15. Increasing shortage of park ing spaces 2 14 14 51 18 3.69 1.00 42. Resulting in spatial environment carrying pressure .7 11 20 56 13 3.69 .854 14. Increasing traffic congestion 2 18 13 53 14 3.59 1.01 17. Increasing litter and garbage pollution 4 21 13 49 14 3.50 1.08 19.Increasing resources waste in advertising and delivery mails 2 23 18 40 18 3.47 1.09 16.Increasing environmental decline in sensitive areas 3 20 17 47 13 3.46 1.05 18. Increasing air and noise pollution 4 22 14 47 13 3.43 1.09 13. Overcrowding 2 25 20 42 11 3.35 1.03 57. Increasing nightlife activities 1 27 21 44 6 3.27 .97 59. Increasing prostitution 3 24 28 38 7 3.23 1.00 Total 3.47 1.02 Cronbach’s = .8204 Social/Cultural Costs 60. Increasing traffic accide nts 4 23 19 48 7 3.30 1.03 58. Increasing drinking and vandalism 4 26 27 38 5 3.16 .98

PAGE 144

13161. Decreasing public safety 5 34 24 30 7 3.00 1.06 Total 3.15 1.02 Cronbach’s = .9228 Overall reliability Cronbach’s = .8542 Items reverse coded prior to analysis N = 286; Unit: percent Items coded on 5-point index with 1=Strongly Disagree, 2=Disagree, 3= No opinion, 4= Agree, 5= Strongly Agree

PAGE 145

132 LIST OF REFERENCES Agrawal, A., & Gibson, C. (1999). Enchantment and disenchantment: The role of community in natural resource conservation. World Development, 27(4), 629-649. Alderson, W. (1957). Marketing behavior and executive action. New York: Columbia University Press. Allen, L.R., & Gibson, R. (1987). Perceptions of community life and services: A comparison between leaders and community residents. Journal of the Community Development Society, 18 (1), 89-103. Allen, L. R., Hafer, H. R., Long, P.T. & Pe rdue, R. R. (1993). Rura l residents’ attitudes toward recreation and tourism development. Journal of Travel Research, 31 (4), 27-33. Alreck, P., & R. Settle (1995). The survey research handbook (2nd ed.). Chicago: Irwin. Anderson, T.W. (1984). An introduction to multivar iate statistical analysis. (2nd ed.). New York: John Wiley & Sons. Andereck, K. L., & Vogt, C.A. (2000). The relationship between residents’attitudes toward tourism and tourism development options. Journal of Travel Research, 39 (1): 27-36. Andriotis, K., & Vaughan, R. (2003). Urban residents’ attitudes toward tourism development: the case of Crete. Journal of Travel Research, 42(4), 172-185. Ap, J. (1990). Residents’ pe rceptions research on the so cial impacts of tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 17 (4), 610-616. Ap, J. (1992). Residents’ per ceptions on tourism impacts. Annals of Tourism Research, 19 (3), 665-90. Ap, J., & Crompton, J. (1998). Developing and testing a tourism impact scale. Journal of Travel Research, 37(4), 120-130. Assael, H. (1987). Consumer behavior and marketing action. (3rd ed.) Boston, MA: Kent Publishing Company.

PAGE 146

133 Ayers, J., & Potter, H. R. (1989). Attitude s toward community change: A comparison between rural leaders and residents. Journal of the Community Development Society, 20(1), 1-18. Back, K.J., & Lee, C. K. (2005). Residents’ perceptions of casino development in Korea: The Kangwon Land casino case. UNLV Gaming Research & Review Journal, 9(2), 45-53. Bagozzi, R. (1978). Marketing as exchange: The theory of transactions in the marketplace. American Behavioral Scientist, 21 (5), 535-555. Ballantyne, R.R., & Uzzell, D.L. (1994). A checklist for the critical evaluation of informal environmental learning experiences. International Journal of Environmental Educational Information, 13 (2), 111–24. Belisle, F. J., & Hoy, D.R. (1980). The percei ved impact of tourism by residents: A case study in Santa Marta, Colombia. Annals of Tourism Research, 7 (1), 83–101. Becker, G. (1981). A treatise on the family. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press. Ben-Porath, Y. (1980). The F-Connection: Fam ily, friends, and firms in the organization of exchange. Population and Development Review, 6 (1), 1-30. Bergstrom, T. (1996). A survey of theories of the family. In Mark Rosenzweig and Oded Stark, editors, Handbook of Population and Family Economics. North Holland, Amsterdam. Bernard, H.R. (2000). Social research methods: Qualitative and quantitative approaches. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications. Bettman, J.R. (1979). An information process theory of consumer choice, reading. MA: Addison-Wesley. Blau, P.M. (1964). Exchange and power in social life. New York: John Wiley & Sons. Blau, P.M. (1967). Exchange and power in social life. Revised edition. New York: Wiley. Boulding, K.E. (1970). Economics as a science. New York: McGraw Hill. Brayley, R., & T. Var (1989). Canadian per ceptions of tourism’s influences on economic and social conditions. Annals of Tourism Research, 16 (4): 578-582. Brinberg, F., & Castell, C. (1982). A res ource exchange theory to interpersonal interactions: A test of Fao’s theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 8(2), 33-45.

PAGE 147

134 Brougham, J. E., & Butler, R. W. (1981). A segm entation analysis of resident attitudes to the social impact of tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 8(4), 569-90. Bryan, H. (1979). Conflict in the great outdoors: Toward understanding and managing for diverse sportsmens’ performances. University, AL: Bureau of Public Administration, University of Alabama. Buckley, R., & Pannell, J. (1990). Environmen tal impacts of tourism and recreation in national parks and conservation reserves. Journal of Tourism Studies 1 (1), 24–32. Buultjens, J., & Davis, D. (2001). Managi ng for sustainable commercial whitewater rafting in Northern New Wales, Australia. Journal of Tourism Studies, 12(2), 4050. Cavas, S., & Tanrisevdi, A. (2002). Residents attitudes towa rd tourism: A case study of Kusadasi, Turkey. Tourism Analysis, 7(3-4), 259-268. Chen, C.L. (1996). Sustainability of green re sources: Direction of the development of leisure agriculture. Nature (1), 4-13. Chen, F.J. (2002). The ideology survey and scenario analysis of the leisure housing in ILan County: A case study of the im pact effect on Taipei-I-Lan Highway. Master’s thesis, Chung Hua University, Taiwan. Chen, H.Y. (2004). The influence of B&B managers’ personality on decision-making style-A case study of Dong-Shan river le isure agricultural area in I-Lan County. Master’s thesis, Fu-Jen Catholic University, Taipei, Taiwan. Chen, K. L. (1998). Forest affecting recreation experiences and recreation values of forest recreational areas –A case study of Chi-Lan Forest Recreational Area. I-Lan, Taiwan: National I-Lan University Press, 1 (1), 27-37. Chen, K.L. (2002). The estimation of economic impact for industrial cultural activities in I-Lan. Department of Applied Economics, National I-Lan University. Chen, K. L., & Chang, K. C. (2003). The economic evaluation of recreation agriculture and industrial culture activities An Example of I-Lan County. .I-Lan, Taiwan: National I-Lan University Press, 1 (1), 91-103. Chen, K. L., Wu, C.C.& Lin, F.J. (2003).The evaluation of the production values of the recreational agricu lture industry in I –Lan County. Chinese Agribusiness Management Association, 9 (1), 47-83. Chen, K. L. (2004). Economic impacts on Green Expo, I-Lan. Department of Applied Economics, National I-Lan University, Taiwan.

PAGE 148

135 Chen, L. C., Wang, D. H., Huang, G. M., & Lin, K. J. (2002). Economic evaluation of recreational benefits at Fushan Botanical Garden. Taiwan Journal of Forest Science, 17(3), 375-385. Chen, S.L., & Ko, L. T. (1994). Residents’ perceptions of eco nomic and social impacts of tourism development at Hun-Chaun Township. Shih Hsin University. Taipei, Taiwan. Chen T.C. (2004). A study on relationships among facto rs affecting consumer’s choices, social exchange antecedents, and loyalty in travel agency. Master’s thesis, Ming Chuan University, Taipei, Taiwan. Chen, T. S. (2003). The formation and promotion of tourism in I-Lan County. Master’s thesis, Shih Hsin University, Taipei, Taiwan. Chen, Y. L. (2004). Alternative or non-alternative deve lopment? The hot spring industry and regional change in Jiaosi. Master’s thesis, Shih Hsin University, Taipei, Taiwan. Cheng, J. C., & Chen, J.L. (1996). Mana gerial strategy in Leisure farming. Agricultural Management Annual, 2 (2), 123-144. Cheng, J.H. (2001). Market segmentation of leisur e farming in Northern Taiwan— Analysis of consumers’ demand. Master’s thesis, Shih Hsin University, Taipei, Taiwan. Chiang, J.C. (1999). Development of leisure farming and fishery. Chung Hsin University Agriculture, 31 (1), 13-17. Chiou, P. H. (2003). A study of the relationship among tourism image, satisfaction and behavioral intention: A case of four leisure farms in I-Lan area. Master’s thesis, Shih Hsin University. Taipei, Taiwan. Chu, H.C. (2004). A study on the trend of leisure farm development at I-Lan County. Master’s thesis, Fu-Kong Collage of Humane and Sociology, I-Lan, Taiwan. Coast Guard Admini stration, (2005). General duty of coast guards. Executive Yuan, Taiwan. Cooke, K. (1982). Guidelines for socially a ppropriate tourism development in British Columbia. Journal of Travel Research, 21(1), 22–28. Council of Agriculture. (2004). Leisure agriculture report, Executive Yuan, Taiwan Cudeck, R. (2000). Exploratory factor analysis In Tinsley, H.E. & Brown, S.D. (Eds.), Handbook of Applied Multivariate Sta tistics and Mathem atical Modeling. California: Academic Press. 265-294

PAGE 149

136 Davis, D., Allen, J., & Cosenza, R. M. (1988). Segmenting local residents by their attitudes, interests, and opinions toward tourists. Journal of Travel Research 27 (2), 2-8. Deccio, C., & Baloglu, S. (2002). Nonhost community resident reactions to the 2002 Winter Olympics: The spillover impacts. Journal of Travel Research, 41(3), 24656. DGBAS. (2002). Employment structure in Taiwan area 2001. Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statis tics, Executive Yuan, Taiwan. DGBAS (2003). Family income structure in Taiwan area 2002. Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statis tics, Executive Yuan, Taiwan. Donnelly, M.P., Vaske, J.J. & Graefe, A. R. (1986). Degree and range of recreation specialization: Toward a typology of boating related activities. Journal of Leisure Research, 18(2), 81-95. Eagles, P.F.J. (1997). Paper presen ted for IUCN World Commission on Protected Areas in the 21st Century: From Islands to Networks, Albany, Australia. Emerson, R. M. (1962). Power dependence relations. American Sociological Review, 27 (1), 31-40. Emerson, R. M. (1972). Exchange theory, part 1: A psychological basis for social exchange in sociological theories progress. MA: Houghton-Mifflin Emerson, R. M. (1987). Toward a theory of value in social exchange. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Engel, J.F., & Blackwell, R.D. (1982). Consumer behavior. (4th ed.) New York: Dryden Press. Faulkner, B., & Tideswell, C. (1997). A fram ework for monitoring community impacts of tourism. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 5 (1), 3-28 Fesenmaier,D.R., & Johnson, B. (1989). Invol vement-based segmentation: Implication for travel marketing in Texas. Tourism Management, 10(4), 293-300. Foa, U. & Foa, E. (1974). Societal structures of mind. Thomas, Springfield, IL. Freeman, R.E. (1984). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Boston: Pitman:.p.46. Fukuyama, F. (1996). Trust: the social virtues a nd the creation of prosperity. New York: Free Press,

PAGE 150

137 Gilbert D., & Clark M. (1997). An explorat ory examination of urban tourism impact, with reference to residents attitudes, in the cities of Canterbury and Guildford. Cities, 14(6), 343-352 Gouldner, A. (1960). The norm of reci procity: A preliminary Statement. American Sociological Review, 25 (2), 161-178. Gursoy, D., Jurowski, C., & Uysal, M. (2002). Resident Attitudes: A Structural Modeling Approach. Annals of Tourism Research, 29 (1), 79–105. Gursoy, D., & Rutherford, D.R. (2004). Host attitudes toward tourism: an improved structural model. Annals of Tourism Research, 31(3), 495-516. Hair, J., Anderson, R.E., Tatham, R. & Black, W. (1998). Multivariate data analysis. (Fifth Edition). New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, 87-95. Harrill, R. (2004). Residents’ attitudes toward tourism development: a literature review with implications for tourism planning. Journal of Planning Literature, 18(3), 251266. Havitz, M.E., & Dimanche, F. (1990). Propositio n of testing the involvement constructin recreational and tourism contexts. Leisure Sciences, 12(2), 179-195. Havitz, M.E., Dimanche, F., & Bogle, T. (1994). Segmenting the a dult fitness market using involvement profiles. Journal of Park and R ecreation Administration, 12(3), 38-56. Haywood, K. M. (2000). Responsible and res ponsive tourism planning in the community, in Ryan, C. & Page, S. (eds.) Tourism management—towards the millennium. New York: Pargamon. (p 168: 213). Hearne, R. R., & Salinas, Z. M. (2002). The us e of choice experiments in the analysis of tourist preferences for ecotourism development in Costa Rica. Journal of Environmental Management, 65(2), 153-163. Ho, J. J. (2004). The research of hot spring hot el consumer buying behavior. Master’s thesis, Fu-Jen Catholic University, Taipei, Taiwan. Ho, P. T. (2004). Tourism impacts and impact control stra tegies: A case study of Fenqihu area. Master’s thesis, National Chiayi University, Chiayi, Taiwan. Hong, J. J. (2001). Case study of the choices and results of local governments’ developing strategies: I-Lan “anti-development” model. Master’s thesis, National Taipei University, Taipei, Taiwan. Huang, C.K. (2004). The evaluation model for leisure agriculture area. Master’s thesis, Nan-Hua University, Taiwan.

PAGE 151

138 Hunt, S.D. (1976). The nature and scope of marketing. Journal of Marketing, 40 (3), 1728. I-Lan County Government Re port (1992). I-Lan, Taiwan. I-Lan County Government Re port (2000). I-Lan, Taiwan. I-Lan County Government Re port (2002). I-Lan, Taiwan. I-Lan County Government Re port (2003). I-Lan, Taiwan. I-Lan County Government Repor t (2004). I-Lan, Taiwan I-Lan County Government Report (2005). Bureau of Agriculture Affairs, I-Lan County, I-Lan, Taiwan. I-Lan County Statistical Abst ract (2004). I-Lan, Taiwan. I-Lan County Tourism Comprehensiv e Plan (1996). I-Lan, Taiwan. I-Lan County Tourism Ambassa dor Association Handbook, 2004. Jacobs, J. E. (2002). Community participati on, the environment, and democracy: Brazil in comparative perspective. Latin American Politics and Society, 44 (4), 59-88. Jafari, J. (1986). A systemic view of socio-cu ltural dimensions of tourism. In President’s Commission on American Outdoor Tourism, Washington DC, 33-55. Jurowski, C., Uysal, M. & Williams, D.R. (1997). “A theoretical analysis of host community resident reactions to tourism.” Journal of Travel Research, 34 (2), 3-11. Kao, P.C. (1994). Aborigines’ perceptions and attitudes towards tourism development in Ar-Li-Shan Scenic Area. Master’s thesis, Chinese Cultural University. Taipei, Taiwan. Kayat, K. (2002). “Power, social excha nges, and tourism in Langkawi: Rethinking resident perceptions.” International Journal of Tourism Research, 4 (3), 171-91. Kelly, H. H., & Thibaut, J.W. (1978). Interpersonal relations: A theory of interdependence. New York: Wiley & Sons. Kim, S.S., Scott, D., & Crompton, J.L.( 1997) An Exploration of the relationships among social psychological involvement, behavi oral involvement, commitment, and future intentions in the context of birdwatching. Journal of Leisure Research, 29(3), 320341. King, B., Pizam, A., & Milman, A. (1993). Soci al impacts of tourism: Host perceptions. Annals of Tourism Research, 20 (4), 650–665.

PAGE 152

139 Kop, S. S. (1992). The development of industrialization in Taiwan, 1960s-1990s Presented in “I-Lan Studies”, The First Academic Conference in I-Lan. Kotler, P. (1984). Marketing management: Analysis planning, implementation and control. New Jersey: Prentice Hall. Kreps, K.E. (1997). The interaction between norms and economic incentives: Intrinsic motivation and extrinsic incentives. The American Economic Review, 87(2), 359364. Kull, C. A. (2002). Empowering pyromaniacs in Madagascar: Ideology and legitimacy in community-based natural resource management. Development and Change, 33 (1), 57-78. Kuo, H. F. (2004). Local governance and tourism development: A case study of I-Lan County. Master’s thesis, Fu-Kong Collage of Humane and Sociology, I-Lan, Taiwan. Laarman, J.C., & Gregersen, H.M. (1996). Pricing policy in natu re-based tourism, Tourism Management, 17(4), 247-254. Lane, B. (1994). Sustainable rural tourism strategies: A tool for development and conservation. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 2 (1&2), 102 – 111. Lankford, S. V., & Howard, D.R. (1994). Developing a tourism impact attitude scale. Annals of Tourism Research, 21 (1), 121–139. La Porta, R., Lopez-de-Silanes, F., Shleif er, A., & Vishny, R. (1997). Trust in large organizations. The American Economic Review, 87 (2), 333-338. Lawson, R., Williams, T., Young, & Cossens, J. (1998). A comparison of residents’ attitudes towards tourism in 10 New Zealand towns. Tourism Management, 19 (3), 247-256. Lee, S.Y. (2003). Cultural governance and local development: The spatial-social process of I-Lan 1990-2002. Master’s thesis, Hsih-Hsin University, Taipei, Taiwan. Li, H. E. (2000). A study on public recreational res ource use and pricing strategies: A case of Wu-Lao Keng Scenic Park. Master’s thesis, Shih Hsin University, Taipei, Taiwan. Lindbeck, A. (1997). Incentives and so cial norms in household behavior. American Economic Review Papers and Proceedings, 87 (2), 370-377. Lin, K. C., Lin, C. C., & Tang, S.L. (2000). Survey of visitor information in the Fushan Botanical Garden, Taiwan. Taiwan Journal of Forest Science, 15(1), 105-113.

PAGE 153

140 Lin, S. C. (1994). Systemic environmental strategies for government agencies: Case study of I-Lan County Government’ s “Tourism for the county” policy. Master’s thesis, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan. Lindsay, P., & Norman, D. A. (1977): Human information proce ssing: An introduction to psychology. New York: Academic Press. Liu, J. C., & T. Var (1986). Resident at titudes toward tourism impacts in Hawaii. Annals of Tourism Research, 13 (2), 193–214. Liu, J.L. (2005). The research of environmental desi gn in leisure agriculture from the viewpoint of ecological desi gn—Two cases study in I-Lan. Master’s thesis, National Dong-Hua University, Taiwan. Long, P. T., Perdue, R., & L. Allen (1990) Rural resident tourism perceptions and attitudes by community level of tourism. Journal of Travel Research, 28(3), 3–9. Madrigal, R. (1993). A tale of tourism in two cities. Annals of Tourism Research, 20(2), 86-102. Madrigal, R. (1995). Resident’s percep tions and the role of government. Annals of Tourism Research, 22(1), 336-352. Mathieson, A., & Wall, G (1982). Tourism: Economic, physical and social impacts. New York: Longman. McCool, S.F., & Marin, S.R. (1994). Comm unity attachment and attitudes toward tourism development. Journal of Travel Research, 32(3), 29-34. McFarlane, B.L. (1994). Specializati on and motivation of birdwatchers. Wildlife Society Bulletin, 22 (3), 361-370. McGehee, N. G., & Andereck, K.L. (2004). Fact ors predicting rural re sidents’ support of tourism. Journal of Travel Research, 43(4), 131-140. McIntyre, N., & Pigram, J. J. (1992). Recreat ion specialization reex amined: The case of vehicle-based campers. Leisure Sciences, 14(1), 3-15. Meeker, B.F. (1971). Decisions and exchange. American Sociological Review, 36(3), 485-495 Milman, A., & Pizam, A. (1988). Social impacts of tourism on Central Florida. Annals of Tourism Research, 15 (3), 191–204. Moore, K.R., & Cunningham, W.A. (1999). So cial exchange beha vior in logistic relationships: A shipper perspective. International Journal of Physical Distribution and Logistics Management, 29 (2), 103-121

PAGE 154

141 Moscardo, G. (1996). Mindful visi tors – heritage and tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 23(2), 376–397. Napier, T. L., & Bryant, E.G. (1980). Attitu des toward outdoor recreation development: An application exchange theory. Leisure Sciences, 3 (2), 169-187 Nash, D. (1989). Tourism as a form of imperialism. In Guests and Hosts: The Anthropology of Tourism (2nd ed.), Smith, V. ed., pp. 37-52. University of Pennsylvania Press Philadelphia. Orams, M.B. (1997). The effectiveness of envi ronmental education: Ca n we turn tourists into ‘greenies’? Progress in Tourism and Hospitality Research, 3 (4), 295–306. Pearce, D. (1989). Social impacts of tourism. In The social, cultural and environmental impacts of tourism. Sydney, Australia: New S outh Wales Tourism Commission Perroux, F. (1960). Contrainte, echange, dons. Economie et Societe. Presses Universitaries de France, Paris. 21-22,342-346 Pizam, A. (1978). Tourist impacts: the soci al costs to the destination community as perceived by its residents. Journal of Travel Research, 16(4), 8–12. Pressman, S., &. Montecinos, V. (1996). Economics and sociology: A review essay. Journal of Economic Issues, 30(3), 877-889. Rose-Ackerman, S. (1996). Altrui sm, nonprofits, and economic theory. Journal of Economic Literature, 34(2), 701-728. Rosentraub, M.S., & Thompson, K. (1981). Th e use of surveys of satisfaction for evaluations. Policy Studies Journal, 9 (7), 990-1000. Rothman, R.A. (1978). Residents and tran sients: Community reaction to seasonal visitors. Journal of Travel Research, 16(3):8–13. Ryan, C., Scotland, A., & Montgomery, D (1998). Resident a ttitudes to tourism development — a comparative study between the Rangitikei, New Zealand and Bakewell, United Kingdom. Progress in Tourism and Hospitality Research, 4(2), 115-130. Sahlins, M. (1972). Stone age economics. New Jersey: Aldine Transaction. Schluter, R., & Var, T. (1988).Resident at titudes toward tourism in Argentina. Annals of Tourism Research, 15 (3), 442-445. Scott, D., & Godbey, G.(1994). Recreation specialization in th e social world of contract bridge. Journal of Leisure Research, 26(3), 275-295.

