Abstract: In this research, we study the effects of tourism policy-making in the Pre and Post Islamic revolution (1979) in Iran with a comparative approach. The case study of research is Babolsar in the north of Iran which located on the southern coast of the Caspian Sea. The results of the research show that differences in ideology and values between Pre and Post Islamic Revolution affected on the Tourism Policy-making in Iran. In the case, the jobs and spatial features related to the tourism have been better and increased, but pollution of the coastal environments and shores have been increased. Also the ecotourism opportunities after the revolution have been more attractive for internal tourists than foreigners.
INTRODUCTION
Political geography studies the interactions and relations between geography and politics (Hafeznia, 2000a). According to the definition of the Association of American Geographers, the nature of this branch of geography is the interaction of geographical area and political process. Pacoina believes that the political geographers are concerned with the study of the geographical consequences of political decisions and actions. Cohen and Rosenthal state that the political geography is concerned with the spatial attributes of political process (Glassner, 1993).
Drysdale and Blake believe that political geography makes a spatial analysis about Political phenomena and studies the spatial attributes of the political process and decision as well (Draysdale and Blake, 1990). Mirheydar also has such definition about political geography (Mirheydar, 1993).
Tourism as a human behavior has geographical and spatial dimensions. Geographical environment and elements provide the background and opportunities for tourism and tourism has some effects on the geographical environment and space. The governments under the influence of political, social and economics forces take some policies to form and develop the tourism activities. They utilize all geographical, cultural, historical and archaeological potentials for this purpose and they develop and create new potentials as well. So the governments with their policies and activities in the ground of tourism change the geographical landscape and create a new space. On the other hand, it seems that the tourism in the future would have an important role on the national development of the countries and it will come as a matter and case for competition among states and each of them will try to attract more tourists.
So the studies on the bilateral relations between geography, tourism and policies of the governments, should be considered by the geographers especially political geographers.
Tourism is being defined as the activities of the people who travel from their home to the other places for the purposes of recreation, rest and etc. (Dos While, 1999). Ecotourism as a kind of tourism grow up in the world and the people who seem are tired from the living in crowded cities and urban areas, prefer to live in the nature for sometimes. The shores and beeches, mountains, Forests, the bank of rivers, islands, valleys and even deserts are the good places for such tourism.
Policy making by the governments in the ground of tourism is under the influence of the both internal and external factors. Internal factors are: laws and customs of the society, values, ideologies and pressure groups (Hall and Jenkins, 1999). External factors are: globalization trend and transnational companies (Lee, 1999).
The policies of the tourism section and its activities can make or change the structure, spatial features and functions of the places and geographical environments. The effects of the policies can impact on the:
| • | Spatial features such as roads, settlements, hotels, transportation, etc. |
| • | Economy such as revenue, currency, jobs and employments. |
| • | Culture, such as exchange of traditions, dialogue and communication, understanding each other, peace and friendship, etc. |
| • | Environment such as, scarcity, degradation, pollution, etc. and vice versa security, beauty, hygienic, comforting etc. |
THE NATURE OF POLICY
A policy is the structure for government actions in attaining certain aims. A tourism policy, therefore, is a structure for government activities in relation to tourism. Tourism policies are created principally as a mechanism of managing the development of the tourism industry. Regulations are similarly needed for legal control over its activities. There are reasons why studying policies is important. As concluded by Hall and Jenkins (1995), it helps in understanding the causes and consequences of policy decisions and of the policy itself. It also helps in ensuring that the right goals will be achieved. It has recently become a very important issue especially for heavily visited destinations or countries, particularly in developing countries, in order to develop policies for the area for managing the disruptive impacts of tourism. Nonetheless, policies are not necessarily put into practice.