PAGE 155

142 Sheldon, P. J., & Var, T. (1984). Resident attitudes to tourism in North Wales. Tourism Management, 5 (2), 40-47. Shen, C.L. (2002). The “backwardness” and development of I-Lan: A reflection of local autonomy. Master’s thesis, Hsih-Hsin University, Taipei, Taiwan. Shi, G. S. (1994). The basic principles of development of business entity and economy in I-Lan: Historical analysis of “Stagnati on” and “Transformation”. “I-Lan Study”, The First Academic Conference, I-Lan Literature Periodic, 7 (1), 260-276. Siegel, P. B., & Jakus, P. M. (1995). Tourism as a sustainable rural development strategy: Building consensus in resident attitudes. Southern Journal of Rural Sociology, 11 (1), 17-41. Simpson, L., Wood, L., & Daws, L. (2003). Community capacity building: Starting with people not projects. Community Development Journal, 38 (4), 277-286. Sirakaya, E., Teye, V., & Somez, S. (2002). Understand residents’ support for tourism development in the Central Region of Ghana. Journal of Travel Research, 41(3), 57-67. Skidmore, W. (1975). Theoretical thinking in sociology. New York/Lnodon: Cambridge University Press. Smith, M. D., & Krannich, R. S. (1998). T ourism dependence and resident attitudes. Annals of Tourism Research, 25 (4), 783-801. Snaith, T., & Haley, A. (1999). Residents’ opinions of tourism development in the historic city of York, England. Tourism Management, 20 (1), 595-603. Stem, C. J., Lassoie, J.P., Lee, D., Deshle r, D.D., & Schelhas, J.W. (2003). Community Participation in ecotourism benefits: The link to conservation practices and perspectives. Society and Natural Resources, 16 (5), 387-413. Stein, T.V., Anderson, D.H., & Thompson, D. (1999). Identifying and managing for community benefits in Minnesota State Parks. Journal of Park and Recreation Administration. 17(4), 1-19. Stein, T. V.(1998).Ecotourism: A new la nd management opportunity for private landowners. Florida Forests, 5 (1), 36-38. Stein, T.V., Anderson, D.H., & Kelly, T. ( 1998). Using stakeholders' values to apply ecosystem management in an upper Midwest landscape. Environmental Management. 24(3), 399-413. Stein, T. V. (2001). Making ecotourism a reality: An integrated approach. Renewable Resources Journal, 19(3), 6-12.

PAGE 156

143 Stone, R. N. (1984). The marketing characteristics of involvement. Advances in Consumer Research, 11(1), 210-215. Sutton, W. (1967). Travel and understanding: No tes on the social structure of touring. Journal of Comparative Sociology, 8 (2), 217-233. Tasi, S. L. (1986). The changes of employment structure in business entity in Taiwan, 1950-1980. Master’s thesis, Fu-Jen Catholic University, Taipei, Taiwan. Taiwan Domestic Tourism Annual Repor t (2003). Tourism Bureau, Taiwan. Thibaut, J. W., & Kelley, H. H. (1959). The social Psychology of Groups, New York: John Wiley & Sons. Thomason, P., Crompton, J.L., & Kamp, B.D. (1979). A Study of the attitudes of impacted groups within a host community toward prolonged stay tourist visitors. Journal of Travel Research, 17(3), 2–6. Tomljenovic, R., & Faulkner, B. (1999). Touris m and older residents in a sunbelt resort. Annals of Tourism Research, 27(1), 93-114. Turner, J.H. (1986). The structure of sociological theory. Chicago: The Dorsey Press. Um, S., & Crompton, J. L. (1987). Measuri ng resident’s attachment levels in a host community. Journal of Travel Research 26 (1), 27-29. Valentine, P.S. (1992). Review : Nature-based tourism. In Special Interest Tourism. B. Weiler and CM Hall (Eds.). London: Belhaven Press. 105-128 Vincent, V.C., & Thomson, W. (2002). Asse ssing community support and sustainability for ecotourism development. Journal of Travel Research, 41(4), 153-160. Weaver, D. B. (1998). Ecotourism in the less developed world. New York: CAB international Weaver, D.B., Faulkner, B., & Lawton, L. (2001). Nature-based tourism in Australia and Beyond: A preliminary investigation. Gold Coast, Queensland: Cooperative Research Centre for Sustainable Tourism, Griffith University. Weber, M. (1949). The methodology of the social sciences. New York : The Free Press. Weber, M. (1968). Economy and society. An oultline of interpretative sociology. NY: Bedminster. Williams, J., & Lawson, R. (2001) Community issues and resident opinions of tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 28(2), 269–290.

PAGE 157

144 William, D.R., & Huffman, M.G. (1986). Recr eation specialization as a factor in backcountry trail choice. IN Lucas, R.C. (Ed.). Providing-Symposium on recreation choice behavior. (p. 31-37). U.S. Department of Agriculture. Wu, C. G. (1989). The transition of indus tries in Taiwan, 1950-1980. Department of Applied Economics, National Chung-Hsing University, Taiwan. Wu, C.C., Chen, K. L., & Lin, F.J. (2004). 2004 summary report of economic impacts of leisure agricultural area in I-Lan. National I-Lan University, Taiwan. Wu, T.C., & Pan, C.M. (2004). Estimating Visitor expenditures and economic output effects—A case study of the Internat ional Children’s Folk Art Festival. Journal of Outdoor Recreation Study. 17(1): 1-21. Yang, Y.S. (2003). A study on visitors’ evaluation of bed & breakfast facilities in I-Lan Area. Master’s thesis, Hish Hsin University, Taipei, Taiwan. Yu, C.N. (2004). B&B as an alternative production of the meaning of home—A case study on B&B Homestay in I-Lan Area. Master’s thesis, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan. YuKi, G. (1994). Leadership in organizations. Englewood Cliffs, NJ : Printice-Hall.

PAGE 158

145 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH Joe Ying Chin Yang finished his doctoral study at the University of Florida’s School of Forest Resources and Conservati on in August 2006, with a major in forest resources and conservation (ecotourism) and a minor in tourism, recreation and sport management. In 1983, he received his Mast er of Business degree from Tarleton State University. His undergraduate degree is from Fu-Jen Catholic University, Taiwan, where he studied international trade. He has former ly worked as a real estate specialist for ANCA realty in California, a nd as a marketing specialist for Kent Industrial in New Jersey and California.


Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UFE0013620/00001

Material Information

Title: Nature-Based Tourism Impacts in I-Lan, Taiwan: Business Managers' Perceptions
Physical Description: Mixed Material
Copyright Date: 2008

Record Information

Source Institution: University of Florida
Holding Location: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
System ID: UFE0013620:00001

Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UFE0013620/00001

Material Information

Title: Nature-Based Tourism Impacts in I-Lan, Taiwan: Business Managers' Perceptions
Physical Description: Mixed Material
Copyright Date: 2008

Record Information

Source Institution: University of Florida
Holding Location: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
System ID: UFE0013620:00001


This item has the following downloads:


Full Text























Copyright 2006

By

Joe Ying Chin Yang



































I dedicated this paper to my parents, Chin-Hsin Yang and Sung-I Tseng Yang & my wife,
Yu-Mei Chen















ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I wish to acknowledge my dissertation committee for their guidance, time, and

efforts to their students: Dr. Taylor Stein, faculty advisor and committee chair; Dr. Janaki

Alavalapati, Dr. Marilyn Swisher, Dr. Clyde Kiker and Dr. Stephen Holland. I also wish

to acknowledge Dr. Kai-Li Chen, Professor of National I-Lan University, for her

thorough advising and documenting support.

In addition, I wish to express my appreciation to the following people and

organizations for their contributions to making this dissertation possible:

* Shi-Ning Rou of Yuca CPA in I-Lan for local connections and essential guidance
for this study

* Lien-Hsing Yu, I-Lan County Director of Land Administration, for supporting
existing county document and data

* Te-Hsin Chen, Deputy Director of Bureau of Business and Travel, I-Lan County
for his assistance and guidance.

* Ms Cheng-Jiao Ho of the I-Lan Tourism Association for advising and assisting my
interviews

* Tsai-Kun Lin, Assistant Manager of the I-Lan Farmers' Association for his
guidance and providing farming information

* Ms Li-Wen Hsu, formal Director of I-Lan Tourism Ambassadors Association, for
her guiding and providing data

* Ms Fen-Ju Kuo of Kun-Shan University for Chinese editing

* Juao-Ming Hsu of Kun-Shan University for statistical analysis performed

* All the fieldworkers and respondents in I-Lan who participated in the qualitative
and quantitative parts of this study.









* Qiong Wang of the University of Florida for statistical analysis performed

* Tseng-Tien Hwang, for all his faith in my abilities. His support during my studies
has been very valuable.

* My parents and sister Suzie and her family for their continuous full support and
encouragement

* My wife, YuMei, for her patience and full support during this dissertation process

* All the teachers, students and administrators from the Department of Tourism,
Recreation and Sport Management and the School of Forest Resources and
Conservation, University of Florida















TABLE OF CONTENTS

page

A C K N O W L E D G M E N T S ................................................................................................. iv

L IST O F TA B L E S ......... ............................. ......... ... ....... ....... ix

LIST OF FIGURES ......... ......................... ...... ........ ............ xi

ABSTRACT ........ .............. ............. .. ...... .......... .......... xii

CHAPTER

1 IN TR OD U CTION ............................................... .. ......................... ..

Statem ent of Purpose and Objectives .................................... ............. ........ ....... 3
R research Q uestions........... .................................................................. ........ .. .. ...
Scope of the Study ................................................... ............................ ...... .4
Significance of Study ................................................... .......... ........ .. ..
D e fin itio n s ........................................................... ................ .. 7

2 L IT E R A TU R E R E V IE W .................................................................. .....................8

N ature-b asked T tourism .................. ................................................... .....................8
Attitudes and Perceptions of Tourism Im pacts................................. .....................9
Social E x change T heory .................................................................................... ... 12
The Difference and Similarities between Exchange and Economic Theories ....14
Relationship between Exchange and Economy................................................15
Social Exchange Theory in Tourism ........................................ ....... ............... 16
Involvement in Community Development ................. ......... ............ .................19
R elevant R research to I-L an ............................................... ............................. 23
Studies in E conom ic Im pact ............2.. ...... ......... .............. .....................23
Studies in Leisure Farming and Bed and Breakfast Lodging..............................25

3 M E T H O D .............................................................................2 7

Stu dy Site ......... .. ........... .......... ................. ............................27
N atu ral E nv ironm ent ........................................ ............................................2 7
The H history of I-L an....................................................................... ......... ............. 29
Demographic Structure and Population Trend in I-Lan................................30
Econom ic D evelopm ent in I-Lan ............................................. ............... 30
Tourism Development in I-Lan................. .............. .................31










Stage 1 (1981-1989): Exploration, involvement and development.............32
Stage 2 (1989-1997): Development of cultural tourism and major
tourism activities.................. ....... ... ..................32
Stage 3 (1997-2005): Consolidation of major tourism activities .................33
M ajor Tourism Types ......................................................... ............... 34
L eisu re farm s ................................3 4.............................
Events and tour spots.................... .. ........................................ 35
T ourism Strategies............ ........................................................ .......... .... 37
R e se arch D e sig n ................................................................................................... 3 7
Survey In strum ent....... ....................................................................... ........ .. .... .. 40
D evelopm ent of Survey ............................................. ..... ....................... 40
In itia l in terv iew s ..................................................................................... 4 1
Im p a ct su rv ey ......................................................................................... 4 2
Development of final questionnaire .............. ............................... 44
D ata C o lle ctio n ..................................................................................................... 4 5
The Sam ple .................................. ............... ......... ........ 45
Collecting Data .............. ........................ ......... 46
D ata A nalysis................................................... 46
V a ria b le s ........................................................................................................ 4 6
Factor A analysis ............... ..................................................................... ........ ..... 47

4 R E S U L T S .............................................................................5 2

D description of Sam ple ........................................................... 52
Socio-D em graphic Characteristics .............................................. ......52
Business Characteristics ............................................................ 53
S u m m a ry .......................................... ................................................... 8 1

5 DISCUSSION AND SUGGESTION ........................ ............ ......... 82

L essons L earned from I-L an ................................................................................. 90
T h eoretical Im plication s ....................................................................................... 9 5
F utu re R research ................................................................96
C conclusion ....................... ................. ................................................... 98

APPENDIX

A INITIAL INTERVIEW DATA AND TOURISM IMPACT SCALE ......................100

B INITIAL SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE ....................................................... 104

C QUESTIONNAIRE RESOURCES ................................................................106

D FACTOR ANALYSIS .................. .. ......... ......... ........112

E FORMAL SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE .........................................120

F OVERALL TOURISM IMPACTS .......................................... ........ 127









L IST O F R E FE R E N C E S ......................................................................... ................... 132

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH ............................................................. ..................145
















LIST OF TABLES


Table page

3-1 Production Output of Business Entity in I-Lan County, 1970-2001 ........................31

3-2 Items selected for Initial Survey of Nature-Based Tourism Impacts.....................43

3-3 Reliability Analysis for Economic Impacts................................. ............... 50

3-4 Reliability Analysis for Social/Cultural Impacts ........................................... 51

3-5 Reliability Analysis for Environmental Impacts .............. ...................................51

4-1 Frequency of Respondents' Socio-Demographic Characteristics............................53

4-2 Respondents' Type of Business, Length of Business and Organization..................54

4-3 Relationships between type of Business and Sales Revenue ..............................55

4-4 Distribution of Respondents' Perceptions of County Government.....................56

4-5 Distribution of Respondents' Level of Involvement.................... .................57

4.6 Overall Perceptions of Costs/Benefits of Tourism Impacts...................................60

4-6-1 Correlation in between Overall Impact Factors...........................................63

4-7 Significant Level between Socio-Demographics and Type of Business.................. 64

4-8 Relationship between Gender and Major Types of Business...............................64

4-9 V ariables in M odel ........................... ............................. ......... .. .... ..... ...... 65

4-9-1 Multiple Regression Results of Attitudes toward Government ..............................66

4-10 Multiple Regression Results of Past Participation in Tourism Planning over the
Past 12 Months .............. ...... ....................... ......................66

4-11 Multiple Regression Results of Willing to Participate in Tourism Planning over
the next 12 M months ........... ... ................................ .......... .. .. ......... .... 67

4-12 Multiple Regression Results of Implementation of Tourism Planning....................67









4-13 Multiple Regression Results of Participation in Government Tourism Projects .....68

4-14 Multiple Regression Results of Contributing Money to Tourism Planning.............68

4-15 V ariables in M odel ........................... ............................. ......... .. .... ..... ...... 69

4-16 Multiple Regression Results of Social/cultural Benefit........................... ........70

4-17 Multiple Regression Results of Economic Benefit 1..................... .............. 70

4-18 Multiple Regression Results of Environmental Benefit.....................................71

4-18-1 Multiple Regression Results of Attitudes toward Government...........................72

4-18-2 Multiple Regression Results of Willing to Participate in Tourism Planning
over the next 12 M onths............................................................................ ...... 72

4-18-3 Multiple Regression Results of Used Tourism Projects over the last
12 M month s ...................................................... ................. 73

4-19 V ariables in M odel ........................... ............................. ......... .. .... ..... ...... 73

4-20 Multiple Regression Results of Social/cultural Benefit ..................................74

4-21 Multiple Regression Results of Economic Benefit 1: Job & Sales Revenue...........74

4-22 Multiple Regression Results of Environmental Benefit ...................................75

4-23 Independent and Dependent Variables in Model ............................................. 76

4-24 Multiple Regression Results of Social/cultural Benefit ..................................77

4-25 Multiple Regression Results of Economic Benefit 1..................... ...............78

4-26 Correlation between Socio-Demographics, Business Characteristics and Level of
Involved ent............................................................... ... .... ........ 79
















LIST OF FIGURES


Figurege

1-1. Conceptual Model of Costs/Benefits of Tourism Impacts, Type of Involvement,
and Level of Involvement ..... .................. ......... ....... .. .. .................5

1-2. Three major Elements for Tourism Development in I-Lan: Local Industry,
E nvironm ent and Culture ........................................ ................................. 6

3-1. M ap of Study Site .................. ................ ................ ......... .. ............. 28

3-2: Seven Z ones of I-L an C ounty......................................................................... .... 29

3-3. Dong-Shan River Water Park (I-Lan County Government Webpage 2005).............36

3-4. Jiaosi Hot Spring (I-Lan County Government Webpage 2005)..............................36

3-5. Conceptual Model of Costs/Benefits of Nature-Based Tourism (NBT) Impacts,
Type of Involvement, and Level of Involvement.................................................39

3-6. Flow chart of Survey D esign ...................................................................... 41















Abstract of Dissertation Presented to the Graduate School
of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy

NATURE-BASED TOURISM IMPACTS IN I-LAN, TAIWAN: BUSINESS
MANAGERS' PERCEPTIONS

By

Joe Ying Chin Yang

August 2006

Chair: Taylor V. Stein
Major Department: Forest Resources and Conservation

Nature-based tourism (NBT) is an emerging industry in Taiwan. In Taiwan's

export-import oriented economy, I-Lan County has served as a leader promoting NBT

since the 1980s. Based on I'Lan's experience in NBT, this dissertation reports on

research that examines the tourism business owners' perceptions of the social, economic,

and environmental impacts nature-based tourism has had on I-Lan County. The

framework of this study uses social exchange theory to examine perceptions of

costs/benefits.

Data were collected in fall, 2005 (N=286), from fifteen types of business managers

in I-Lan County. Perceptions of NBT impacts were assessed through examination of

participants' socio-demographic characteristics and type and level of involvement in

tourism planning.

Results indicate that 83% of respondents were raised in I-Lan and 41% operated

their business between 2 to 6 years. Most business owners reported that NBT had a









moderate impact on their business contributing approximately 30% of their annual sales

and 31% of customers. Participants believed benefits to the social/cultural environment

were the most apparent impact in I-Lan, followed by environment and economic benefits.

Environmental, social/cultural and economic costs were not considered major problems.

Neither gender nor education related to participants' perception of impacts, but

participants who were raised in I-Lan rated economic costs higher than newer residents.

The findings show that social/cultural benefits are the most apparent in I-Lan and

these perceptions were likely shaped by I-Lan's strong commitment to NBT over the last

several decades. The reviving of cultural identity and cultural recognition in the region

symbolizes the struggle of local culture versus the dominant Chinese culture, which has

been the mainstream culture in Taiwan since 1950s.

Another major finding in this study is that participants' perceptions of the

government are more important in determining perceptions of benefits than actual

interaction with the government. It indicates that the county government might change

its role from top-down decision-making style to co-partnering with local business people.