Jenkins (1980) suggests seven outstanding factors for developing countries to regard tourism as one of their development strategies. These include income redistribution, freedom from trade restrictions, continuing demand growth, development costs, employment, prestige and finally the wanderlust: defined as the variation of tourist flows over the tourist destinations. In most developing countries, it is the government that has responsibility for its tourism policies and the definitions of regulations over tourism development. However, a free reign to the private sector to develop tourism often exists in practice. It is often believed that business interest groups priorities their business profits more than a long-term sustainability. Strong control from the government is critically necessary for preventing and managing issues such as exploitation, deterioration and destruction over the area.
THE STUDY OF POLICY IMPLEMENTATION
The study of policy implementation has substantially grown since Pressman and Wildavsky's case of Oakland and California during the late 1960s (O’Toole, 2000; Lester and Stewart, 2000). Youngish (1990) also introduces that implementation studies became fashionable from the contribution of Van Meter and Van Horn in 1975. Since those periods of time, policy implementation moved to an important position in policy study. Importantly, most implementation research has been conducted in and focusing the United States. However, there are also some contributions from Western Europe. At present, a number of good theories are put forward by a number of new researchers, nonetheless, according to O'Toole (2000) solid cross-national comparative study has been especially lacking. As Winter (1999) notes, in terms of the problems analyzed, the field of implementation research would be considered much more robust than simply by counting research under the label of implementation. Until now, implementation studies mostly tend to focus on the lists of variables that may affect the achievement of implementation processes (Matland the natural of policy.
A policy is the structure for government actions in attaining certain aims. A tourism policy, therefore, is a structure for government activities in relation to tourism. Tourism policies are created principally as a mechanism of managing the development of the tourism industry. Regulations are similarly needed for legal control over its activities. There are reasons why studying policies is important. As concluded by Hall and Jenkins (1995), it helps in understanding the causes and consequences of policy decisions and of the policy itself. It also helps in ensuring that the right goals will be achieved. It has recently become a very important issue especially for heavily visited destinations or countries, particularly in developing countries, in order to develop policies for the area for managing the disruptive impacts of tourism. Nonetheless, policies are not necessarily put into practice.
It is widely recognized that the achievement of tourism policies requires many components such as qualified personnel, financial resources, local involvement and authorities in charge. In many developing countries, there is highly centralized control. Policies and regulations may be less strictly enforced in remote areas resulting from their long distance from centers of policy-making. It is evident that there is a gap in implementing policies and regulations especially in developing countries where there is poverty, bureaucracy and corruption. The consequences of policies not being well-implemented such as illegal street guides and sex encounters in Yogyakarta, Indonesia; environment degradation; sex tourism; building control leading to its collapse in Pattaya, Thailand and child prostitution associated with the informal sector of tourist trade as well as the use of child labor in the industry in Sri Lanka (Hall and Page, 2000), can create potential long term problems for the countries either for national health and safety or the economy. The aforementioned examples show a requirement for study, research and understanding of policy-implementation in order to ensure its goals so as to protect the destinations, local communities and the tourists. For such an influential reason, this study intends to explore in-depth insights and potential factors of successful policy-implementation in an area of a developing country with the intention of its application in subsequent studies of other developing countries. Jenkins (1980) suggests seven outstanding factors for developing countries to regard tourism as one of their development strategies. These include income redistribution, freedom from trade restrictions, continuing demand growth, development costs, employment, prestige and finally the wanderlust: defined as the variation of tourist flows over the tourist destinations. In most developing countries, it is the government that has responsibility for its tourism policies and the definitions of regulations over tourism development. However, a free reign to the private sector to develop tourism often exists in practice. It is often believed that business interest groups priorities their business profits more than a long-term sustainability. Strong control from the government is critically necessary for preventing and managing issues such as exploitation, deterioration and destruction over the area.
THE POLICY IMPLEMENTATION PROCESS
Implementation in general can be simply defined as putting policies into practice or a series of governmental decisions and actions directed toward putting an already decided mandate into effect (Lester and Stewart, 2000). Implementation plays an important role in making plans and policies realistic. For O'Toole (2000) policy implementation is what develops between the establishment of an apparent intention on the part of government to do something or to stop doing something and the ultimate impact in the world of action. Tasmanian and Sabatier (1983) define implementation as the carrying out of basic policy decisions, usually incorporated in a statute but which can also take the form of implementation executive orders or court decisions. The attempt of defining successful implementation has been made, according to Matland (1995) based on Ingram and Schneider (1990), the successful implementation represents agencies compliance with the principal's requests; agencies are held accountable for reaching specific indicators of success, goals of the policy are achieved, local goals are achieved. In conclusion, successful implementation is the congruence of policy goals.
The implementation process is therefore inevitably associated with the complex process of planning, organizations, inter-organizations, coordination, communication and promotion which are necessary in order to achieve policy goals and objectives (Lewis and Wallace, 1984). Implementation frequently involves exchanges between organizations at different levels of government, or between centre and periphery, or between public and private sector. Implementers are responsible for operating and setting plans and also mediating between conflicting groups as well as negotiating to ensure plan implementation is successful (Greed, 1996). It is usually found that implementers have limited power to carry through their planning objectives alongside all the other private and public actors involved in the implementation process. Implementers can later feel that implementation process is time-consuming and political. In Greed's research (1996) planners and implementers needed to adopt other tactics in seeking to carry out effective planning by either looking for alternatives means or fulfilling the original intentions of their plans. They also needed to have professional expertise characters and good judgment in order to avoid being overwhelmed by changes and variety occurring during the implementation process. Lewis and Wallace (1984), in their books of policies into action, explicitly state that Central Government is frequently not the executants of its own policies. They are mainly carried out by local authorities, public corporations, firms or other agencies. It is evident that the divisions and distances between such organizations render implementation complicated and uncertain. As a result, the implementation difficulties are currently exacerbated by growth in the scale of government, which causes the interrelationships within government (Lewis and Wallace, 1984). According to Gogging et al. (1990), three clusters of variables affecting state implementation are introduced which are inducements and constraints from the top (the federal level), inducement and constraints from the bottom (state and local level) and state-specific factors defined as decisional outcomes and state capacity. Interestingly, Pressman and Wildavsky (1973) state that the possibility of successful implementation is less than 50% if the process is accurately done up to 90% through six hierarchical levels. However, implementation should not be seen as a confrontational or negative process in which there are losers and winners. It should end up with a reasonably satisfactory result for all parties (Greed, 1996).
In addition, according to Cline (2001) the implementation problem can be defined in two basic ways: firstly on problems of organizational management and secondly on a conflict of interest in the process. Planners and implementers are normally bound to encounter a complex legal situation which is full of contradictions and which affects its outcome. According to Greed (1996) little things such as interpersonal interaction, traditional based assumptions, awkward little bits of unhelpful legislation and absurd regulation can empower themselves to block effective policy making and implementation at the day-to-day level of planning practice. The performance of implementation also depends heavily on the nature of the particular policy and the organizational context and culture. This must be taken fully into account when implementing the policy in different area. Lewis and Wallace (1984) quoted Berman's two basic strategies for policy implementation. They are associated with being Programmed and Adaptive. The first one involves carefully defining goals, assigning responsibilities and laying down clear and detailed programmers of the activities so that implementation can proceed without any subsequent changes and adjustments. The latter is regarded as policy flexibility for the implementers in cases of varying circumstances.
It can be said that implementation by its very nature may not be achieved at its early stage, as the matter of fact that policy itself is only a tentative solution to a problem (Lewis and Wallace, 1984). The implementers therefore cannot be certain of the policy's result in advance. The policy, acting as a hypothesis, has to be tested against reality and environment and its effectiveness evaluated and subjected to correction. Even under perfect conditions all information passing upwards in a bureaucracy is subject to uncertainty. Corruption, recognized as a key obstacle to economic and political progress (Williams, 1998), often takes place. As a result, Lewis and Wallace (1984) present an assumption for avoiding those unpredictable circumstances that implementers should identify, at the early state, the conditions under which policy objectives are successfully translated into actions. Greed (1996) also supplements that to put policy into effect or to achieve implementation requires a range of tools including negotiation, management techniques, legal measures, political lobbying, cooperation with the private sector and the application of professional expertise and experience.