The county can also alleviate its own financial burden by releasing some of its tourism

activities to private sectors and use private sector resources for sustainable nature-based

tourism development in I-Lan.

Results show that with a better understanding of business owners' perceived

impacts, county tourism planners can improve the collaborative management of nature-

based tourism in I-Lan.














CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION

Many nations promote nature-based tourism to promote and sustain both nature and

economics (Hearne & Salinas, 2002). Taiwan, which has had much success expanding its

economy over the last 40 years, is beginning to look toward to nature-based tourism

(NBT) to continue its economic growth while improving its environmental integrity.

In Taiwan's export-import oriented economy, most of its counties have relied on

establishing manufacturing plants and commercial companies for their economic

development; however, I-Lan County has set a different tone. It promoted tourism as its

primary economic activity. In fact, I-Lan County was the first tourism-oriented county in

Taiwan in the 1980s.

Over the past twenty years, I-Lan has continued to attract people's attention to its

tourism opportunities and environmental protection. While other counties in Taiwan

began to experience the serious environmental deterioration and pollution problems of

industrialization and commercialization, they have taken note of I-Lan's achievement.

The major tourism events in I-Lan, such as a Children's Festival and Green Expo, have

been ranked the first and third, respectively, among top ten mega tourism events in

Taiwan since 1999 (Lee, 2003)

Tourism generates 16-20% of county's economic output, as much as $1.2 billion

annually, and creates 46,000 jobs (I-Lan County Government Report, 2004). I-Lan's

county government has led the way for tourism development in the county. Many

successful events were created and developed by the county government. The local









economy relies heavily on this government-led tourism, and local businesses are an

important part of the overall county tourism development. Business associations usually

have a close relationship with county government and government agencies; and they

also have influence on tourism development (I-Lan County Government Report, 2004).

But, what has really happened in I-Lan in these years? Since tourism development in I-

Lan is twenty years old, it is an appropriate time to evaluate the impacts tourism has on

the county's businesses and stakeholders.

Most tourism studies in I-Lan focus on a single sector (e.g., leisure farming) or

special events (Green Expo, Children's Festival). Research has not looked at tourism's

effect on the entire county. Other tourism studies have focused on visitors or residents

and only briefly examined local businesses. For these reasons, instead of focusing on

residents' perceptions of tourism impact, this study aims to examine NBT impacts on

tourism related business managers' perceptions for I-Lan County and attempts to

understand the role that business managers play in county government's tourism decision

making process.

When examining tourism impacts, with their dual roles as business operators and

residents, business managers can provide unique perceptions about the critical issues

related to tourism impacts. Thus, this study will use fifteen types of business managers as

units of analysis, and the study area will cover the entire I-Lan County. The study will

use existing literature, government data, interviews, surveys and observations to achieve

its research objectives. By examining business managers' perceptions of NBT impacts,

we can understand the factors and elements that influence NBT's economic,

social/cultural and environmental impacts. The findings of this study will be valuable for









county government and researchers when planning, managing and evaluating tourism

development in I-Lan.

Statement of Purpose and Objectives

The purpose of this study is to understand regional business managers' perceptions

of economic, social/cultural, and environmental costs and benefits of NBT. The

investigation of stakeholders' perceptions of tourism impacts enables researchers and

county government to better understand the attitudes, belief, and values of the people

who implement the tourism industry in the county. Therefore, this study will provide

implications for regional governments in developing countries which are transitioning

from traditional extractive industries to NBT. This study differs from others in the same

area of study in two general perspectives. First, the study assesses factors influencing

fifteen types of business managers' perceptions in the entire county. Second, the study

examines the NBT development in I-Lan, where NBT is at its inception stage for the

entire country.

The overall objectives of this study include to

* understand stakeholders' perceptions and attitudes regarding economic,
social/cultural, environmental and other factors for NBT in I-Lan and

* examine the relationship among stakeholders' socio-demographic characteristics,
type and level of involvement in tourism and their relation to perception of NBT's
costs and benefits.

Research Questions

This study will attempt to answer the following questions:

1. What are the stakeholders' perceptions of economic, social/cultural and
environmental costs/benefits of nature-based tourism?

2. How do stakeholders' socio-demographic characteristics (e.g., gender, age, level of
education, location of residence, length of owning business) relate to their









involvement in tourism planning (as characterized by type of involvement, attitude
towards the government, and level of involvement)?

3. How does stakeholders' involvement in nature-based tourism (as characterized by
type of involvement, attitude towards the government, and level of involvement)
relate to their perceptions of costs/benefits?

4. How do stakeholders' socio-demographic and business characteristics relate to
perception of costs/benefits?

5. How do stakeholders' socio-demographic characteristics and level of involvement
relate to their perception of costs/benefits?

Scope of the Study

Based on data from both I-Lan County and central Taiwan governments, several

business entities including hotel/motel, restaurant/food, gift/souvenir stores, leisure

farms/bed &breakfast, buses, car/motorcycle rental, whale-watching boaters, travel

agency, advertising designs, printing, financing institute and other tourism related

business (I-Lan County Statistical Abstract, 2004) were purposely chosen to take part in

this study. In other words, the results cannot be inferred to a larger population.

Socio-demographic characteristics, business characteristics, attitudes toward the

government, type of involvement and level of involvement will be selected as the

indicators by which perception of costs and benefits of nature-based tourism will be

measured. These form major components of the conceptual model, which will guide this

study (Figure 1-1). Due to issues of time and costs of surveys, a one-time measure of

each outcome variable will be used. Qualitative data from observations and interviews

will be used to supplement the major findings from the overall survey, which was

designed to answer the research questions.


























Figure 1-1. Conceptual Model of Costs/Benefits of Tourism Impacts, Type of
Involvement, and Level of Involvement

Significance of Study

When Taiwan pursued economic development through developing manufacturing

industries over the past forty years, I-Lan had little involvement in this movement. Its

economic development has always been 10 to 20 years behind other Taiwan counties (Shi,

1994). In the 1980s, rather than accepting the traditional manufacturing industry, which

had been pushed hard by the central government, I-Lan chose a tourism development

policy as its direction for economic development and stressed environmental protection

as part of this development.

According to the county tourism plan, tourism resulted in the combination of

"Local industries" and "Local humanities and cultural environment." In the past, tourism

planning was largely based on supply-demand theory, which focused mainly on

environmental resources in terms of supply without considering the relationship between

resources and local residents. According to I-Lan's Tourism Comprehensive Plan









(1996), the most important issues ought to be the role of local residents and their

involvement in tourism when considering recreational resources.

According to the county plan, the combination of integrating and assisting local

industries is the local government's fundamental task for tourism development. I-Lan is a

pioneer in Taiwan's tourism development history. Since I-Lan has not followed Taiwan's

traditional industrial development path, some look on I-Lan as backward with an anti-

development attitude that is based on "nostalgia" (Chen, 2003). From another

perspective, I-Lan has evaluated its options and chosen a unique path of development. It

does not want to follow an "over-development" philosophy but is choosing to rethink and

reconstruct its path using tourism as the tool (Chen, 2003; Shen, 2002).

The county government promotes "Tourism I-Lan," and also promotes

"Environment I-Lan" and "Culture I-Lan" as county policies. Through developing

tourism, I-Lan tries to find a solution for reviving local industries while attempting to

consider both environmental protection and cultural preservation (I-Lan County Tourism

Comprehensive Plan, 1996). Figure 1-2 illustrates the relation among local industries,

local environment and local culture in I-Lan.


Local
Industry





EnvironmentCulture

Figure 1-2. Three major Elements for Tourism Development in I-Lan: Local Industry,
Environment and Culture









Nature-based tourism is a new concept in Taiwan. From Taiwan's perspective, it is

meaningful to understand the county's role and its transformation from a primary fishing,

agricultural society into a recreation and tourism society. In fact, I-Lan County is the first

county that spent money to professionally research and identify guidelines for its county

planning (Chen, 2003, Lee, 2003); however, a study of stakeholders' perceptions of

nature-based tourism's impacts is needed.

Definitions

The following definitions are used in this study:

* Nature-based tourism: Tourism, which depends on nature and enhances nature
(Weaver, 1998). In this paper, nature-based tourism is defined as outdoor tourism
activities in natural areas such as lake, mountains, forests, wetlands, waterfalls,
beaches, natural trails and engaging in leisure farming, whale-watching, bird-
watching, kayaking, biking, walking, etc.

* Perception: Perception in humans describes the process whereby sensory
stimulation is translated into organized experience (Lindsay and Norman, 1977)

* Tourism impact: Tourism affects individuals, social groups, economies and the
environment. Tourism impacts usually are measured by economic, social, cultural
and environmental aspects (Mathieson and Wall, 1982)

* Costs/benefits: Tourism impacts can be analyzed in positive (benefits) and negative
(costs) ways in terms of economic, social/cultural and environmental aspects (Ap,
1992).

* Stakeholder: A stakeholder in an organization is any group or individual who can
affect or be affected by the achievement of the organization's objectives (Freeman,
1984).

* Involvement: An action of information searching or extended problem solving
behavior (Bettman 1979; Engel and Blackwell 1982), which could be measured by
time and/or money (Havitz and Dimanche, 1990).














CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW

Nature-based Tourism

Nature-based tourism is concerned with the direct enjoyment of some relatively

undisturbed phenomenon of nature (Valentine 1992). Eagles (1997) stated that nature-

based tourism had its roots in the desire of people to experience nature in their leisure

time. This form of tourism refers to travel motivated totally or in part by interests in the

natural history of a place, where visits combine education, recreation and often adventure

(Laarman & Gregersen 1996).

Many researchers stress the importance of appropriate management for sustainable

NBT development. Stein (2001, p. 6) points out that "like any use of rural and natural

areas, nature-based tourism has the same potential to change, alter, and degrade the

environment as other industries." Buckley and Pannell (1990) argue that NBT could

result in low environmental impact, and gain high sustainable economic return if well

planned and managed.

Buultjens and Davis (2001) argue that nature-based tourism has the potential to

cause significant ecosystem damage without effective management. Stein (2001) argues

that natural areas are unique unto themselves and when humans enter into the mix, no

single guideline can provide for a best solution. The challenge for researchers is to

identify and analyze the impacts of NBT to better manage for those impacts.









Attitudes and Perceptions of Tourism Impacts

This study uses business stakeholders' perceptions to examine NBT impacts in I-

Lan County. Attitudes and perceptions of tourism impacts have played an important role

in tourism studies. Researchers have used perceptions of residents and tourists to

understand tourism impacts in many tourism destinations. For instance, Hong (2001)

studied I-Lan tourism development by using the concepts of power network and county

commissioners' charisma to analyze the economic development in I-Lan. Hong argued

that although the development of agriculture and tourism in the 1980s and 1990s didn't

improve much of the economic growth in I-Lan compared with other areas in Taiwan, the

tourism policy still gained residents' strong support due to residents' awareness of the

importance of environmental protection and the perceptions of maximum benefits of

tourism for I-Lan.

According to Andereck and Vogt (2000), research about resident attitudes or

perceptions of tourism constitutes one of the most systematic and well-studied areas of

tourism. Resident attitudes toward tourism-more specifically, perceptions of tourism

impacts- have been a subject of research for more than 30 years. Jafari (1986) noted that

tourism research focused on the positive aspects of tourism impacts in the 1960s, the

negative aspects in the 1970s, and a more balanced approach in the 1980s. Research in

the 1990s has shifted focus to the study of residents at the community level. Studies of

residents' attitudes toward tourism have often been conducted in rural communities

where they search for opportunities to gain economic viability (Andereck and Vogt,

2000). For example, Pizam (1978) investigated residents' perceptions of the impacts of

tourism in Cape Cod, Massachusetts. The study found that a much larger portion of the

resident and the entrepreneur sample felt an overall negative effect from the impact of









tourism than those who felt an overall positive effect. The most negative attitudes

towards tourism on the Cape were residents employed in non-tourism enterprises,

followed by residents employed in tourism business, residents who were unemployed and

non-tourism business owners; while the tourism business owners expressed the most

positive attitudes.

Belisle and Hoy (1980) studied residents' perception of tourism at Santa Marta,

Colombia. They found that in developing countries, the economic benefits of tourism

might not be as great as often thought, whereas the environmental and social impacts

from tourism were detrimental. The study found that positive impacts of tourism were

reported more than twice as often as the level of negative impacts of tourism. Among five

independent variables, distance from tourism destination, economic status, education, age

and sex, only distance from tourism destination significantly affected the perception of

tourism impact.

Liu and Var (1986) studied resident attitudes toward tourism impacts in Hawaii.

They found that residents strongly agreed that tourism provides many economic and

cultural benefits, but were ambivalent about environmental benefits. Residents regard

environmental protection as being a more important priority than tourism's economic

benefits, but they were not willing to lower their standard of living to achieve this goal.

The leakage of economic benefits is a major issue many residents face, and

researchers have used elements of leakage to study the economic benefits of NBT. For

instance, Weaver and Lawton (2001) studied residents' perceptions of tourism impacts in

Australia and used local businesses as controlled by locals to measure the economic

leakage. The researchers found that local residents did not perceive significant economic









leakage. Andriotis & Vaughan (2003) studied residents' attitudes toward tourism

development in Crete and used tourism money moving to businesses outside the region as

measures of economic leakage. This study found that economic leakage was apparent and

perceived negatively. Kao (1994) and Chen and Ko (1994) studied tourism impacts in

Taiwan and found that residents in tourism destinations perceived leakage of economic

benefit as a negative economic impact.

Researchers who conducted these studies made the argument that residents'

perceptions of and attitudes toward tourism impacts were as important as the actual

impacts, if not more so. In most studies, perceptions of impacts or attitudes were

measured using a series of agreement scales (McCool and Martin, 1994; Weaver and

Lawton, 2001; Deccio and Baloglu, 2002; Andereck and Vogt 2000; Sirakaya, Teye and

Somez, 2002; Andriotis and Vaughan, 2003; McGehee and Andereck, 2004). According

to Mathieson and Wall (1982), there are three perceived impacts of tourism: 1) economic,

2) physical, and 3) social. This study will examine the stakeholders' perception of NBT

impacts in economic, social/cultural and environmental aspects, and the measurement

will be made using agreement scales. Statements of perceptions in tourism impact in this

study will be mostly adapted from Ap and Crompton (1998) and Weaver and Lawton

(2001) (See Appendix B)

There are several studies about residents' perceptions of tourism impacts in Taiwan.

Kao (1994) studied residents' perceptions of tourism impacts at Kuan-Yin and found that

residents perceived overall tourism's benefits exceeded its costs. Positive economic

impacts included improving transportation, improving public utilities, increasing

recreational facilities, increasing income, not increasing price of goods. Negative









impacts included increasing prices of real estate and leakage of economic revenues.

Positive social impacts included promoting local history and culture and maintaining

public safety. Negative impacts included the disruption of residents' daily life.

Chen and Kao (1994) indicated that residents perceived that large companies

received the most benefit from tourism, but residents still saw increases in their personal

incomes associated with tourism. They also noticed several negative social effects

including changing social norms, increasing crime, and widening the gap between the

rich and the poor. Studies from Chen (2003), Lin (2003) and P. T. Ho (2004) indicated

that residents perceived more positive impacts than negative impacts, especially

economic impacts. They were most concerned with negative environmental impacts

followed by social/cultural negative impacts.

Social Exchange Theory

Social exchange theory emerged in the 1950s as a way to better understand

interchanges between individuals and organizations. According to social exchange

theory, exchange occurs between individuals who are known to each other, as well as

between the anonymous traders of economic exchange (Ben-Porath 1980). Social

exchange is based on the exchange of rewards and costs to quantify the values of

outcomes from different situations for an individual (Thibaut and Kelley, 1959). Bagozzi

(1979, p.434) stated that exchange involves "a transfer of something tangible or

intangible, actual or symbolic, between two or more social actors."

Social exchange theory is based on the concept that people are reward-pursuing and

punishment-avoiding, and people are motivated to action by expectation of profits.

Rewards are not only the monetary returns, but may be social or psychological means

(Napier and Bryant, 1980). Skidmore (1975) suggests that individuals will likely engage









in an exchange under three conditions: 1) the result of rewards are valued, 2) the

exchange will produce valued rewards, and 3) perceived rewards exceed perceived costs.

Yuki (1994) points out that social exchange combines both material benefit and

psychological benefit. Material benefit includes salary. Psychological benefit includes

position, loyalty and trust.

Foa and Foa (1974) have developed an exchange theory using six categories to

describe the resources: love, status, information, money, goods and services. Based on

Foa and Foa's theory, of the dimensions of particulatism and concreteness underlie the

six categories, and resources perceived as similar are more likely to be exchanged than

dissimilar resources. An important aspect of an exchange between individuals not directly

included in Foa and Foa's theory is resource scarcity. Becker (1976) argues that the

fundamental economic approach to human behavior is the allocation of scare means (or

resources) to satisfy competing ends. Brinberg and Castell (1982) argue that the

availability (or scarcity) of a resource influences the patterns of exchange. Social

exchange theory is a framework for explicating movement of resources, during imperfect

market conditions, between networks via a social process (Emerson, 1987).

Research shows that trust is positively associated with economic performance in

the sense that trust greatly affects the performance of a society's institutions, including

firms and governments. For example, a study by La Porta, Lopez-de-Silanes, Shleifer,

and Vishny (1997) showed that both economic and social performance is positively

affected by trust in exchange and other social relations. The higher level of trust among

actors, the more efficient the combine actions.









Studies show that mutual trust has significant positive effects on economic

performance (e.g., sales on large organizations) as well as on social (and government)

efficiency and public participation. Research also found that higher levels of trust also

have positive effects on GNP growth, so a society with high trust is more likely to have

faster GNP growth than other societies (La Porta, Lopez-de-Silanes, Shleifer, and

Vishny, 1997).

Fukuyama (1996) observed that industrialized societies such as the United States,

Japan, and Germany have been capable of building an efficient corporate economy as a

result of social cooperation by high levels of trust. These findings suggest that mutual

trust within large economic organizations represent a major factor of their success in the

market, which is measured by the volume of exchange. On the other hand, low trust or

lack of it appears to have negative impacts on economic as well as non-economic

performance (La Porta, Lopez-de-Silanes, Shleifer, and Vishny, 1997).

The Difference and Similarities between Exchange and Economic Theories

According to Emerson (1962, 1972), social exchange theory differs from traditional

study of exchange in economics. The major difference is that neoclassical economic

theory views the actor (a person or a firm) as working with a market rather than with

other actors. In the various forms of social exchange theory, the exchange relation

between two specific actors is the central concept of the theory. Social and economic

theories of exchange might look similar, but they remain radically different in their

conceptual core.

Economic sociology regards exchange transactions as embedded in or governed by

institutions, cultural values, and social relations rather than as self-regulating mechanisms

(Pressman & Montecinos, 1996). According to Weber (1968), from a sociological









viewpoint, the market is not just an exchange mechanism but also a complex social

structure. Exchange is in essence a special case of social action, with not only formal

rationality but also extra-economic rationality.

Relationship between Exchange and Economy

Exchange has been accepted by many marketing scholars as the core concept of

marketing (Bagozzi 1975; Hunt 1976; Kotler 1984). Alderson (1957, p. 15) stated

"Marketing is the exchange, which takes place between consuming groups and supplying

groups." Because of marketing's close association to economics, distinguishing between

marketing and economics is sometimes difficult. Sahlins (1972) stated that mutual

exchange began in primitive societies where exchange rates were set by social contract

and equilibrium was established by reciprocity. Reciprocity is the process whereby this

mutual exchange of acceptable terms is actualized. It is a social interaction in which the

movement of one party evokes a compensating movement in some other party.

The economy as the realm of exchange is implicated in the socio-sphere as the

most complex domain (Boulding, 1970). According to Kreps (1997), actors in economic

exchange, as well as other social relations, are guided both by extrinsic and intrinsic

motivation. The first is in utility/profit seeking by following the law of supply and

demand and other economic laws, and the second, in altruism, the sense of duty, and the

like. Intrinsic motivations express non-economic considerations, internal values and

rules, norms and economic incentives interact (Kreps, 1997) in exchange as well as in

other actions including household behavior (Bergstrom 1996; Lindbeck 1997).

The pertinence of various forms of altruistic behavior in an economy often is

considerable, as indicated by the incidence of charity in the modern economy. Research

(Rose-Ackerman, 1996) indicates that overall, 73% of Americans make voluntary









contributions (survey in 1993) to different types of charities. Research on private charity

reports that most donors are guided by generous impulses and thus experience intrinsic

benefits from the act of giving rather than extrinsic (monetary) payoffs (Rose-Ackerman,

1996).