Lewis and Wallace (1984) observe some significance of the environment for implementation based on the implementation study across national boundaries. Firstly its environment maybe more complex and interactive and unpredictable due to the distance. Second, it seems to have unfamiliar connections to others so-called inter-organizational turbulence. Next, economic conditions that might have an influence on financial resources and possible cutbacks. Then, it is the transnational dimension. Finally policy implementation heavily depends on the degree of national ability, administrative limits, strategies and styles. Policy implementation in one country can be insulated from external influences, especially community involvement which is significant in this context. It is in other words, the way it blurs the distinction between policy formulation and policy implementers (Lewis and Wallace, 1984; Matland, 1995). It is compulsory for the central government to control the interactions between the national and community levels if policy's goal is meant to occur at local levels. Importantly, the implementation process should not assume that resources are plentiful. It is important to note that the classical theoretical frameworks are usually constructed by an assumption of abundant resources without unpredictable extrinsic factors (Lester and Stewart, 2000). According to Matland (1995) the available resources, institutional structure and access to implementing arena are substantial for the policy outcomes. To achieve policy goals, the relevant actors should assure that the necessary resources are available avoiding any adjustments and delays to the extent that they are able to do so.
APPROACHES TO POLICY IMPLEMENTATION
In the present world, the approach to implementation must be flexible and experimental and pay the fullest attention to the environment (Gogging et al., 1990). If the outcome of a policy is uncertain then the implementers must expect to have to adjust its content from time to time; to become, as it were, more systematically tentative in our approach to policy-making (Lester and Wallace, 1984). Implementation is in the fullest sense a policy action continuum in which an interactive and negotiate process is taking place over time, between those seeking to put policy into effect and those upon whom action depends (Barrett and Fudge, 1981). It is also the action in practice of the policy hypothesis. It is the attempt at realizing policy, its trial solution. The study of implementation often assumes fully formed, complete policies as the starting point. In fact most policies that are to be implemented are unclear, tentative and subject to negotiation and it is precisely because of their unsettled and unfinished nature that the implementation process has a close and creative interaction with policy, therefore the whole process maybe regarded as evolutionary (Lewis and Wallace, 1984). Neglect of implementation leaves policy advice incomplete. Early attention to implementation requirement on the other hand, enables participants to tackle the problems that would later create misunderstanding conflict and delay. Hill (1993) according to Lewis and Wallace (1984), three sets of requirements can be inferred from the earlier discussion of implementation with respect to structural adjustment, industrial turbulence and supplement management. Firstly, implementation of large scale structural change requires substantial institutional capabilities and robust inter-organizational relations, thus there may be a marked gap between institutional requirement and existing capabilities. Successful implementation depends on closing the gaps. The second requirement of effective implementation is followed from the strategic objective of withdrawing from obsolescent industries and identifying opportunities to create new industries. Different types of adjustment problems require appropriate handling to maintain momentum for change without provoking counter-productive conflicts. Conflict is an unavoidable part of large-scale structural change. Finally, it is essential to be clear at what level problems should be addressed. Many problems can be handled only at the micro level. Some changes in the environment involve simultaneous adjustment by the whole network of organizations in an industry, others involve redefinition of relations among industries. It is relatively explicit that the government should at the very early stage learn how to work with each other in its contextual environment before addressing implementation problems.
According to Hern and Porter (1981), Implementation requires an implementation structure, appropriate mechanisms, a delivery system, institutional capabilities and an appropriate institutional setting. It is observed here that borrowing a ready-made policy from another country or another policy will not be efficient and sufficient. As discussed earlier, implementation is subject to change and adaptation over time and different situations. Feedback is therefore regarded as an essential characteristic for the implementation mechanisms and it generally comprises of two types: negative which corrects deviations from and original objectives and positive which amplified deviations (Maruyama, 1963 in Lewis and Wallace, 1984). It is, in fact, another source of information influencing a more efficient implementation process. Lester and Stewart (2000) strongly assert that implementation always involves in various actors, organizations, procedures and techniques over the policy process along with its evolution. Implementation is viewed as a stage immediately after the passage of a law and it also broadly means administration of the law which demands diverse factors to work together in order to adopt policies into effect, so as to attain policy goals. In this book, implementation can be conceptualized as a process, an output and outcome (Lester and Stewart, 2000). The five main activities or functions typically occur in the process of state implementation are summarized as state enabling laws, administrative rule making, resources, monitoring and enforcement and, finally, redesign of policies. Furthermore, there are some essential characteristics of the implementation process in which time and satisfactory performance of certain necessary tasks related to carrying out the intent of the law and policies are required. The process is also associated with regulation enacting, delegating the authority to run a programmed, funding the programmed and hiring sufficient staff to provide for adequate implementation. The number of violations to comply with the implementation must be taken into account. It is clear that the concept of implementation is acting as a complex phenomenon (with a process, an output and an outcome). It again inevitably involves a number of actors, organizations and techniques of control. According to Lester and Steward (2000), the agents in implementing policies can be broadly divided as firstly, the Bureaucracy (administrative agencies); secondly, the Legislature (legislative bodies) by formulating policy as well as its implementation; then the courts by enforcing through the judicial branch; pressure groups who seeks to influence the guidelines and regulations in a way that will benefit them and finally, the community organization by implementing public programmers at local level. It is often argued that a potential obstacle at this stage is the fact of having too close relationships with administrative agencies, distortion may occur.
Implementers can use a number of techniques for policy implementation. Most recently, the debate has focused on two approaches. They are the command and control approach and the economic incentives or market approach (Lester and Stewart, 2000). The first approach involves the use of Mechanisms that is somewhat coercive such as inspection and the imposition of sanctions on violators. The latter is the approach with respect to tax credits, subsidies or rewards and penalties. Another two major approaches are top-down and the bottom up approaches. It is widely accepted that policy is made at the top and implemented at the bottom. Accordingly, it is often debatable that people at local level are the appropriate practitioners if policy is meant to be implemented locally where problems are really understood. In the meantime, top-down and combinations of these approaches are regarded as an initiative control that policy's objectives, necessary resources and powers are considered, managed and distributed. However, in any ambiguous and unstable cases, this approach would be well undermined at local level. It must be heeded and co-operated regularly by the central government. Hill (1993) asserts that the difficulty of the top-down and bottom-up dilemma lies in the fact that many administrative arrangements involve a delicate balance between legitimacies at different levels between central and local government. It can be said that a potential new approach to the solution of implementation problems is to find ways of monitoring the behavior of lower-level actors and being more responsive to local messages towards policies and its implementation.
The natural of policy: A policy is the structure for government actions in attaining certain aims. A tourism policy, therefore, is a structure for government activities in relation to tourism. Tourism policies are created principally as a mechanism of managing the development of the tourism industry. Regulations are similarly needed for legal control over its activities. There are reasons why studying policies is important. As concluded by Hall and Jenkins (1995), it helps in understanding the causes and consequences of policy decisions and of the policy itself. It also helps in ensuring that the right goals will be achieved. It has recently become a very important issue especially for heavily visited destinations or countries, particularly in developing countries, in order to develop policies for the area for managing the disruptive impacts of tourism. Nonetheless, policies are not necessarily put into practice.