Social Exchange Theory in Tourism

Due to limited explanation in previous studies about the reason for people's

positive or negative attitudes toward tourism (Kayat, 2002), Ap (1992) introduced a

social exchange model to explain perceptions of tourism. Social exchange theory has

been considered an appropriate framework in understanding residents' perceptions of

tourism (Ap 1990; Nash 1989; Long, Perdue and Allen 1990), and it has been adopted as

the framework for the conceptual model presented in this paper (See Figure 1).

Ap (1992) developed a social exchange model for the understanding of residents'

perceptions of tourism. In terms of tourism, social exchange theory explains the exchange

of tangible or intangible resources that residents and tourists may give and receive in the

host-guest context. Residents are willing to enter into exchange with tourists if they

receive more benefits than costs (Jurowski, Uysal and Williams, 1997). Based on social

exchange, researchers assumed that economic benefits derived from tourism development

in exchange for social and environmental impacts (Harrill, 2003).

Sutton (1967) used social exchange to define tourism relationships between hosts

and guests. He suggested that the relationship is asymmetrical and unbalanced in

character. Pearce (1989) supports the concept of asymmetry to explain hosts' negative

perceptions of tourists, And states "... that marked asymmetry of frequent, transitory

contact with the opportunity for exploitation and interaction difficulties due to large

cultural differences are the important elements shaping a negative host reaction to tourists









(1989, p 85). Mathieson and Wall (1982) also state that the tourist-host relationships are

unequal and unbalanced in character. Turner (1986) suggests that hosts will engage an

exchange if they can obtain some benefit without receiving unacceptable costs.

The concept of reciprocity or equality is probably the most central to social

exchange theory. Reciprocity in exchange means that each actor will provide benefits to

the other equitably and with units of exchange that are important to the actors.

Reciprocity suggests that the resource exchange is roughly equal, and reciprocity is

interpreted and used differently by exchange theorists (Ap, 1992).

Several studies have shown that three main elements of the exchange process can

be identified, economic, environmental, and social/cultural, in terms of resident

perception of tourism impacts costs and benefits (King, Pizam, and Milman 1993;

Milman and Pizma, 1988; Long, Perdue and Allen 1990; Schluter and Var 1988). For

instance, Jurowski, Uysal and Williams (1997), using social exchange theory, presented a

study to examine attitudes towards tourism among residents in five counties at the Mount

Rogers National Recreation Area, Virginia. They found that residents' perceptions of

economic, social and environmental impacts depend on four independent variables: 1)

economic gain, 2) community resource use, 3) community attachment, and 4) natural

environment.

Gursoy, Jurowski and Uysal (2002) criticized Jurowski, Uysal and Williams'

(1997) model and aggregated the costs and benefits factors into three categories:

economic costs/benefits, social costs/benefits and environmental costs/benefits. They

proposed a new model that expanded on the findings of Jurowski Uysal and Williams'

(1997) study by segregating the impacts into costs and benefits and then examining the









influence of these two on support. They also added two new constructs: the state of the

local economy and the level of community concern. Gursoy and Rutherford (2004)

proposed and tested a new model which expands on the findings of the models proposed

by Jurowski, Uysal and Williams (1997) and Gursoy, Juroski and Uysal (2002) by

breaking down the perceived impact into five areas: 1) economic benefits; 2) social

benefits; 3) social costs; 4) cultural benefits; and 5) cultural costs.

Deccio and Balogue (2002) examined nonhost community residents' perceptions of

the spillover effects of the 2002 Winter Olympic Games in Salt Lake City, Utah. They

found that residents, who are environmentally conscious, did not support the Olympics;

those who are economically dependent on tourism and those who participate in outdoor

activities generally supported the Olympics. In addition, they noted that the level of

community attachment of residents did not influence the perception of the Olympics or

support for the Olympics. Sirakaya, Teye and Somez (2002) used social exchange model

to study residents' support for tourism development in the Central Region of Ghana.

They used seven factors to examine residents' attitudes about economic, social/cultural,

and environmental aspects, while also asked questions about personal involvement in the

tourism decision-making process. The findings of their study support the results of other

studies in developed nations that residents' support for tourism development is based on

their perception of costs and benefits.

Andriotis and Vaughan (2003) used social exchange theory to examine the

identification and explanation of the attitudes of urban residents toward tourism

development on Crete. They found that within communities there are segments

expressing different levels of support/concern for various tourism impacts (economic,









socio-cultural, and environmental). In addition, they also noted that level of education

can determine residents' attitudes. Highly educated respondents were more likely to

express concern about the impacts of tourism.

McGehee and Andereck (2004) used social exchange theory to examine factors

predicting rural residents' support of tourism in communities in Arizona. They found that

personal benefit has a significant relationship with tourism impact. Older people tend to

perceive tourism more negatively. Respondents, who lived in the community as children,

were more likely to perceive tourism impacts negatively. There is positive relationship

between tourism planning and both support for additional tourism and tourism's negative

impacts.

In Taiwan, social exchange theory has been applied in psychology, management,

information technology and tourism studies. For instance, T.C. Chen (2004) studied

relationships among factors affecting customers' choice, social exchange antecedents and

loyalty in travel agency.

Involvement in Community Development

Involvement in community development plays an important role in tourism

development. Engel and Blackwell (1982) stated that involvement could be measured by

the time spent, the number of alternatives examined, and the extent of the decision

process. Bettman (1979) stated level of involvement as a mediating variable in the search

for information. Assael (1992) argued that involvement means understanding a person's

consumer behavior and decision-making process. Stone (1984) defined involvement as

time and/or intensity of effort expended in undertaking of activities.

Several researchers discussed measures of involvement including amount of time

spent, frequency of participation and experience (Bryan, 1979; Donnelly, Vaske and









Graefe, 1986; McFarlane, 1994; McIntyre and Pigram, 1992; Scott and Godbey, 1994;

William & Huffman, 1986). Havitz and Dimanche (1990) stated that time and money

expended could explain level of involvement. Fesenmaier and Johnson (1989) used

behavioral measures of involvement in Texas and they include length of planning time

devoted to decision-making as the indicator. In recreation, involvement could be

measured by frequency of participation, money spent, ownership of equipment, and

number of memberships (Kim, Scott and Crompton, 1997).

Researchers show that there are strong linkages between the degrees of community

participation and the effectiveness of tourism development. For example, Stein, Anderson

and Thompson (1999) examined community benefits associated with Minnesota State

Parks. Using the benefits-based management framework, they found that park mangers

and planners needed more interaction with community residents. They suggested that

park managers and planners needed to: 1) provide benefits related to specific community

needs; 2) balance community and visitor needs; and 3) offer communities valuable

partnerships with parks to provide benefits.

Jacobs (2002) examined the grassroots environmental movement in Latin America

and European countries, and found that Brazilians residing in the urban periphery link

their own local environmental concerns to global consideration and concern for

environmental issues is closely related to a wide range of community involvement. Kull

(2002) studied community-based natural resources management in Madagascar, and

argued that the success of the community-based approach depends upon the real

empowerment of local resource users and attention to legitimacy of local institution. The









empowerment of local community residents can bring the success of environmental

issues when dealing with different level of governments.

Stem, Lassoie, Lee, Deshler, and Schelhas (2003) conducted research in Costa Rica

and argued that nature-based tourism offers communities an opportunity to improve their

well-being and economic livelihood. It also encourages people in the community to

conserve their forests and wildlife. Stein, Anderson and Kelly (1998) studied

stakeholders' values to apply ecosystem management at Red River Basin, in Minnesota

and North Dakota landscape. They found that community members valued the landscape

for a variety of non-economic and economic reasons. Community members perceived

that the landscape not only generated income, but also affected their quality of life.

Simpson, Wood and Daws (2003) studied the relationship between governments and

communities and suggested that the challenge for government is to enable the processes

of capacity building, participation and community ownership without creating

unnecessary pressures on the time, personal energy and the finances of residents of rural

communities. Providing resources to support these processes will increase the long-term

benefits for rural communities.

Agrawal and Gibson (1999) argued that in examining community development and

conservation, a focus on: 1) multiple interests and actors within communities, 2) how

these stakeholders influence decision-making, and 3) the internal and external institutions

that shape the decision-making process, are more meaningful than a focus on community

itself. Haywood (2000) stated that community participation in tourism planning is a

process of involving all relevant and interested parties (local government officials, local

citizens, architects, developers, business people, and planners) in such a way that









decision-making is shared. According to Haywood, there are three goals of community

tourism planning: 1) to identify the possibilities and choices about future tourism within

the community, 2) to examine each possibility carefully in terms of probable impacts, and

3) to reflect the preferences of people, whose lives and living environment are influenced

by the decision made, in tourism planning.

Resident involvement in tourism decision-making appears to influence the level of

support and attitude toward tourism and tourists (Cooke, 1982). When residents are

involved with various community tourism activities, they are more favorable toward

community change and development (Allen and Gibson, 1987; Ayers and Potter, 1989;

Rosentraub and Thompson, 1981). Madrigal (1993) studied two Arizona communities

and found that residents with positive perceptions of tourism believed that they could

influence tourism decisions.

The involvement in tourism decision-making and the empowerment of local

community members has been practiced in I-Lan. For example, the involvement in

tourism decision-making process for townships in I-Lan such as Shan-Shin and Yuan-

Shan, where local communities were able to incorporate input from local residents and

share the process of decision-making in tourism planning, reflected a linkage between

environmental issues and tourism (I-Lan County Government Report, 2002). The

empowerment of local community residents can bring the success of environmental

issues when dealing with different level of governments. For instance, in I-Lan, the fifty-

two acre wetland near the Lan-Yang River mouth was originally to be established as an

industrial park by Taiwan central government. However, due to strong resistance from

both local residents and county government based on fears of environmental pollution,









the area was established as a wetland protection zone in 1998 (I-Lan County Government

Report, 2002).

Relevant Research to I-Lan

With the support of I-Lan county government, many researchers in Taiwan have

studied a variety of issues in I-Lan. There are more than 100 theses and dissertations

regarding I-Lan issues, and about fifty papers studying tourism in I-Lan. The following

are some research projects related to tourism impact.

Studies in Economic Impact

Chen (1998) used the travel cost method to study the value Chi-Lan forest

recreation and the results showed that the average recreation value was NT$223.6 per

visitor. Lin and Tang (1999) conducted visitor surveys in the Fushan Botanical Garden

and found that visitors' primary motivation was appreciation for the environment. They

also found that sightseeing, learning about trees, and taking a walk were the most

preferred activities in the garden. Li (2000) studied the recreational resource use and

pricing strategies at Wu-Lo Keng Scenic Park and found that I-Lan residents agreed to

pay a small portion of admission fees or cleaning fees for using the park.

Chen, Wang, Huang and Lin (2002) used the travel cost method to study the

economic value of recreational benefits at Fushan Botanical Garden and concluded that

the total annual economic benefits for the garden reached NT$22,830,000 (US$681,492).

K.L. Chen (2002) used expenditure regressions to estimate 2001 I-Lan Green Expo and

found the direct economic benefit to be NT$64,350,000 and total benefit to be

NT$189,780,000. Chen and Chang (2003) studied the economic impacts of leisure

agriculture and industrial culture in I-Lan. They found that the total economic benefit for

I-Lan was-between NT$2,700,000 and NT$189,780,000 for eight major cultural activities









in 2000-2002. Intangible benefits were found to be-between NT$920,000 and

NT$98,380,000. K.L. Chen (2004) examined the economic impact of the Green Expo in

I-Lan and found that 64 businesses increased their sales revenue and 236 were unchanged.

Hong (2000) examined the perception of I-Lan's "anti-development" attitude to

study local government's strategies and choices in economic development. The findings

show that I-Lan's economic growth was still far behind most of the other counties in

Taiwan after twenty years of tourism development. Hung used Thailand, Hong Kong and

Switzerland as examples to explain tourism's contribution to their societies. The findings

showed that productivity of tourism contains a smaller portion of economic revenue for

an industrial country such as Switzerland compared to developing countries like Thailand.

The reason was that the tourism industry produced low profits compared to the

manufacturing industry, with high productivity resulting in high profits.

Shen (2002) argued that since the 1980s, the non-position party resisted pressure

from the authoritarian central government and industrialization for its economic

development. Adapted from Shen (2002), T.S. Chen (2003) studied the formation and

promotion of tourism policy in I-Lan. He argued that in order to form the tourism policy,

the county government gathered professional elites, local communities, local industries

and local activists in a long-term interaction and mutual consent and accumulated

experiences to establish a unique "alternative development" style in Taiwan. Kuo (2004)

studied tourism development and local governance in I-Lan, and argued that I-Lan still

was ahead of other areas in tourism, but that the county government should include more

private sector and local non-profit organizations involvement in tourism for its

sustainable development.









Y.L. Chen (2004) examined the Jiaosi hot spring industry and regional change and

concluded that I-Lan regional development has been gradually entrapped into the pattern

of development of Taiwan's west coast. The development of "EP, Culture, Tourism" by

the county government has not created a new and productive direction for I-Lan. Instead,

the government has repackaged the existing system under the pressure of economic

stagnation in the 1980s. The development of the Jiaosi Hot Spring has resulted in a

scarcity of hot spring resources, the region's environmental decline, and a general

imbalance of local industry development.

Studies in Leisure Farming and Bed and Breakfast Lodging

F.J. Chen (2002) examined the demand for leisure housing as a result of

construction of the Pei-I Highway. Using scenario analysis, Chen suggests that after the

completion of Pei-I Highway in 2006, there will be an increase in the demand for people

from other counties for leisure activities in I-Lan. Specifically this will include an

increasing demand for leisure housing by 34%, increasing demand for membership clubs

by 20% and increasing demand for leisure centers by 46%.

Yang (2003) studied visitors' evaluation ofB&B's in I-Lan. In an evaluation of

B&B facilities, visitors most desire kitchen and barbecue facilities, followed by parking

space, and emergency lighting equipment. In an evaluation of services, visitors desired

provision and arrangement of breakfast, transportation service, and arrangement of

special events. In an evaluation of environmental landscapes, visitors desired indoor and

outdoor trees, yard landscaping, and surrounding landscapes. For recreational activities,

visitors preferred feeding animals, and participating in folk festivals.

H.Y. Chen (2004) studied how the personality of B&B managers affects their role

in decision-making at the Dong-Shan River leisure agricultural area in I-Lan. The









findings concluded that agreeableness was one of the most important personality

characteristics in determining their role in decision-making. This was followed by

consciousness, extroversion, openness and neuroticism among characteristics of

managers' personality. Yu (2004) used B&B's in I-Lan to study the meaning of home.

The findings concluded that the meaning of home in B&B's is established under the

effects of ideology, the meaning of object, and the personal relationship.

Chu (2004) studied leisure farming and marketing in I-Lan County. The findings

indicated that the driving forces of the "operational basis" for leisure farms were the

current operating situation and competitiveness. The driving forces of future development

for leisure farms were market segmentation, innovation, resources integration and

establishment of evaluation system.

Huang (2004) used an analytic hierarchy process to establish an evaluation model

for Taiwan leisure agriculture. The findings showed that natural resources attractions

were the most important. This was followed by integrating, creating customer-value, and

the potential market. Recreational safety was the most important element within "natural

resources attractions."

Liu (2005) studied the environmental design of leisure agricultural areas from the

viewpoint of ecological design in I-Lan. The findings indicated that managers in leisure

farms focus more on making profits and often make environmentally unfriendly decisions

when balancing ecological concerns and commercial benefits. On the other hand, most

owners in leisure agricultural areas are still devoted to traditional agricultural production;

thus, they have flexible choices regarding ecological design, which is more

environmentally friendly.














CHAPTER 3
METHOD

The purpose of this research was to examine I-Lan business managers' perceptions

of nature-based tourism impacts and to understand the relationship among socio-

demographic characteristics, level of involvement and their perception of impacts. This

chapter includes a description of the study site, research design, survey instrument, data

collection, and data analysis.

Study Site

Natural Environment

The study area is I-Lan County, Taiwan. Approximately 463,000 people live in the

2,143 square kilometer county, which is located in the northeast corner of Taiwan Island.

I-Lan is in the shape of a triangle opening toward the northeast. It faces the Pacific Ocean

on the east, and is surrounded by mountains on the west, south and north. Because of its

geographic location, it has limited access to the other areas in Taiwan (Figure 3-1).

Three quarters of the county is mountainous. Combined with its wet climate, the

county's rivers and creeks form a unique landscape in I-Lan. Due to the rugged

environment, large-scale economic development is limited. I-Lan is situated in a

subtropical climate with an average annual temperature of 22 C year round and 210

average annual days of rain. It has the most humid area in Taiwan. In winter northeast

seasonal winds are as strong as light typhoons, which affect winter tourism, especially for

whale watching activities.










Map of Taiwan Map of I-Lan County



Taury Touchen
3Chinen Hsinchu
HsRcj ip (

Miaol
Taicseg Taiwan' Ian
Ta~Thun
YunA ngwel
Chung ua
Nantour
unionn Hu lien
Penghus Chii i
Tainan.

Kaosi A Taing n
KAOSI/L
Ping g




Figure 3-1. Map of Study Site

I-Lan is one of Taiwan's major commercial fishing areas. In addition, it is one of

northern Taiwan's major agricultural production areas and it also has the largest forested

area in northern Taiwan. I-Lan is full of diverse natural attractions, which include

beaches, offshore islands, tall mountains, forests, lakes, waterfalls, hot springs and unique

cold springs. Furthermore, due to its low development, I-Lan's natural landscape is well

preserved.

Based on I-Lan's geography, the county is zoned into seven areas (Figure 3-2):

1. Central Plain Area: Includes the cities of I-Lan, Jiaosi, Chuang Wei, WuJih and
Lou-Dong;

2. Northern Lan Yang River: Includes the city of Yuan-Shan as well as important
natural attractions that include Lan Yang River, Te-Tz-Ko River, Wu-Feng-Chi
waterfall, Jiaosi Hot Spring, Yuan-Shan Hot Spring, and Lake Dragon;

3. Southern Lan Yang Rive: Includes the cities of Shan-Hsin, Dong-Shan as well as
Dong-Shan river, Wu-Lou-Kun, Lake Plum;









4. SuAo, NanFangAo areas: Include the city of SuAo and the natural area known as
Cold Spring;

5. 5. Northern Tou-Cheng coastal area: Includes the two natural attractions
known as Turtle Island and Tou-Cheng beach;

6. 6. Dong-Ao, Nan-Ao area: Includes mostly rural areas along the scenic coast
of I-Lan; and

7. 7. Northern Yu-Lan Lan-Yang River Valley area: Includes the cities of Tai-
Ping Shan and Ming-Chi as well as the Chi-Lan Forest Recreation Scenic areas
and current residence of the remaining Atayal people (I-Lan County Tourism
Comprehensive Plan, 1996).


Figure 3-2: Seven Zones of I-Lan County

The History of I-Lan

I-Lan was originally named Kavalan and was named by the Atayal people

(aborigines in Taiwan) who had lived in the region for more than three thousand years. In

1750, the Ching dynasty took I-Lan as part of Chinese sovereignty. Forty-six years later









Wu-Sha and his followers came to I-Lan and established agriculture throughout the area.

The Chinese quickly overwhelmed the Atayal and took control of the I- Lan area. The

Atayal were forced to move to coastal Hua-Dong and surrounding mountain areas.

In 1895, Japan took Taiwan from Ching dynasty after winning the war and ruled

Taiwan from 1895 to 1945 (I-Lan Government Report, 2004). Industry remained low in

I-Lan during Japanese rule (Shi, 1994) and the I-Lan economy was suppressed (T.S.

Chen, 2003).

Demographic Structure and Population Trend in I-Lan

The population in I-Lan has been decreasing since the 1960s. Most of the outflow

can be attributed to young people, who mostly move to the Taipei metropolitan area. Of

the 462,200 people currently living in I-Lan, 18% have a college degree, 24% have a high

school diploma, and 29% only went to school between 6-9 years (I-Lan County Statistical

Abstract, 2004). As an added indication that the young adults are leaving I-Lan, the

county's dependency ratio has decreased from 47.90% in 1994 to 44.62% in 2004 and the

aged index has increased from 34.8 % in 1994 to 59.8 % in 2004 (I-Lan County

Government Report, 2005).

Economic Development in I-Lan

After the Communist Revolution in 1949 and subsequent establishment of the

Chinese Nationalists in Taiwan, the country began the development of light industry. In

the 1970's through 1980's, Taiwan focused on exporting products, which continued to

expand its economy (Tsai, 1986). In the 1990s,Taiwan's economic structure has further

improved as it developed state-of-the-art information technology, electronics, and

transportation (Kop, 1992, p21). In general, over the past forty years, Taiwan's economy









has gradually transformed from labor-intensive industry (i.e., agriculture and light

industry) to capital-intensive industry (Wu, 1989,p 76).

Over this same time period, I-Lan County lagged behind the rest of Taiwan in the

development of industry; however, I-Lan's economic structure started to change in the

1990s. Agriculture and manufacturing declined steadily throughout the 1990's while

commerce, financing, real estate and the service sectors, increased almost 90% from

22.1% (1991) to 41.5% (2001). These emerging industries provide an output of $NT 68.1

billion, which was a 300% growth from the $NT 17 billion produced in 1991 (Table 3.1).

These three entities only slightly changed from 1986 to 1991; but, they changed

drastically from 1991 to 2001. The growth of tourism in the 1990s has been the major

driving force for the fast growing of the third business entity in I-Lan (Lee, 2003).

Table 3-1. Production Output of Business Entity in I-Lan County, 1970-2001
Unit: $NT million
Year Total Output Primary Secondary Third
Output % Output % Output %
1970 5,658.75 1,193.44 21.09 4,465.31 78.91
1976 13,133.21 3,207.68 24.42 7,407.00 56.40 2,518.53 19.18
1981 32,548.87 4,374.43 13.44 21,652.93 66.53 6,521.52 20.04
1986 57,149.16 8,798.49 15.40 36,222.52 63.38 12,128.15 21.22
1991 79,214.97 11,557.97 14.59 50,155.00 63.32 17,502.00 22.09
1996 162,311.86 10,431.32 6.43 91,812.95 56.57 60,067.59 37.01
2001 165,141.00 8,776.00 5.31 87,785.00 53.16 68,058.00 41.53
Sources:1. 1970-2004 Agriculture Annual Report, Commission of Agriculture Affairs,
Executive Yuan
2. I-Lan County Comprehensive Space Plan 2005

Tourism Development in I-Lan

Three stages of tourism development can be categorized in I-Lan since 1981: Stage

1 (1981-1989): Exploration, involvement and development; Stage 2 (1989-1997):

Development of cultural tourism and major tourism activities; and Stage 3 (1997-2005):

Consolidation of major tourism activities.









Stage 1 (1981-1989): Exploration, involvement and development

In the 1980's, Chen Ding-Nan, I-Lan county commissioner, advocated the issue

of tourism development and implementation of environmental protection as major county

policies. With strong support from local residents, the county government had

successfully resisted the pressure from both central government and large manufacturing

companies, which often pushed county governments to establish more industrial and

manufacturing plants. Three issues demonstrated I-Lan county government and residents'

attitudes towards environmental protection: 1) Strong resistance to a proposed fire-power

plant in 1986; 2) Strong resistance to a petrochemical plant in 1987 and 1991; and 3)

Support for the establishment of water-bird protection zones at the proposed fire-plant

location in 1993 (I-Lan County Government Report, 1992; Lin, 1994: 45-54).

In order to promote tourism and maintain environmental protection in I-Lan,

Chen's priority was to improve the infrastructure for recreation and tourism. He began to

plan for building sport parks in I-Lan City and Lo-Dong. With detailed and thorough

plans, Chen was able to obtain funding for the construction from both central and

provincial governments (I-Lan County Government Report, 2000). During Chen's

commission tenure from 1981 through 1989, he completed the establishment of both I-

Lan and Lo-Dong sport parks and began construction of facilities at Dong-Shan River

and Wu-Lo-Kung scenic areas. The design and quality of the park brought much attention

to I-Lan and also attracted visitors from other counties in Taiwan (Chen, 2003).

Stage 2 (1989-1997): Development of cultural tourism and major tourism activities

Yu, His-Kun, the county commissioner after Chen (1989-1997), continued to

improve the infrastructure, and focused on reviving and preserving the local culture.

Through integration of cultural tourism activities and local industry, Yu developed









marketing programs to promote major tourism activities. From 1991-1997 Yu launched a

series of traditional cultural activities, such as "The Grappling with Ghosts Competition"

at Tou-Cheng, which had not occurred since the early 1950's. I-Lan county government

also created many cultural activities, such as developing the county historic hall, the first

county historic hall in Taiwan, in 1992; holding Happy I-Lan Year in 1994; and

establishing the I-Lan Study Conference in 1996. Yu also launched many tourism

activities around Dong-Shan River, such as rafting activities in Dong-Shan River, and

recreational activities at Dong-Shan River Water Park, holding International Collegiate

Regatta in 1994, and developing Children's Festival in1996. Through these major

tourism activities, I-Lan began to establish a unique and important tourism image.

Stage 3 (1997-2005): Consolidation of major tourism activities

The next county commissioner, Liu, Sho-Cheng (1997-2005), followed in the

footsteps of Chen and Yu. He continued to promote major tourism activities and created

new ones, such as Green Expo in 2000, Green Onion and Garlic Festival in 2001, and

Chiao-Hsi Hot Spring Festival in 2003. As a result, "Culture, I-Lan" and "Tourism, I-

Lan" have become the official county policies over the past twenty years (I-Lan County

Government Report, 2002).

According to the Taiwan Tourism Bureau (2003), domestic tourism has grown over

the past twenty years in Taiwan. The number of visitors increased from 30 million (1988)

to over 100 million (2001), and the number of scenic attractions also increased from 50

(1988) to 263 (2001). The market share of the Taiwan domestic tourism reflects the

progress of its tourism development in I-Lan. I-Lan's market share changed little from

2.7% in 1986 to 2.4% in 1991; however, the figure jumped from 4.2% in 1993 to 5.1% in

2001, with a total of 5,100,000 visitors annually in I-Lan.









Major Tourism Types

There are two different types of nature-based tourism in I-Lan: 1) leisure farms and

2) events and tour spots (T.S. Chen, 2003). These are described below.

Leisure farms.

There are 27,742 acres of farmlands (13% of total land area) in I-Lan; the number

of people working in agriculture is 142,466, or 30.6% of the total population (I-Lan

County Statistical Abstract, 2004). The primary crops are: Cheng (2001, p. 27) defines

leisure farming as "using farm village's natural ecology, humanities as resources, and

through special planning, designing and managing to provide agricultural feature of

recreational activities and occasions for the public." It is an industry that puts agricultural

production, agricultural manufacturing and living services together. Leisure farming

combines tangible and intangible resources of agriculture and farm village within a

leisure context to provide entertaining and educational experiences for visitors.

In recent years, I-Lan's leisure farms have become destinations for visitors from

metropolitan areas especially from Taipei. As part of the county's major events, such as

I-Lan International Children's Folklore & Folk-game Festival and Green Expo, farmers

have expanded the quantity and improved the quality of leisure farms. Currently, there

are 100 leisure farms within I-Lan, that attract 1,820,000 visitors annually, with total

annual sales revenues of NT$ 2,252,520,000 (Wu, Chen and Lin, 2004).

Meanwhile, the growing bed and breakfast (B&B) business is another category

within leisure farms. The Council of Agriculture (COA), the highest administrative

agency in charge of agricultural affairs in Taiwan, defines B&B's as lodging that" uses

residential rooms as a family's sideline business and integrates local culture, natural

landscaping, ecosystem, environmental resources, fishery and farming activities to









provide country lifestyle for visitors to stay-over" (COA,2004, p. 2). In 2001, Taiwan's

government established Bed & Breakfast Management Regulation, which incorporated

B&B's natural surrounding into planning in order to attract visitors and help sustain

surrounding farm villages, mountain and forest areas, and aboriginal villages (CAO,

2004). The majority of B&B visitors are single, young (80% between age 20-39), higher

educated, and has a middle class in income (NT$ 500,000). The reasons visitors stay at

B&B's are based on reasonable rates and their proximity to nature. There are around 500

B&B in I-Lan in 2005 (Chen, 2003).

Events and tour spots.

Events and tour spots include points of interest in each township. The Green Expo,

Children's Festival, Collegiate Regatta and whale-watching tours are some of the

county's most popular events and tour events. Some of the county's major tourism

regions include:

* Wu-Lo-Kung Scenic area, which is 400 acres and located at New Town River. It is
the place where the county hosts Green Expo each year. It is a recreational park
with facilities for barbecuing, family outdoor activities and camping. It attracted
487,500 visitors in 2004 (I-Lan County Statistical Abstract, 2004).

* Dong-Shan River Scenic Area contains the Dong-Shan River Water Park, which
was established in 1994. It was the first "water" theme park in Taiwan. The park
plans incorporate "water and green," by creating several different shapes and depth
of water zones. It is a popular place for families, and the park and its surrounding
river area have been used to host the International Children's Festival and
International Collegiate Regatta (See Figure 3-3). The area attracted 1,121,936
visitors in 2004 (Bureau of Business & Travel, I-Lan County, 2005).






















4. i/ /7.J II,


Figure 3-3. Dong-Shan River Water Park (I-Lan County Government Webpage 2005)

* Wu-Shi Fishing Harbor, located in Northern I-Lan, has been a traditional fishing
harbor for the last century. It recently became the major station for Turtle Island
tours and whale and dolphin watching tour-boats. The emerging whale-watching
business began in 1999 in IL. There are 12 whale-watching boats at Wu-Shi that
hosted 140,800 visitors and made NT$84,509,400 in sales revenues in 2004
(Bureau of Agriculture Affairs, I-Lan County, 2005).

* Jiaosi Hot Spring Area hosts 1,400,000 visitors a year (Taiwan Domestic Tourism
Report, 2003) and made NT$4 billion between 1999 and 2001. Visitation has
increased 15% annually. Younger visitors are frequenting the springs, and college
students have become the major clients (Ho, 2004) (see Figure 3-4).















Figure 3-4. Jiaosi Hot Spring (I-Lan County Government Webpage 2005)









Tourism Strategies

I-Lan has focused on two approaches to improve nature-based tourism in the

county: 1) interpretation and 2) package tour programs. Interpretation is recognized as an

important strategy in sustainable tourism development (Ballantyne, & Uzzell, 1994;

Moscardo, 1996). The I-Lan Tourism Ambassador Association (TBA) was established in

1996, which aims to train local tour operators to interpret natural and cultural sites. There

are four categories of service in TBA: a) Travel service consulting in I-Lan, b) Travel

itinerary, schedule planning & designing for visitors/groups, c) Tour guiding &

interpretation for package tours, d) Training & educating for tour guides & interpreters.

The interpretation includes natural flora and fauna, history of the tour area, local culture

and the concept of environmental protection. Currently, there are over one hundred fifty

trained tour guides and interpreters in the association (I-Lan TBA, 2004).

Package tour programs (PTP) became popular after the Children's Festival in 1996

(Chen, 2003). Business owners across different sectors combined their activities to create

a series of package tour programs. For example, a two-day one night tour program

includes visiting Tai-Ping Forest Recreation area, a leisure farm, whale watching, a

winery, I-Lan Old street, Fu-Shan botanical Garden and a night at the Jiaosi Hot Spring

hotel. Research has not shown the impacts of PTP, but business owners and the county

government are hopeful they will increase the distribution of benefits throughout the

county. Approximately one-third of tourism-related business owners are involved in PTP

(I-Lan County Government, 2005).

Research Design

This study used a three-phase approach to answer its research questions. First,

individual interviews were used to identify nature-based tourism's current role in I-Lan









and existing impacts of nature-based tourism. Second, a short survey that focused entirely

on perceived impacts was given to a small sample or business managers to validate the

impact indices to be used in the final phase of research. Finally, the primary data

gathering technique was an on-site survey of I-Lan business managers. The research

design for this study was cross-sectional strategy.

Conceptual Framework

The conceptual model used in this study combined the model of Gursoy and

Rutherford (2004) and other models regarding socio-demographic characteristics, types

of involvement and level of involvement (Figure 3.5).

The model illustrates the flow of this research. Based on past research, people's

socio-demographic make-up and experience with tourism likely effect how they perceive

the costs and benefits of tourism. Therefore, socio-demographic and business

characteristic (e.g., length of owning business, respondents' organization) variables are

likely an important component of this study along with two intervening variables: 1) type

of involvement and 2) level of involvement. Based on this conceptual model, this study

examined the interaction between socio-demographic and business characteristics and

level of involvement and their relations to perceived costs and benefits of tourism

impacts.

Type of business was not included in the analysis due to the large diversity of

businesses working in the nature-based tourism industry.





















Socio-demos &
Business characteristics
Gender
Age
Education
Raised in I-Lan
Residence
Length of Business
Organization


Type of Involvement
Food/Restaurant
Gift/grocery
Hotel, leisure farms
Supermarket
Car/bus rental
Taxi/ Bus
Printing
Whale-watching
Travel agencies
Financing institutes
Sales revenue
% of NBT revenue
% of NBT customers
% of change


Level of Involvement
Attitudes toward gov't
Decision-maker
Part of tour programs
Tourist
No involvement


Figure 3-5. Conceptual Model of Costs/Benefits of Nature-Based Tourism (NBT)
Impacts, Type of Involvement, and Level of Involvement

* Socio-demographic and business characteristics. Socio-demographic and
business characteristics that will be examined in this study are based on past
research. Specifically, this study will examine gender, age, education, respondents'
organization, where they were raised, location of residence, and length of time they
owned the business.

* Type of involvement. The type of involvement participants have with nature-based
tourism is potentially an important factor in how they evaluate NBT's impacts. This
study interviewed people from 15 types of businesses (I-Lan County Government
Report, 2002, K.L. Chen 2002, 2004). It also examined their economic dependence
on NBT using four economic descriptors related to NBT: 1) sales revenue, 2)
percent of business revenue, 3) percent of customers, and revenue changes over the
last five-years (K.L. Chen, 2002, 2004).

* Level of involvement. Members of the business community can have varying
levels of involvement in county tourism planning. Based on respondents' attitudes
toward government (I-Lan County Tourism Comprehensive Plan, 1996) and four
choices, participants were asked to indicate their level of involvement with tourism:
1) decision maker, 2) tour provider, 3) tourist, and 4) no involvement (Smith and
Krannich 1998).


Perceived costs/benefits
of tourism impacts
Economic benefits
Economic costs
Social/cultural benefits
Social/cultural costs
Environmental benefits
Environmental costs


.


Z









Perceived costs and benefits of tourism impacts. The largest part of this study
focused on business managers' perception of economic, social/cultural, and
environmental impacts. The majority of the items that compiled this list came from
individual interviews with I-Lan business managers. Based on past research,
researchers worded each impact so each was consistent within the questionnaire
and with other tourism impact studies. They were also placed into appropriate
categories (i.e., economic, social/cultural, and environmental). (Ap &Crompton
1998, McCool & Martin 1994, I-Lan County Tourism Comprehensive Plan. 1996,
Gilbert &Clark 1997, Snaith & Haley 1999, Weaver & Lawton 2001, T. S. Chen,
2003). Items were validated using a short impact study and a total of 42 items were
used in the final questionnaire.

Research Questions
The following questions are addressed in this research:
1. What are the stakeholders' perceptions of economic, social/cultural, and
environmental impacts of nature-based tourism?

2. How does their level of involvement in tourism planning relate to their perception
of nature-based tourism's impacts?

3. How does stakeholders' socio-demographic and business characteristics relate to
their level of involvement in tourism planning

4. How does stakeholders' socio-demographic and business characteristics relate to
their perception of impacts?

5. How does stakeholders' socio-demographic and business characteristics and level
of involvement relate to their perception of impacts?

Survey Instrument

This research used both qualitative and quantitative approaches to answer the

research questions. First, individual interviews were conducted to identify stakeholders'

perceptions of impacts through an open free-flowing discussion. Second, a questionnaire

was used to gather quantitative data.

Development of Survey

The survey design includes three steps: 1) initial interviews, 2) impact survey, and


3) conducting the formal survey (Figure 3.6).




































Figure 3-6. Flowchart of Survey Design

Initial interviews

The researcher conducted 15 interviews with I-Lan business managers involved in

nature-based tourism in June 2004. They were asked questions regarding general issues

of tourism impact. Next, the researcher interviewed five more managers by phone in July

and August 2005. Respondents included county authorities, local business people, and

researchers (Appendix A). Each respondent was asked to list nature-based tourism's ten

most important economic, social/cultural and environmental impacts. They were

instructed to include both negative and positive impacts.

Content analysis was used to analyze the responses. The primary goal of the

interviews was to identify the most pervasive impacts, as defined by stakeholders. To









achieve this goal, researchers used statistical rules of consistency to identify how often an

impact needed to be mentioned in order for it to be included in the scale. Based on the

consistency of economic, social/cultural and environmental items listed by respondents,

the acceptable scale for items in each category was set. Items were included in the scale if

80% of respondents listed that item as an economic impact, 70% listed the item in the

social/cultural category, and 66% listed it in the environmental category. Upon

eliminating and combining similar items, past literature was used to word the item

consistently with past studies (Weaver and Lawton, 2001; Ap and Comptom, 1998;

Andriotis & Vaughan, 2003; and Chen, 2003). The final list of impacts composed 16

economic impacts, 13 social/cultural impacts, and 13 environmental impacts (Table 3-2).

Impact survey

Questionnaires were e-mailed to 26 participants in the fall 2005. Six new

participants who did not participate in previous interviews were also included. Twenty-

one participants returned usable questionnaires (Appendix A). Items were measured

using a 5-point index with two-dimensional variables, the positive and negative, where

1= Not an impact and 5= Very important Impact (See Appendix B).

To analyze the results, the researcher used mode rule for consistency to eliminate

lesser important impacts. Based on 21 respondents' answers and 5-point index on each

item, the researcher identified the mode for each item such as 3 (11), where 11

respondents rated 3 on the item. The procedures included several steps:

1. Identify the mode for each item.

2. Keep items rated 2, 3, 4 and 5 with mode equal to or larger than nine. Nine is set as
standard for reflecting 50% of participants' responses.

3. Eliminate items with modes smaller than nine, items without a single mode, and
inconsistently mentioned items. For instance, item" improved transport










infrastructure" was eliminated for inconsistency mentioned items, where six
respondents chose 2, five chose 3 and five chose 4.

4. To keep proper items, checking the second largest number for items with mode
number 9 or fewer. Add up second largest number with the largest number. Keep
the item if the total number is more than 13, otherwise eliminated.

5. This resulted in 12 items in the economic category, 10 items in social/cultural, and
11 items in environmental.

Table 3-2. Items selected for Initial Survey of Nature-Based Tourism Impacts
Impact Type Statement
Economic 1.Revenues for business increased
Impacts 2. More local employment
3. Wages & fringe benefits increased
4. Increased quality of shops, hotels and restaurants
5. More leisure farms & bed & breakfast businesses
6. Increased the variety of package tour programs for visitors
7.More whale-watching business for visitors
8. More tax revenues and expenditure from tourism
9.Improved transport infrastructure
10.More recreational facilities for local residents
11.Improved the quality of Jiaosi hot spring businesses
12.Most tourism businesses controlled by local residents
13.Increased real estates costs
14.Results in fewer available lands for business
15.Increased other counties' imitation of tourism programs
16.Competition in hotel/motel getting worse
Social/ 1.Increases cultural re-recognition
Cultural 2.More cultural activities
Impacts 3.Sense of pride
4. Stronger sense of IL attachment
5.Little change in lifestyle of local residents
6.Decreased prostitution in Jiaosi
7.Increased children's education in local history and literature
8.Increased the learning of native language
9.Increases quality of life of IL residents
10.Focuses too much on attracting visitors
11.Results in unfair resources allocation by county government
12.Disrupt the peace and tranquility of IL
13.Visitors over-convergence in specific seasons
Environ- 1.Increase environmental education for children
mental 2.Ecosystem has better preserved
Impacts 3.Increased local residents' awareness of the importance of maintaining natural amenities
4.Improvement of local areas' appearance
5.Increased traffic congestion
6.Results in overcrowding
7.Results in shortage of parking spaces
8.Results in environmental decline in sensitive areas
9.Increased waste of disposable meal boxes
10.Increased air and noise pollution
11.Increased litter and garbage pollution
12.Increased resources waste in advertising and delivery mails
13.Increased pollution in sanitation









Development of final questionnaire

The final questionnaire included thirteen sections (Appendix E). Sections 1-11

asked participants to rate the perception of impacts using the scales that were defined in

the earlier research. Responses to the statements regarding impacts used a 5-point index

scale ranging from "strongly disagree" (=1) to "strongly agree" (=5). A "no opinion"

option was available. The statements were alternately worded positively and negatively

way to aviod yea- or nay-sayer bias (Alreck and Settle 1995). Section 12 addressed

respondents' level of involvement in nature-based tourism where managers indicated

title/position, and amount of times and money they are involved as a decision-maker, a

tour provider, or a tourist in tourism. Section 13 asked participants for descriptive

information which included type of business, economic descriptors and socio-

demographic characteristics.

The survey was first written in English and then translated into Chinese by the

researcher. The Chinese questionnaire was edited by a Ph. D candidate in Chinese at

National Normal University and a Chinese professor at Kun-Shan University (KSU).

After making corrections to the survey, a sample of sixty college students from KSU and

fourteen business managers at Tou-Cheng and Jiaosi were chosen to pilot test the

questionnaire in September and October 2005. This group received a cover letter

explaining the study and asked for their assistance. The pretest was used to determine

content validity of the instrument, flow of questionnaire, accuracy of Chinese translation,

and to obtain respondents' opinions regarding format and design of the questionnaire.









Data Collection

The Sample

The sample selected for the main questionnaire was business owners/managers'

from fifteen business types (i.e., gift stores, food/restaurants, grocery/discount stores,

hotels, leisure farms, bed &breakfast, car rental, bus/taxi, whale watching boaters,

advertising, printing, travel agencies, farmers associations, savings and loans, banks). All

businesses had some relation with nature-based tourism. Potential respondents were

distributed over the entire twelve administrative districts in I-Lan County. Specifically

they included I-Lan City and its eleven townships. Even though the majority of NBT

attractions are located in Dong-Shan, Wu-Chich and Lou-Dong, I-Lan City, Lou-Dong

and Jiaosi provide most of the supporting businesses and infrastructure (e.g., hotels,

food/restaurants, transportation and travel agencies).

Study participants were purposely chosen based on two factors: 1) their role in the

NBT industry, the importance each type of business has in the tourism industry, with

certain types (e.g., hotels and travel agencies) having a more direct role; therefore,

receiving more respondents, and 2) the number of potential businesses in a specific

region, with more participants coming from cities like I-Lan City where there are a higher

density of tourism businesses.

To gather business managers' names and contact information, the researcher used a

I-Lan County 2005 phone book, I-Lan Hotel Association membership list, Car/Bus

Rental Association list, I-Lan Leisure Farms Development Association list, I-Lan Leisure

Agriculture Handbook, Bed & Breakfast related websites, county government travel

information, and tourism business information.









Collecting Data

The on-site survey was conducted during October to December 2005 in I-Lan

County, and 316 managers were interviewed. To obtain more in-depth information from

respondents, follow-up interviews were conducted soon after the initial questionnaire was

administered. These respondents included gift, bus, car rental, restaurant, hotel, leisure

farms, bed & breakfast, travel agency and financial institutes.

A team of five people conducted the interviews. They included the lead researcher,

the researcher's wife Chen, an experienced field researcher who teaches at Kun-Shan

University, and three local college students with training doing interviews. Self-

administered questionnaires were distributed using face-to-face interviews and mail

between October and December 2005. Two hundred and forty were collected by the

interviewers and 76 were collected by mail in some of the more remote communities. By

December 13, which was set as the deadline for returning questionnaires, four weeks

after mailing of original questionnaire, a total of 316 completed questionnaires were

obtained. Thirty of the questionnaires were eliminated due to missing data and responses

from people not related to NBT businesses. This resulted in a total of 286 usable

questionnaires, a response rate of 90%.

Data Analysis

SPSS 12.0 for Windows was used to calculate descriptive statistics, t-tests,

regression, one-way ANOVA, and factor analysis.

Variables

Dependent variables used in this study included the perception of nature-based

tourism impacts. Twenty costs and benefits were considered economic items, seven costs









and benefits formed the social/cultural category, and nine costs and benefits formed the

environmental category.

There were three groups of independent variables (i.e., type of involvement, level

of involvement and socio-demographic characteristics). Type of involvement was

measured by identifying the type of business the participant managed and the percent of

nature-based tourism that makes up the business' sales revenue and customers. Also, how

the business has changed in terms of size and revenue over the last five years was

examined. Four levels of involvement: involvement in decision-making, involvement as

part of tour provider, involvement as tourist, and no involvement were measured. Socio-

demographic characteristics were measured by gender, age, education, living in IL as a

child, location of residence, and length of own business.

Factor Analysis

To better assess tourism impacts, the researcher used factor analysis to confirm and

improve the final indices used to measure business managers' perceptions of economic,

social/cultural and environmental impacts. Factor analysis is a class of multivariate

statistical methods that defines the underlying structure in a data set matrix. It analyzes

the structure of interrelationships (correlations) among a large number of variables by

defining a set of common underlying dimensions, known as factors. With factor analysis,

the researcher can first identify the separate dimensions of the structure and then

determine the extent to which each variable is explained by each dimension (Hair,

Anderson, Tatham and Black, 1998, P. 87-88).

Additionally, factor analysis reduces the number of statements that can be used to

measure a factor, therefore, improving the accuracy of the final indices. In this study,









factor analysis was primarily used to improve the model fit and enhance construct

validity.

Internal reliability of multi-item scales (indices) can be estimated by Cronbach's

alpha to assess the accuracy or precision of the measurement (Malhotra, 1999). Following

the procedure by Hair et al. (1998), factor analysis was conducted using exploratory

principle components analysis (PCA) and varimax rotation. Cronbach's alpha tests were

conducted to verify economic, social/cultural and environmental dimensions.

Since 58 items used in the questionnaire came from a variety of sources calculating

Cronbach's alpha with the factors helped to specify the items used to measure a specific

impact index (e.g., social/cultural benefit or environmental cost). The reliability scales of

economic costs/benefits, social/cultural costs/benefits and environmental costs/benefits

were tested. The total variance explained by PCA was 66%. There were nine factors with

36 items left in these tables, which eliminated items with lower loadings (redundant or

unimportant items) (Table 3-3-Table 3-5).

Details of nine factors are explained as follows.

* Economic Benefit 1 (ECB1): Includes statements regarding increases of sales
revenue, job opportunity, wage and whale watching business.
* Economic Benefit 2: Package Tour Programs (ECB2): Includes statements
regarding issues of package tours.
* Economic Cost 1: Land Prices (ECC1): Includes statements regarding increases of
land prices.
* Economic Cost 2: Tourism Variability (ECC2): Includes statements regarding
tourism seasonality and tourism resource variability.
* Economic Cost 3: Leakages (ECC3): Includes statements regarding economic
profit leaking to outsiders.
* Social/Cultural Benefit: Cultural Identity and Recognition (SCB): Includes
statements regarding tourism affects on cultural identity and recognition.
* Social/Cultural Cost (SCC): Includes statements regarding tourism effects on social
norms and behaviors.
* Environmental Benefit (ENB): Includes statements regarding tourism's positive
environmental changes.









* Environmental Cost (ENC): Includes statements regarding tourism's negative
effects on the environment.

Factor analysis eliminated several items, which did not contribute to the ability of

an index to measure an index type. For example, the items "increasing leisure farms and

Bed& Breakfast," "upgrades the quality of tourism in IL" and" Increasing quality of

shops, hotels and restaurants" were eliminated from the analysis. In contrast, items that

did not receive noticeably high means such as "tourism leaks heavily to outsiders" and

"most tourism profits obtained by big companies" stood out as major economic costs

after the analysis categorized them into their own factor.

Factor analysis shows that two categories are needed to explain economic benefits:

1) job and sales revenue issues; 2) package tour program. ECB2: Package Tour Programs

was not used in future analysis of perception of impacts. The benefit items within that

factor were too specialized for purposes of this analysis, and only a small percentage of

participants (35%) were involved in package tours. There were three categories in

economic costs: 1) tourism variability; 2) land prices, and 3) economic leakages (Table 3-

3). The item 'increasing whale watching businesses' was retained in category of ECB 1

due to its importance of representing NBT.










Table 3-3. Reliability Analysis for Economic Impacts
Corrected Item Alpha If Item
Total Correlation Deleted
ECB 1 (Economic Benefit 1: job and sales revenue
issues)
Increasing revenues for business .5779 .6842
Increasing job opportunities .6970 .6053
Increasing wages & fringe benefits .5583 .6963
Increasing whale watching businesses .3970 .7694
Cronbach's Alpha = .7541

ECB2 (Economic Benefit 2: Package Tour Program--PTP)
Increased the variety of package tour programs .7678 .8997
Upgrades the quality of service of PTP .7904 .8952
Increases customers from PTP .7791 .8976
Increases sales revenues from PTP .7438 .9041
Integrates local industries from PTP .7102 .9069
Increases name-recognition for businesses from PTP .8018 .8940
Cronbach's Alpha = .9149

ECC1 (Economic Cost 1: Land prices)
Increased rent of houses and lands .5897 .6387
Increased in housing and land prices which only .6524 .5596
happened in tourism development areas
Increased in housing and land prices, which is related .4803 .7549
to Pei-I freeway
Cronbach's Alpha = .7436

ECC2 (Economic Cost 2: Tourism Variability)
Visitors over-convergence in specific seasons .4756 .7994
Over-using tourism resources in peak seasons .6817 .7360
Under-using tourism resources in low seasons .6558 .7446
Affecting the balance of revenue, expenses and .5582 .7757
willingness of investment
Resulting in spatial environment carrying pressure .5731 .7713
Cronbach's Alpha = .8042

ECC3 (Economic Cost 3: Leakages)
Tourism profits leaked heavily to outsiders .5565
Most tourism benefits obtained by big companies .5565
Cronbach's Alpha = .7113










Social/cultural costs and benefits factored into predefined categories of items

(Table 3-4).


Table 3-4. Reliability Analysis for Social/Cultural Impacts
Corrected Item Alpha If tem
Total Correlation Deleted
SCB (Social/Cultural Benefit: Tourism's affect on
cultural identity & recognition)
Increased diversity of cultural activities among .6461 .8328
different ethnic groups
Improved autonomy in the community 6780 .8212
Improved the understanding among different .6363 .8375
communities & cultures
Cronbach's Alpha =.8530

SCC (Social/Cultural Cost)
Increasing drinking and vandalism .7851 .8466
Increasing prostitution .7793 .8485
Increasing traffic accidents .6771 .8867
Decreasing public safety .7874 .8450
Cronbach's Alpha = .8889
Environmental costs and benefits factored into predefined categories of items

(Table 3-5). Reliability of .9051 in environmental cost indicates the internal consistency

of these items.


Table 3-5. Reliability Analysis for Environmental Impacts
Corrected Item Alpha If tem
Total Correlation Deleted
ENB (Environmental Benefit)
Enhancing preservation of ecosystem .4721 .4943
Increasing local residents' awareness of importance of .4560 .5080
maintaining natural amenities
Improving local areas' appearance .4064 .5699
Cronbach's Alpha = .6264

ENC (Environmental Cost)
Overcrowding .7251 .8902
Increasing traffic congestion .7868 .8815
Increasing shortage of parking spaces .6533 .9002
Increasing litter and garbage pollution .7633 .8845
Increasing air and noise pollution .7989 .8790
Increasing resources waste in advertising and delivery .7080 .8931
mails
Cronbach's Alpha = .9051














CHAPTER 4
RESULTS

This chapter describes the results of the I-Lan business owners' survey using a

variety of descriptive and multivariate statistics. It will first provide a discussion of the

overall sample in terms of the independent variables (e.g., socio-demographic

characteristics, business characteristics, attitudes toward the government, and

involvement in tourism planning). It will then examine the relationships between the

variables (i.e., independent variables and perception of benefits). Where significant

differences are identified, those differences will be discussed in detail.

Description of Sample

Socio-Demographic Characteristics

Results showed that most respondents (64.3%) were between 36-55 years old (with

a mean of 43 years) and 59% were male and 41% were female. (Table 4-1) A little more

than one-third of respondents (36.1%) possessed a high school/vocational diploma and

44% had a college degree or higher. The portion of respondents with a college degree

(44%) was higher than that of the county data (18%), which might indicate tourism

development attracts better educated people. Most participants (83%) lived in I-Lan as

children. There were 26% respondents who resided at I-Lan City, the largest

administrative district and also the major commercial center in I-Lan (Table 4-1).









Table 4-1. Frequency of Respondents' Socio-Demographic Characteristics
Variable Category Percent1
Gender Male 59
Female 41
Age 20-35 26
36-45 34
46-55 30
56-75 10
Education Less than high school 20
High school /vocational 36
Technical/associates degree 27
College graduate & advanced 17
degree
Raised in I-Lan Yes 83
No 17
Residence IL City 26
Lou-Dong 16
Jiaosi 15
DongShan 9
YuanShan 9
Tou-Cheng 6
Su-Ao 5
ChaungWei 4.
Wu-Jih 4
Ta-Tung 3
Shan-Hsin 2
Nan-Ao 1.
Other 7
1 N=286


Business Characteristics

The 347 respondents were categorized in 16 business types (Table 4-2). Almost

three quarters of respondents managed hotels (18%), restaurants (16%), B&B's (15%),

leisure farms (12%) and gift shops (11%). Ten percent of respondents chose more than

one type of business, with the largest overlap between people saying they were employed

in leisure farms, B&B's, and restaurants.

On average, the participants owned a business in the community for 13.8 years,

with 41% owning a business between 2-6 years. About 38% of respondents, who owned a

gift shops worked at the National Center for Traditional Arts. Almost half of the










participants (46%) were members of Business Organizations (e.g., I-Lan County Hotel

Association). Forty-three percent of participants were not members of an organization or

association.

Table 4-2. Respondents' Type of Business, Length of Business and Organization
Variable Category Percent (%)
Type of Business Gift 11
(N = 347) Market 3
Food 16
Taxi/Bus 2
Hotel 18
Leisure Farm 12
B&B 15
Adv/printing 2
Rental 7
Whale watching 2
Travel Agency 3
Farmers Ass. 5
S&L 1
Bank 4
Other 3
Length of Owning Less than 2 years 11
Business (N = 263) 2-6 years 41
7-15 years 24
16-30 years 16
31- 150 years 9
Organization Local official/consultant 0
(N = 263) Representative 0
Reps of Tourism Assoc. 11
Private Reps/ Org 46
Independent Businesses 43

The financial success and role NBT tourism plays in receiving financial revenues

was evaluated in terms of total sales revenue, percent of sales and customers from NBT,

and change in sales revenue in the last 5-years.

Almost one third of the respondents reported making less than NT$1,200,000 (USD

40,000) and 13.6% reported more than NT$50,000,000 (USD 1,680,000) in annual sales

revenue. Sales revenue data show that businesses made an average of 30% of annual

sales and 31% of customers from NBT. Whale watching businesses had the highest

percentage of sales (59.3%) and customers (56.4%) from NBT. Gift shops (37.5% of









revenue and 38.8% of customers) and B&B (35.5% of revenue and 38.0% of customers)

had the next highest percent from NBT (Table 4-12).

More leisure farm, B&B and gift store businesses have increased their sales

revenue rather than decreased over the last five years. Since tourism has also grown over

this period, this might indicate that these businesses gain more from tourism than other

businesses. For all business types, 56% of respondents reported increases in sales revenue

and 43% reported decreases (Table 4-3).

Table 4-3. Relationships between type of Business and Sales Revenue
Type Sample Size Percent of Percent of Percent Percent
(n) Sales that Customers Increase in Decrease in
derives from that derives Revenue over Revenue over
NBT from NBT the Last Five the Last Five
Years Years
Whale 8 59.3 56.4 10.0 15.0
Gift 33 37.5 38.8 24.7 23.3
B&B 51 35.5 38.0 26.0 36.3
Printing 5 32.3 29.4 11.0 17.5
L. Farm 38 31.4 33.5 20.0 26.3
Food 46 27.7 27.5 24.0 22.0
Market 9 26.8 26.8 30.0 25.0
Bus 5 16.0 18.0 20.0 10.0
Hotel 58 30.6 31.3 15.4 23.8
Car Rent 5 29.3 31.5 18.3 19.6
Travel 9 28.6 30.9 35.0 11.5
Farmers A 11 22.5 15
S&L 2 15.0
Bank 9 20.0 21
Mean 30 31
N=265; 56% of respondents reported increase in sales and 43% of them reported decrease

Attitudes Toward Government and Level of Involvement

Generally, most participants have positive attitudes towards the government and

how it is working with stakeholders in tourism planning. Over 75% of respondents agreed

that county government invited them to assist in tourism planning and knew their

concerns (Table 4.4) and 60% of respondents agreed that they could influence tourism









planning. When the three items where combined into an overall Attitudes Toward

Government index (reliability = .8953), the index had a mean of 3.65.

Table 4-4. Distribution of Respondents' Perceptions of County Government
Percent'


-A .


Statement (Attitudes toward county
government)
County government invites you to 1.7 6.6 15 65.4 11.2 3.78 .80
participate in tourism planning
County government knows your concerns 1.7 10.5 16.8 61.2 9.8 3.67 .86
and issues of tourism planning
County government accepts your opinions 2.4 7.7 21 58.7 10.1 3.66 .85
You influence county tourism planning 2.8 14 23.8 50 9.4 3.49 .94
N =261;Mean =3.65 2.2 9.7 19.2 58.8 10.1 3.65

Although attitudes toward the government's inclusion of stakeholders into planning

are high, most participants do not actively work with the government. Nearly 50% of the

respondents had never participated in tourism planning either as a decision maker or

provider of county tourism programs. Only 6% of them had participated more than 10

times in tourism planning in the past 12 months. Nearly 56% of respondents had

participated in tourism activities as tourists in the past 12 months, and about 30% of

respondents had participated in tourism planning as decision makers or tour providers in

the past 12 months. Nearly 60% of respondents had never donated money to tourism

planning or activities in the past 12 months, but 5% of them had contributed more than

NT$50,000 in the past 12 months (Table 4-5).










Table 4-5. Distribution of Respondents' Level of Involvement
Percent'
Never 1-5 6- 11 20 More
Partici- times 10 times than 20
pated times times


Statement (Decision Maker)
How many times have you participated in
local government's tourism planning, as a
major decision-maker, in the past 12 months?
How many times are you willing to
participate in local government's tourism
planning, as a major decision-maker, over the
next 12 months?
Total

Statement (Tour Provider)


How many times have you participated in
implementing local government's tourism
activities, as a tour provider, in the past 12
months?
How many times have you used local
government's tourism projects, as a tour
provider, in the past 12 months?
Total

Statement (Tourist)


How many times have you participated in
local government's tourism activities, as a
tourist, over the last 12 months?

Statement (Donation)


How much money have you contributed in
local government's tourism planning or
activities, over the last 12 months? NT$
'N =256
2 N= 259
3 N= 259
4N= 258


52.4


24.5



38.5
Percent2
Never
Partici-
pated
56.3



51.7


54
Percent3
Never
Partici-
pated
33.6


Percent 4
No
Money

59.8


34.3 7.3 3.5 2.4


50.7 14.3 4.5 4.3



42.6 10.8 4 3.4

1 -3 4-6 More than 6
times times times


31.1 7.3



36.4 6.3


33.8 6.7


1-6
times

55.9


6 -20 More than 20
times times

7.7 2.1


1 3000- 10,000 More
3000 10,000 Than
50,000 50,000
12.2 15.7 6.6 4.5










Research Question 1: Overall Perceptions of Benefits and Costs

Stakeholders have similarly high perceptions ofNBT's benefits, with all the groups

having means between 3.6 and 4.2. In terms of individual factors, Economic benefit 2

(ECB2) package tour program had the highest mean (4.2), followed by Social/cultural

Benefits (SCB) (4.1), while social/cultural Cost (SCC) (3.0), and Economic 3: Leakages

(EC3) (2.9) ranked last (Table 4-6). Social/cultural benefits group ranked at the top

among other benefits groups, followed by environmental benefits group and economic

benefits

Respondents perceived the most benefit from the Social/cultural Benefit group,

which might be related to the county government's promotion of cultural activities since

1990s. This might also help to explain respondents' low perception of socio-cultural

costs. Respondents also perceived tourism variability and rising land prices as major

economic costs. Leakage outside the county was the lowest perceived impact. This might

indicate that respondents perceived rising land prices as the most important concern,

(mean 4.23), but they didn't perceive leakage of tourism profit as a big problem.

Although ECB 2 package tour program (PTP) had the highest mean, survey data showed

that only 38% of respondents participated in PTP, and many respondents failed to answer

the specific PTP question. Thus, this paper will not further analyze costs and benefits of

PTP.

Overall, respondents perceived lower cost than benefit in economic, social/cultural

and environmental groups except ECC 1 (mean3.9) and ECC2 (mean 3.7). Especially,

respondents perceived much lower cost in environmental cost, social cost and economic

cost3 (tourism leakages) than the relative benefit groups (Table 4-6).






59


With NBT benefits receiving rather high scores, respondents apparently have a

strong positive perception of nature-based tourism; therefore, the analysis will focus on

respondents' perceptions of benefits rather than costs. Also, when models focusing on

cost were analyzed, the conceptual model explained little.














Table 4.6 Overall Perceptions of Costs/Benefits of Tourism Impacts


Percent


N Mean


ECB2 (Economic Benefit 2: Package Tour Program--PTP)
Increased the variety of package tour programs
Upgrades the quality of service of PTP
Increases customers from PTP
Increases sales revenues from PTP
Integrates local industries from PTP
Increases name-recognition for businesses from PTP

SCB (Social/Cultural Benefit: Tourism's affect on cultural
identity & recognition)
Increased diversity of cultural activities among different ethnic
groups
Improved autonomy in the community
Improved the understanding among different communities &
cultures
ENB (Environmental Benefit)
Enhancing preservation of ecosystem
Increasing local residents' awareness of importance of
maintaining natural amenities
Improving local areas' appearance

ECB 1 (Economic Benefit l: job and sales revenue issues)
Increasing revenues for business
Increasing job opportunities


4.20
4.21
4.17
4.22
4.04
4.13
4.19


4.06 2

4.10 1

4.01. 2
4.09 2

3.80 2
3.40 3
3.98 0

4.00 1

3.60 1
3.83 1'
3.55 2


18 15 56 8

9 7 71 12


6 10 61 22














Table 4.6 Continued


Percent


N Mean


Increasing wages & fringe benefits
Increasing whale watching businesses


ECC1 (Economic Cost 1: Land prices)
Increased rent of houses and lands
Increased in housing and land prices which only happened in
tourism development areas
Increased in housing and land prices, which is related to Pei-I
freeway

ECC2 (Economic Cost 2: Tourism Variability)
Visitors over-convergence in specific seasons
Over-using tourism resources in peak seasons
Under-using tourism resources in low seasons
Affecting the balance of revenue, expenses and willingness of
investment
Resulting in spatial environment carrying pressure

ENC (Environmental Cost)
Overcrowding
Increasing traffic congestion
Increasing shortage of parking spaces
Increasing litter and garbage pollution
Increasing air and noise pollution
Increasing resources waste in advertising and delivery mails


3.90 1
3.69 1
3.91 1


4.23


3.70
4.05
3.54
3.61
3.72


3.68 1


2 5 57 35


10 20 56 13


3.40
3.35
3.59
3.69
3.50
3.43
3.47













Table 4.6 Continued


SCC (Social/Cultural Cost)
Increasing drinking and vandalism
Increasing prostitution
Increasing traffic accidents
Decreasing public safety


Percent
N Mean




1 2 3 4 5
286 3.0 5 32 25 33 5
285 3.16 4 26 27 38 5
286 3.23 3 24 28 38 7
286 2.70 7 47 19 23 4
286 3.0 7 30 24 34 5


ECC3 (Economic Cost 3: Leakages)
Tourism profits leaked heavily to outsiders
Most tourism benefits obtained by big companies


286 2.90 6
286 2.99 4
286 2.81 8


29 38 27 1
24 44 27 1
33 32 26 1










Correlation in between overall impact groups

Results showed that ECB 1 (Economic benefit: job and sales revenue issues) was

significantly correlated with ECC (Economic cost), SCB (social/cultural benefit) and

ENB (Environmental benefit) (Table 4-6-1). ENB was positive significantly correlated

with ECB1, SCB, and SCC, while ENB was negative significantly correlated with ENC.

All benefits were positively correlated with each other, which brought high mean of

SCB (4.1) and ENB (3.8). ECB1 (3.6) was positively correlated with ECC, which might

explain the high mean of ECC (3.5).Respondents' perception of high economic costs also

was co-respondent with their perception of lower economic benefits compared with

social/cultural and environmental benefits. ENC (3.4) was negatively correlated with

SCC (3.0), which might indicate that when respondents focused less in negative

social/cultural impact, they turned their attention to negative environmental impact

Table 4-6-1. Correlation in between Overall Impact Factors
ECB1 ECC SCB ENB ENC SCC
ECB1 Pearson Correlation 1 .298(**) .256(**) .258(**) .037 .059
Sig. (2-tailed) ..000 .000 .000 .532 .318
N 286 286 286 286 286 286
ECC Pearson Correlation 1 .235(**) .103 .260(**) .009
Sig. (2-tailed) ..000 .081 .000 .882
N 286 286 286 286 286
SCB Pearson Correlation 1 .240(**) .005 .183(**)
Sig. (2-tailed) ..000 .934 .002
N 286 286 286 286
ENB Pearson Correlation **) 263(**)
.253(**)
Sig. (2-tailed) ..000 .000
N 286 286 286
ENC Pearson Correlation 1 -.413(**)
Sig. (2-tailed) ..000
N 286 286
SCC Pearson Correlation 1
Sig. (2-tailed)
N 286
** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).









Research Question 2: Socio-demographic Relationship with Tourism Involvement

Using the conceptual model, it was necessary to understand if different types of

people in I-Lan (based on socio-demographic characteristics) have different attitudes

toward the government and type and level of involvement in tourism. This section will

describe how specific socio-demographic characteristics relate to these variables.

Type of Involvement. From the General Linear Model Multivariate test (Table 4-

7), there was no significant difference between socio-demographic characteristics and

type of business. However, there was a significant relationship between gender and type

of business (p= .052) at the p=0.1 level.

Table 4-7. Significant Level between Socio-Demographics and Type of Business
Variable F Error df Sig
Age 1.37 1.000 .545
Gender 152.11 1.000 .052
Education 2.20 1.000 .470
Raised in I-Lan as children 5.06 1.000 .266
Length of owning business 1.30 1.000 .570
Residence 2.80 1.000 .439
General Linear Model: Multivariate test
Significant level P < .10

All male respondents were involved in bus and whale watching businesses while

62% and 56% of respondents were female in travel agencies and farmers' associations

respectively (Table 4-8)

Table 4-8. Relationship between Gender and Major Types of Business
Whale Bus Travel Car B&B Hotel L. Gift Food Farm
Rental Farm Asso.
Male 100 100 38 72 69 64 64 54 54 44
Female 0 0 62 28 31 36 36 46 46 56
N =258; unit: percent










Attitudes toward government and level of involvement.

Results show that there is little relationship between socio-demographic variables

and participants' attitudes toward the government and involvement in tourism planning.

The model used to examine level of involvement is specified as follows:

Yi = a + blX1 + b2X2 + ...+ bkXki

Y1 = a + blX + b2X2 + ... + b8X8 (Table 4-9)

Where subscript i denotes the ith observation in the sample, Y is the outcome of the

attitudes toward government and level of involvement, a is a constant, bl, b2 ... bk are

the coefficients associated with each explanatory variable Xl, X2, ....Xki. The

explanatory variables used to explain attitudes toward government and level of

involvement in the model include Organization (Xl)- respondents' organization, Gender

(X2) Male, female, Age (X3) 20-75, Education (X4), Child (X5) Raised in IL as children,

Residence (X6) respondents' residence, LBZ1 (X7) operating business less than one year,

LBZ2 (X8) operating business more than one year.

Table 4-9. Variables in Model
Dependent Variables Independent Variables
M1 Govall (Y1) attitudes toward government Organization (Xl)- respondents' organization,
Gender (X2) Male, female, Age (X3) 20-75,
Education (X4), Child (X5) raised in IL as children,
Residence (X6) respondents' residence, LBZ1 (X7)
operating business less than one year, LBZ2 (X8)
operating business more than one year
M 2 Passtime(Y2) past participated in tourism Same as above
planning over the past 12 months
M 3 Futrtime (Y3) willing to participate in tourism Same as above
planning in the next 12 months
M 4 Implemt (Y4) implementation of tourism Same as above
planning,
M 5 Partake (Y5) used tourism projects over the last Same as above
12 months
M 6 Tourist (Y6) participating in tourism activities Same as above
as a tourist
M 7 Donate (Y7) donating money to tourism Same as above
planning.









Results showed that there were no significant relationships between socio-

demographics and attitudes toward government. The model predicted or explained only

2% of the variance in Govall (Table 4-9-1)

Table 4-9-1. Multiple Regression Results of Attitudes toward Government
Variable B SE t Sig.
Constant 4.112 .677 6.076 .000
Organization -.052 .066 -.783 .434
Gender -.038 .109 -.348 .728
Age .004 .005 .662 .509
Education -.013 .050 -.260 .795
Raised in I-Lan as children -.118 .142 -.826 .410
Residence .017 .017 .969 .334
Owning business less than one year -.095 .234 -.408 .684
Owning business more than one year .000 .003 .055 .956
Significant level at P < 0.05, r2= .016

Respondents' organization was significantly related to participating in tourism

planning in the past 12 months. The model predicted or explained 24% of the variance in

Passtime (Table 4-10). Respondents who represented tourism associations participated

more in tourism planning.

Table 4-10. Multiple Regression Results of Past Participation in Tourism Planning over
the Past 12 Months
Variable B SE t Sig.
Constant 3.409 .665 5.128 .000
Organization -.468 .065 -7.172 .000
Gender -.157 .108 -1.458 .146
Age .009 .005 1.753 .081
Education .037 .049 .767 .444
Raised in I-Lan as children -.043 .140 -.309 .758
Residence .026 .017 1.540 .125
Owning business less than one year -.075 .230 -.327 .744
Owning business more than one year -.001 .003 -.254 .800
Significant level at P < 0.05, r2 = .239

Respondents' organization was significantly related to willingness to participate

in tourism planning over the next 12 months. The model predicted or explained 12% of









variance in Futrtime (Table 4-11). Respondents who represented tourism associations

were willing to participate more in tourism planning over the next 12 months.

Table 4-11 Multiple Regression Results of Willing to Participate in Tourism Planning
over the next 12 Months
Variable B SE t Sig.
Constant 4.688 .800 5.859 .000
Organization -.388 .079 -4.945 .000
Gender -.193 .129 -1.491 .137
Age -.007 .006 -1.149 .252
Education .002 .059 .037 .970
Raised in I-Lan as children .067 .168 .400 .690
Residence .015 .020 .713 .476
Owning business less than one year -.272 .277 -.984 .326
Owning business more than one year .001 .003 .299 .765
Significant level at P < 0.05, r2 = .116

Respondents' organization and residence were significantly related to

implementation of tourism planning. The model predicted or explained 15% of variance

in Implemt (Table 4-12). There was no correlation between organization and residence

Table 4-26).

Table 4-12. Multiple Regression Results of Implementation of Tourism Planning
Variable B SE t Sig.
Constant 2.613 .669 3.907 .000
Organization -.352 .066 -5.369 .000
Gender .065 .108 .601 .549
Age .009 .005 1.742 .083
Education .083 .049 1.691 .092
Raised in I-Lan as children -.056 .141 -.395 .693
Residence .039 .017 2.279 .024
Owning business less than one year -.210 .231 -.908 .365
Owning business more than one year .001 .003 .222 .824
Significant level at P < 0.05, r2 = .152

Respondents' organization and education were significantly related to participating

in government tourism programs. The model predicted or explained 19% of variance in

Partake (Table 4-13). There was no correlation between organization and education

(Table 4-26).









Table 4-13. Multiple Regression Results of Participation in Government Tourism
Projects
Variable B SE t Sig.
Constant 2.787 .638 4.368 .000
Organization -.398 .063 -6.355 .000
Gender .050 .103 .481 .631
Age .007 .005 1.472 .142
Education .125 .047 2.662 .008
Raised in I-Lan as children .081 .134 .607 .544
Residence .008 .016 .490 .624
Owning business less than one year -.197 .220 -.893 .373
Owning business more than one year -.001 .003 -.307 .759
Significant level at P < 0.05, r2 = .186

Respondents' organization was significantly related to donating money to tourism

activities. The model predicted or explained 24% of the variance in Donate (Table 4-14).

Respondents' who represented tourism associations and private organizations contributed

more money to tourism planning. On the other hand, respondents who represented

individual businesses donated less money to tourism planning.

Table 4-14. Multiple Regression Results of Contributing Money to Tourism Planning
Variable B SE t Sig.
Constant 3.442 .901 3.818 .000
Organization -.665 .088 -7.518 .000
Gender -.012 .146 -.082 .935
Age .004 .007 .568 .571
Education .100 .066 1.519 .130
Raised in I-Lan as children .198 .190 1.045 .297
Residence -.034 .023 -1.487 .138
Owning business less than one year .300 .311 .965 .336
Owning business more than one year .001 .004 .366 .714
Significant level at P < 0.05, r2 = .236

Research Question 3: Tourism Involvement's Relationship with Perception of
Benefits
Four benefit groups were used to examine relationships between perceived benefits

and respondents' attitudes toward the government and items referring to the four levels of

involvement: 1) decision-maker, 2) tour provider, 3) tourist and 4) no involvement.

The model used to examine perceptions of costs/benefits is specified as follows:









Yi = a + blX1 + b2X2 + b3X3 + b4X4 + b5X5 + b6X6 + b7X7 (Table 4-15)

Where subscript i denotes the ith observation in the sample, Y is the perceived

impacts of the outcome, a is a constant, bi, b2 ... bkare the coefficients associated with

each explanatory variable X1, X2, ....Xki. The explanatory variables used to explain

NBT's impacts in the model include attitudes toward the government (Xi), past

participated in tourism planning in the past 12 months (X2), willingness to participate in

tourism planning over the next 12 months (X3) implementation of tourism planning (X4),

used tourism projects over the last 12 months (X5) participation in tourism activities as a

tourist (X6), and donation of money to tourism activities (X7).The nine factors derived

from factor analysis were the dependent variables in the model.

Table 4-15. Variables in Model
Dependent Variables Independent Variables
ECB1: Economic benfitl: job and sales Govall (Xi):attitudes toward the
revenue issues government; Passtime (X2)-Past
participation in the pass 12 months,
Futrtime (X3) willing to participate in
tourism planning over the next 12 months,
Implemt (X4) implementation of tourism
planning, Partake (X5) Used tourism
projects over the last 12 months Tourist
(X6) participated as a tourist over the last
12 months and Donate (X7) contributing
money to tourism planning.
SCB: Social benefit Same as above
ENB: Environmental benefit Same as above

Results showed that participants' attitudes toward the government and their

reported participation in tourism were weakly related to their perceptions of benefits

(Tables 4.16-4.18). The three models did show that many significant relationships existed

between the dependent variables and participants' perception of benefits. Where

significance was shown, only small amounts of variance were explained.









Attitudes toward the government and participation in tourism planning in the next

12 months were significantly related to social/cultural benefit. The model predicted or

explained 12% of variance in SCB (Table 4-16). Respondents who interacted more with

county government and respondents who were willing to participate in tourism planning

over the next 12 months perceived more social/cultural benefits than other respondents.

There was no correlation between attitudes toward the government and willing to

participate over the next 12 months (Table 4-26).

Table 4-16. Multiple Regression Results of Social/cultural Benefit
Variable B SE t Sig.
Constant 3.119 .171 18.28 .000
Attitudes toward the government .162 .041 3.943 .000
Past participation over the last 12 months -.066 .049 -1.328 .185
Willing to participate over the next 12 months .102 .041 2.475 .014
Implemented tourism activities over the last 12
months.016 .066 .240 .811
months
Used tourism projects over the last 12 months .060 .065 .923 .357
Participated as a tourist over the last 12 months .058 .051 1.142 .254
Contributed over the last 12 months .006 .033 .173 .863
Significant level at P < 0.05, r2 = .12

The model predicted or explained 4% of variance for participants' perception of

Economic Benefit 1 (ECB1): Job and Sales Revenue (Table 4-17).

Table 4-17. Multiple Regression Results of Economic Benefit 1
Variable B SE t Sig.
Constant 3.038 .211 14.38 .000
Attitudes toward the government .111 .051 2.178 .030
Past participation over the last 12 months -.020 .061 -.319 .750
Willing to participate over the next 12 months .055 .051 1.084 .279
Implemented tourism activities over the last 12 -.020 .082 -.247 .805
months
Used tourism projects over the last 12 months .128 .080 1.593 .112
Participated as a tourist over the last 12 months -.020 .063 -.322 .748
Contributed over the last 12 months -.042 .041 -1.042 .298
Significant level at P < 0.05, r2 = .043









Attitudes toward the government and willingness to participate in tourism planning

over the next 12 months were significantly related to perceptions of environmental

benefits; however, the model only predicted or explained 6% of variance in ENB (Table

4-18). Respondents who interacted more with county government and respondents who

were willing to participate in tourism planning over the next 12 months perceived more

environmental benefits than other respondents.

Table 4-18. Multiple Regression Results of Environmental Benefit
Variable B SE t Sig.
Constant 2.953 .220 13.415 .000
Attitudes toward the government .150 .053 2.819 .005
Past participation over the last 12 months .032 .064 .505 .614
Willing to participate over the next 12 months .108 .053 2.022 .044
Implemented tourism activities over the last 12 .
-.026 .085 -. 300 .764
months
Used tourism projects over the last 12 months -.039 .083 -.467 .641
Participated as a tourist over the last 12 months .042 .066 .639 .523
Contributed over the last 12 months -.015 .042 -.356 .722
Significant level at P < 0.05, r2 = .057

In all, attitudes toward the county government is the major factor affecting business

managers' involvement in tourism planning. In all cases, respondents who had more

positive attitudes toward the government perceived more social/cultural benefits,

followed by economic and environmental benefits. Respondents' more willing to

participate in decision-making over the next 12 months perceived more social/cultural

and environmental benefits.

Reversed variables measurement

In order to better understand the relationship between level of involvement and

respondents' perception of tourism impacts, this study used the above models by

reversing the dependent and independent variables to examine their relationships. The

independent variables include ECB1, SCB and ENB. The dependent variables include









attitudes toward the government, past participation over the last 12 months, willing to

participate over the next 12 months, Implemented tourism activities over the last 12

months, used tourism projects over the last 12 months, participated as a tourist over the

last 12 months, contributed over the last 12 months.

Respondents' perception of SCB and ENB were significantly related to attitude

toward the government (Table 4-18-1). The model predicted or explained 10% of

variance in attitude toward the government. There was a significant correlation between

SCB and ENB, r (285)= .24, P < .01 (Table 4-6-1).

Table 4-18-1. Multiple Regression Results of Attitudes toward Government
Variable B SE t Sig.
Constant 1.558 .393 3.965 .000
ECB1 (Economic Benefit 1) .102 .071 1.430 .154
SCB (Social/cultural Benefit) .301 .085 3.549 .000
ENB (Environmental Benefit) .149 .068 2.183 .030
Significant level at P < 0.05, r2 .10

Respondents' SBC (social/cultural benefit) was significantly related to willing to

participate over the next 12 months (Table 4-18-2). However, this model only predicted

or explained 6% of variance in willing to participate over the next 12 months.


Table 4-18-2. Multiple Regression Results of Willing to Participate in Tourism Planning
over the next 12 Months
Variable B SE t Sig.
Constant -.006 .519 -.012 .990
ECB1 (Economic Benefit 1) .031 .093 .330 .741
SCB (Social/cultural Benefit) .347 .111 3.128 .002
ENB (Environmental Benefit) .162 .089 1.813 .071
Significant level at P < 0.05, r2 = .062

Respondents' SBC (social/cultural benefit) was significantly related to "used

tourism projects over the last 12 months." However, this model only predicted or

explained 5% of variance in used tourism project over the last 12 months (Table 4-18-3).










Table 4-18-3. Multiple Regression Results of Used Tourism Projects over the last 12
Months
Variable B SE t Sig.
Constant .086 .428 .200 .841
ECB1 (Economic Benefit 1) .105 .077 1.366 .173
SCB (Social/cultural Benefit) .291 .092 3.150 .002
ENB (Environmental Benefit) .000 .074 -.006 .996
Significant level at P < 0.05, r2 = .052

Results also showed the significant relationship between SCB and other variables

in level of involvement. However, their predicted powers were very low. In all,

respondents' perception of social/cultural benefit was strongly related to their level of

involvement. That indicated if they perceived benefit from social/cultural aspect they

would be likely to involve in tourism planning.

Research Question 4: Socio-demographics and Business Characteristics
Relationship to Perceptions of Benefits

The model used to examine perceptions ofNBT benefits is specified as follows:

Y, = a + blX1 + b2X2 + b3X3 + b4X4 + b5X5 + b6X6 + b7X7 (Table 4-19)

Table 4-19. Variables in Model
Dependent Variables Independent Variables
Model 1 (ECB 1: Economic benfitl: job Organization (Xl)- respondents'
and sales revenue issues) organization, Gender (X2) Male, female,
Age (X3) 20-75, Education (X4), Child (Xs)
raised in IL as children, Residence (X6)
respondents' residence, LBZ1 (X7)
operating business less than one year,
LBZ2 (X8) operating business more than
one year
M 2 (SCB: Social/cultural benefit) Same as above
M 3 (ENB: Environmental benefit) Same as above

As shown below (Tables 4-20 through 4-22) age and if they operated their business

longer than one year seem to have the biggest affect on perception of benefits; however,

they explain only small percent of the variance.









Only respondents' organization was significantly related (p< .05) to Social/Cultural

Benefit (SCB). The model predicted or explained 5% of variance in SCB (Table 4-20).

Table 4-20. Multiple Regression Results of Social/cultural Benefit
Variable B SE t Sig.
Constant 3.956 .551 8.466 .000
Organization -.104 .046 -2.287 .023
Gender .021 .075 .284 .776
Age .002 .004 .693 .489
Education .010 .034 .289 .772
Raised in I-Lan as children .071 .097 .732 .465
Residence .021 .012 1.780 .076
Owning business less than one year .109 .163 .667 .505
Owning business more than one year .000 .002 .230 .818
Significant level at P < 0.05, r2 = .045

Respondents' age and if they operated their business longer than one year was

significantly related (p< .05) to perception of Economic Benefit 1 (ECB 1): Job and Sales

Revenue. However, the model only predicted or explained 5% of the variance for this

variable (Table 4-21).

Table 4-21. Multiple Regression Results of Economic Benefit 1: Job & Sales Revenue
Variable B SE t Sig.
Constant 3.445 .551 6.248 .000
Organization -.006 .054 -.108 .914
Gender -.120 .088 -1.364 .174
Age .009 .004 2.052 .041
Education .011 .040 .279 .780
Raised in I-Lan as children .042 .114 .368 .713
Residence .002 .014 .152 .880
Owning business less than one year -.038 .192 -.197 .844
Owning business more than one year -.006 .002 -2.440 .015
Significant level at P < 0.05, r2 = .053

There were no significant relationship (p<0.1) between all socio-demographic

variables and environmental benefits (Table 4-22).










Table 4-22. Multiple Regression Results of Environmental Benefit
Variable B SE t Sig.
Constant 4.161 .577 7.29 .000
Organization -.003 .056 -.058 .954
Gender -.095 .092 -1.030 .304
Age .006 .004 1.440 .151
Education .027 .042 .648 .518
Raised in I-Lan as children -.147 .120 -1.231 .220
Residence -.006 .015 -.383 .702
Owning business less than one year -.212 .201 -1.055 .293
Owning business more than one year -.004 .002 -1.527 .128
Significant level at P < 0.05, r2 = .032

Research Question 5: Interaction of Socio-demographic Characteristics and Level of
Involvement to Perception of Benefits
Regression and a one-way ANOVA were used to examine how the respondents'

socio-demographics interacted with their attitudes toward the government and level of

involvement related to their perception of benefits.

The model used to examine perceptions of NBT benefits is specified as follows:
Y,= a + blX1 + b2X2 + ...+ bkXki
Yi = a + biX1 + b2X2 + b3X3 + ... + b14X14 + b15X15 (Table 4-23)

Where subscript i denotes the ith observation in the sample, Y is the perceived

impacts of the outcome, a is a constant, bi, b2 ...bk are the coefficients associated with

each explanatory variable X1, X2, ....Xki. The explanatory variables used to explain

NBT's impacts in the model include attitudes toward the government (Xi), past

participated over the past 12 months (X2), willingness to participate in tourism planning

over the next 12 months (X3) implementation of tourism planning (X4), used tourism

projects, (X5) participation in tourism activities as a tourist (X6), contribution to tourism

activities (X7), respondents' organization(Xs), Gender (X9), Age (Xlo), Education (Xii),

raised in IL as children (X12), respondents' residence(X13) operating business less than

one year (X14), and operating business more than one year(Xi5) .









Table 4-23. Independent and Dependent Variables in Model


Dependent Variables
Model 1 (ECB 1: Economic benfitl: job
and sales revenue issues)


Independent Variables
Govall (Xi)-attitudes toward government,
Passtime (X2)-past participated in tourism
planning over the past 12 months, Futrtime
(X3) wiling to participate in tourism
planning over the next 12 months, Implemt
(X4) implementation of tourism planning,
Partake (X5) used tourism projects over the
past, Tourist (X6) participating in tourism
activities as a tourist and Donate (X7)
contribution to tourism planning.
Organization (Xs)- respondents'
organization, Gender (X9) Male, female,
Age (Xio) 20-75, Education (X11), Child
(X12) raised in IL as children, Residence
(X13) respondents' residence, LBZ1 (X14)
operating business less than one year,
LBZ2 (X15) operating business more than
one year.


M 2 (SCB: Social/cultural benefit) Same as above
M 3 (ENB: Environmental benefit) Same as above

Attitudes toward government, participating in tourism planning over the past 12

months, and willingness to participate in tourism planning over the next 12 months were

significantly related to the perception of Social/cultural Benefit (SCB). The model

predicted or explained 16% of the variance in SCB (Table 4.24). There was a significant

correlation between participating in tourism planning over the past 12 months and

willingness to participate in tourism planning over the next 12 months, r (280) = .60, P

< .01 (Table 4-26). In other words, respondents who participated in tourism planning over

the past 12 months would be willing to participate in tourism planning over the next 12

months.

However, these variables showed opposite affects on the perception of SCB. There

was a significant correlation between perception of government and participating in

tourism planning over the past 12 months, r (285) = -. 19, P < .01 (Table 4-26), which also









explained the opposite affects on the perception of SCB. People who stated that they

participated more in decision-making perceived less SCB. If they were willing to

participate more, they perceived more benefits.

Table 4-24. Multiple Regression Results of Social/cultural Benefit
Variable B SE t Sig.
Constant 2.840 .518 5.481 .000
Perception of government. .174 .044 3.965 .000
Past participation over the last 12 months -.121 .061 -1.984 .048
Willing to participate over the next 12 months .135 .046 2.948 .004
Implemented tourism over the last 12 months -.012 .077 -.153 .878
Used tourism projects over the last 12 months .093 .079 1.174 .242
Participated as a tourist over the last 12 months .059 .055 1.084 .280
Contributed over the last 12 months -.019 .038 -.494 .622
Organization -.078 .051 -1.542 .124
Gender .020 .074 .268 .789
Age .002 .004 .491 .624
Education .000 .033 .010 .992
Raised in I-Lan as children .076 .095 .800 .425
Residence .016 .012 1.394 .165
Owning business less than one year .182 .157 1.160 .247
Owning business more than one year .001 .002 .280 .780
Significant level at P < 0.05, r2 = .161

Attitudes toward the government, age, and if they operated their business longer

than one year were significantly related to Economic Benefit 1 (ECB 1): Job and Sales

Revenue; however, the model only predicted or explained 10% of the variance in ECB 1

(Table 4-25). There was a significant correlation between age and operating their

business longer than one year, r (267) = .16, P < .05(Table 4-26). There was no

correlation between age and perception of government. Respondents who were older than

35 tended to operate their business longer than that of younger respondents. However,

respondents who operated their business longer than one year did not perceive more jobs

and sales revenue benefits.











Table 4-25. Multiple Regression Results of Economic Benefit 1
Variable B SE t Sig.
Constant 2.730 .630 4.331 .000
Perception of government. .126 .053 2.349 .020
Past participation over the last 12 months -.099 .074 -1.336 .183
Willing to participate over the next 12 months .065 .056 1.169 .243
Implemented tourism activities over the last 12
months .093 .213 .831
Used tourism projects over the last 12 months .105 .096 1.095 .275
Participated as a tourist over the last 12 months .032 .066 .488 .626
Contributed over the last 12 months -.051 .046 -1.092 .276
Organization -.020 .062 -.329 .742
Gender -.113 .090 -1.260 .209
Age .009 .004 2.096 .037
Education .020 .041 .500 .617
Raised in I-Lan as children .046 .115 .397 .692
Residence -.006 .014 -.438 .662
Owning business less than one year .044 .190 .233 .816
Owning business more than one year -.006 .002 -2.661 .008
Significant level at P < 0.05, r2= .103


















Table 4-26. Correlation between Socio-Demographics, Business Characteristics and Level of Involvement
ORGANIZE PASSTI FUTRT IMPLE PARTA DONA RESID GOV
NATION ME IME MT KE TOURIST TE GENDER AGE EDU CHILD ENCE LBZ1 LBZ2 ALL


ORGANIZE Pearson
ATION Correlation
Sig. (2-
tailed)
N
PASSTIME Pearson
Correlation
Sig. (2-
tailed)
N
FUTRTIME Pearson
Correlation
Sig. (2-
tailed)
N
IMPLEMT Pearson
Correlation
Sig. (2-
tailed)
N
PARTAKE Pearson
Correlation
Sig. (2-
tailed)
N
TOURIST Pearson
Correlation
Sig. (2-
tailed)
N
DONATE Pearson
Correlation
Sig. (2-
tailed)
N
GENDER Pearson
Correlation
Sig. (2-
tailed)


.384(**)
.000

275

.570(**)


-.243(**)

.000

275

.343(**)


.449(**)
.000

274

.525(**)


.440(**)
.000

277

1



286


.003

277

-.161(**)


.015

266

.185(**)


.694

277

-.044


.006 .002 .463

286 275 286

-.115 .004 .015

.054 .954 .808

281 271 281

-.056 .138(*) .042

.350 .023 .481

285 274 285

-.077 .084 .117(*)

.194 .167 .050

284 273 284

.033 -.014 .118(*)

.578 .814 .047

284 273 284

-.079 .074 .114


.322(**)
.000

272

.601(**)


.000 .184 .223 .055 .095 .204 .060 .564 .105

282 283 283 272 283 277 283 280 274 283

.033 -.079 1 -.031 .072 -.024 -.035 -.067
.219(**) .156(**)
.000 .598 .231 .682 .009 .564 .259


.345(**)
.000

276

.650(**)


.000 .000 .000 .000 .000

281 285 284 284 283

1 .555(**) .471(**) .315(**) .444(**)

.000 .000 .000 .000

281 281 280 280 279

1 .785(**) .390(**) .484(**)

.000 .000 .000

285 284 284 283

1 .432(**) .527(**)

.000 .000

284 283 282

1 .298(**)

.000

284 282

.298(**) 1


.177(**) -.148(*) -.024


-.017 .005 -.128(*) .004 -.050

.787 .935 .034 .952 .405

271 277 274 268 277

.031 .086 .075 -.007 1(

.609 .147 .207 .913 .001

280 286 283 277 286

.016 .010 .013 -.007 .066

.794 .868 .834 .905 .271

275 281 279 273 281
.160(
-.010 .131(*) .022 .029 .6*)

.867 .027 .714 .637 .007

279 285 282 276 285

.084 .037 .032 .009 .180(

.162 .535 .588 .886 .002

278 284 281 275 284

.013 -.040 -.031 .027 .112

.825 .501 .609 .654 .059

278 284 281 275 284

.100 -.076 .113 .035 .097

















Table 4-26 Continued


N
AGE Pearson
Correlation
Sig. (2-
tailed)
N
EDU Pearson
Correlation
Sig. (2-
tailed)
N
CHILD Pearson
Correlation
Sig. (2-
tailed)
N
RESIDENCE Pearson
E Correlation
Sig. (2-
tailed)
N
LBZ1 Pearson
Correlation
Sig. (2-
tailed)
N
LBZ2 Pearson
Correlation
Sig. (2-
tailed)
N
GOVALL Pearson
Correlation
Sig. (2-
tailed)
N


ORGANIZE PASSTI FUTRT IMPLE PARTA DONA RESID GOV
TOURIST GENDER AGE EDU CHILD LBZ1 LBZ2
ATION ME IME MT KE TE ENCE ALL
286 275 286 280 286 283 277 286

1 377.029 .048 .072 .156(*) .099
.377(**)
.000 .630 .427 .235 .010 .101

275 275 271 275 273 268 275

1 .138(*) -.058 .107 .037 -.084

.021 .328 .073 .541 .156

286 280 286 283 277 286

1 .041 .064 -.141(*) -.042

.491 .289 .020 .480

280 280 277 271 280

1 -.041 -.071 .074

.493 .238 .214

286 283 277 286

1 .165(**) -.010

.006 .867

283 277 283

1 .013

.828

277 277



286

286


** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
* Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).









Summary

Social/cultural benefits were the most highly perceived benefits group, followed by

economic benefits; however, all three-benefit groups had fairly close means (all between

3.6 and 4.1). All costs were perceived as being lower than benefits. Attitudes toward

county government affected respondents' perceptions in economic, social/cultural and

environmental benefits.

Sales revenue shows that 30% of annual sales and 31% of customers were from

NBT. Whale watching business has the highest mean scores of percentage of sales from

NBT and the highest percentage customers from NBT, followed by gift shops and B&B.

Leisure farm, B&B and gift store businesses have increased their sales revenue rather

than decreased over the last five years.

Older respondents perceived more economic benefit than younger respondents.

Male respondents participated more in tourism planning than female respondents.

Respondents' organization was significantly related to their level of involvement.

In terms of involvement, it appears that attitudes toward the governments' ability to

work with stakeholders was one of the major variables that influences people's

perception of benefits. Occasionally, other variables associated with tourism involvement

would be significant, but these were rare. Therefore, one of the major results of this study

pertains to stakeholders' perception of interaction and collaboration rather than direct

involvement in tourism planning. Results in reversed multiple regression indicated that

respondents' perception of social/cultural benefit was significantly related to

respondents' level of involvement in tourism planning.














CHAPTER 5
DISCUSSION AND SUGGESTION

The purpose of this study was twofold. First, it was to understand stakeholders'

perceptions of economic, social/cultural environmental and other factors for nature-based

tourism in I-Lan. Second, it was to examine the relationships among stakeholders' socio-

demographic characteristics, type and level of involvement in tourism and their relations

to perceptions of nature- based tourism's costs and benefits. This chapter will revisit each

of the five research objectives and highlight major findings for each objective. Next, it

will summarize implications for planning and future research.

Research Question 1: Perception of Impacts

Results show that respondents perceived the social/cultural benefits higher than

environmental and economic benefits, as well as all costs. In fact, social/cultural costs

were the least reported costs. The I-Lan County government has engaged in culture

activities as major tourism activities since 1990s. For example, the county held the

Grappling with Ghosts Competition at Tou-Cheng in 1991, Come back! Turtle Island in

1991, Building I-Lan House in 1994, Happy I-Lan Year since 1994, holding International

Collegiate Regatta in 1994 and Children's Festival in1996. These activities were often

co-sponsored by local businesses, which activated the local industry.

In the recent past, the central Taiwan government had suppressed many such

cultural activities. Integrating cultural activities with tourism might likely have increased

the sense of local sprit and cultural identity for participating tourism businesses. These

are possible reasons why socio/cultural benefits had such high means. I-Lan was ranked









the first in "sense of pride" among 21 counties and cities in Taiwan in 1996 and 1997

surveyed by Foreseeing Magazine, and was also ranked the first as "the most favorable

living place in Taiwan" in several recent surveys (Lee, 2002). Furthermore, these cultural

activities have successfully attracted visitors and generated sales revenue for local

business.

Results also show that environmental benefit ranked second followed by economic

benefits. The county government has stressed the importance of environmental protection

(EP) when engaging tourism since 1980s. The county rejected polluting manufacturing

plants being built in I-Lan (Lee 2003, Chen 2003). The county also established and

implemented environmental protection standards and regulations in the 1980s and 1990s,

which later became environmental protection policies for the central Taiwan government

(Hong, 2001, Lee, 2003, Chen 2003). Using an EP monitoring system, the county has

been able to detect manufacturing plants that violated the EP standards (I-Lan County

Government 2000, Hong, 2000, Chen, 2003). As a result, the environment in I-Lan is

well conserved compared to other areas in Taiwan. This relates to why I-Lan is so

popular among nature-based tourists.

Results show that economic benefits ranked last in benefits, which might reflect the

economic structure in I-Lan. Past research revealed that the economic benefits generated

from tourism are a small portion of the economy due to tourism's labor intensive and low

profit feature (Hong, 2001). Thus, the economic benefit derived from tourism in I-Lan

has been unable to offset its economic gap. In addition, overall group impacts (Table 4-6)

show that ECC1 (Economic cost: land prices; mean 3.9) and ECC2 (Economic cost2:

tourism variability; mean 3.7) are slightly higher than ECB1 (economic cost: job and









sales revenue issues; mean 3.6), which might explain the respondents' perception of low

economic benefit compared with their perception of social/cultural and environmental

benefits. The positive correlation between ECB1 and ECC (Table 4-6-1) also indicates

the weak economic benefit.

The family income and the unemployment rate in I-Lan describe the economic

situation in I-Lan. I-Lan's family income was ranked 14 among Taiwan's 21 counties

(DGBAS, 2003), and the unemployment rate in I-Lan has always been 5%-15% higher

than that of other areas in Taiwan (DGBAS, 2002). Also, tourism in I-Lan has reached a

consolidation stage. The number of visitors has remained the same or has slightly

decreased since 2001. I-Lan has gradually lost its advantage in tourism due to

competition from other counties (initial survey, 2005)

Another explanation for the ranking might be individual respondent's perception in

economic versus group or whole society's perceptions in social/cultural and

environmental issues. Perceptions of economic issues are usually related to short-term,

direct and personal experience, while perceptions of social/cultural and environmental

issues are usually related to long-term, indirect or related to whole society's experience

instead of personal experience. Several respondents asked the researcher how to answer

the questionnaire regarding social/cultural and environmental items. They were not sure

if they should rate the question based on their own experience or based on I-Lan society's

viewpoints. This might explain the high mean of social/cultural benefits, which was rated

upon group perception instead of respondent's individual perception. When answering

economic items, respondents would rate these items based on their own personal









perceptions not I-Lan society's perceptions. Thus, the results in economic benefits appear

to be lower than social/cultural and environmental benefits.

Research Question 2: Socio-demographic characteristics and type of involvement

Results show that most socio-demographic characteristics have little role in

affecting the type of involvement I-Lan business managers have in tourism. However,

traditional gender roles continue to exist. For example, males were significantly more

likely to operate businesses like whale watching and females were more likely to be

operating travel agencies. Results also show that males have significantly more positive

attitudes towards the government's involvement of stakeholders in planning, probably

because males are more involved in decision-making positions.

Results also show that well-educated respondents participated more in the four

levels of involvement. Survey data show that 44% of respondents have a college degree,

which is much higher than county average (18%) (Table 4-1). It also means that

respondents with better education are likely to be non-natives, who bring capital to invest

in I-Lan. As investors, these respondents would tend to participate more in tourism

planning.

Respondents' organization was related to level of involvement. This confirms that

people who are involved in tourism associations or other private business organizations

are more likely to take part in the government's tourism program, either as a decision-

maker or actively participating in government sponsored programs. Almost half of the

participants (43%) are involved in independent businesses and are not members or

business organizations or tourism associations. These participants believe the government









is open to their participation in tourism programs; although, they apparently do not take

advantage of these opportunities.

Research Question 3: Tourism Involvement's Relationship with Perception of
Benefits

More than 48% of respondents did not participate in county tourism planning over

the last 12 months and only 6% of respondents participated more than 11 times in the past

12 months. There is a need for the county to better understand why stakeholders do and

do not participate. Using the social exchange theory as the underlying context, this study

used perception of benefits to help understand business people's involvement in tourism

planning. A key finding related to participation in tourism planning was the generally

positive attitudes most participants had of the government's ability to interact with

stakeholders and integrate their desires into planning. The fact that they have these

positive attitudes toward the government, but do not actively work with the government

shows that stakeholders have a complex relationship with the government in terms of

tourism planning.

Attitudes toward the government and willingness to participate in decision making

had small affects on respondents' perception of social/cultural benefits. Even with these

weak relationships, this result does highlight the uniqueness of social/cultural benefits

and shows that business managers' attitudes towards collaboration are more important

than actual behaviors (e.g., participating in decision-making, taking part as tourists, and

donating money) when examining their perception of benefits. Since these relationships

were positive (more positive attitudes toward the government and higher willingness to

participate resulted in higher perception of social/cultural benefits), these results might

indicate that when people do participate, their perception of benefits might even decline.









Both economic and environmental benefits do not appear as significant as social/cultural

benefits.

The reversed multiple regression in involvement also indicates perception of both

social/cultural and environmental benefits affect respondents' attitudes towards

government. Respondents' perception of social/cultural benefits affects all level of

involvement even though most of them are weak relationships.

These findings indicate that participants' attitudes and behavior towards

participation need to be better understood. Nearly 34% of respondents have never

participated in tourism activities as tourists and 56 % of them have only participated in

the programs 1-6 times over the last 12 months. Business managers are apparently not

interested in these tourism programs as business ventures or as tourists. This can partly be

explained for a variety of reasons. Specifically, business managers do not see these

activities directly providing the benefits, and they believe their own tourism activities are

more likely to provide these benefits. Also, managers might not believe these programs

are valuable. For example, the number of visitors to the Green Expo and Children's

Festival in 2005 both dropped 10% and 30% respectively from 2004 participation rates.

Business mangers might see these two events as losing their ability to attract new or

repeated visitors. So, although they see nature-based tourism providing overall benefits to

the county, the specific county programs might not be providing these benefits.

Nearly 60% of respondents have never donated money to tourism planning and

only less than 5% of respondents have donated more than NT$50,000 to tourism planning,

which reflect that the concept of donation has not prevailed for business managers in I-

Lan. Most respondents are not willing to contribute any money to tourism planning