It is widely recognized that the achievement of tourism policies requires many components such as qualified personnel, financial resources, local involvement and authorities in charge. In many developing countries, there is highly centralized control. Policies and regulations may be less strictly enforced in remote areas resulting from their long distance from centers of policy-making. It is evident that there is a gap in implementing policies and regulations especially in developing countries where there is poverty, bureaucracy and corruption. The consequences of policies not being well-implemented such as illegal street guides and sex encounters in Yogyakarta, Indonesia; environment degradation; sex tourism; building control leading to its collapse in Patty, Thailand and child prostitution associated with the informal sector of tourist trade as well as the use of child labor in the industry in Sri Lanka (Hall and Page, 2000), can create potential long term problems for the countries either for national health and safety or the economy. The aforementioned examples show a requirement for study, research and understanding of policy-implementation in order to ensure its goals so as to protect the destinations, local communities and the tourists. For such an influential reason, this study intends to explore in-depth insights and potential factors of successful policy-implementation in an area of a developing country with the intention of its application in subsequent studies of other developing countries. Jenkins (1980) suggests seven outstanding factors for developing countries to regard tourism as one of their development strategies. These include income redistribution, freedom from trade restrictions, continuing demand growth, development costs, employment, prestige and finally the wanderlust: defined as the variation of tourist flows over the tourist destinations. In most developing countries, it is the government that has responsibility for its tourism policies and the definitions of regulations over tourism development. However, a free reign to the private sector to develop tourism often exists in practice. It is often believed that business interest groups priorities their business profits more than a long-term sustainability. Strong control from the government is critically necessary for preventing and managing issues such as exploitation, deterioration and destruction over the area.
RESEARCH METHOD
In this research the national policy of Iran on tourism has been considered and a comparative study has been done between pre and post Islamic Revolution (before and after the year 1979). The case study of this research was the Babolsar in the southern coast of the Caspian Sea as important center of ecotourism in Iran.
The hypothesis of the research are as under:
| • | Policy-making on tourism, have been under the influence of ideological views of the government of Iran before the Islamic Revolution and after that and their values were different with each others. |
| • | After the Islamic Revolution the infra-structure of tourism have not changed, but the function of recreative centers have changed. |
| • | After the Islamic Revolution, the pollution of the coasts have been increased information collected by the bibliographic as well as fieldwork methods and the panel technique has been used in the research. The society for the field work selected from the people, who have been in the Babolsar from the past until after the revolution, at least ten year for each period. Therefore these people selected among those who had 30 years old in the time of revolution (1979). According to the census statistics of 1996 such people were 3769 persons. With utilization of Cochran model (Hafeznia, 1996) 360 sample selected by random method and the questionnaires distributed between them. The information of questionnaires analyzed with t.test and chi-square by utilization of SPSS package. |
TOURISM IN IRAN
The Islamic Republic of Iran intends to develop its tourism sector to meet initiative needs and as an effective economic factor in the national economic and social development plan. Tourism offers an opportunity for development not Only through its contribution to the economy, but as a vehicle for bringing about further dialogue among nations and reinforcing the sense of national identity.
The country has great geographical and climatic diversity. Within a few hours, one can travel from deserts to sub-tropical gardens to snowy mountains and from luxuriant forests to areas of extensive cultivation and the warm waters of the coast. A wide selection of natural and scenic attractions exists in all parts of the country.
Iran due to her geographical location and situation has good potentials in ecotourism as well as other kinds of tourism. In the ground of ecotourism and marine tourism attractive shores of the Caspian Sea in the north of the country for summer and shores as well as islands of the Persian Gulf and the coasts of Indian Ocean and Oman Sea in the south of the country for winter are suitable. Moreover the forestry areas in the north, the mountain ranges of Alborz and Zagros and their peaks and slopes, the rivers bank and valley, the great deserts especially Lutt and Namak, the mineral water sites and etc. should be counted as the potential of ecotourism. The other fields of tourism in Iran are historical and cultural potentials. In these ground the ancient traces in Persepolice, Hegmataneh, Sush and the famous cities of Shiraz, Isfahan, Mashhad, Yazd, Tabriz, Hamedan, Kerman, Kermanshah, Bam and others are big potential.
Also Iran has a good potential of religious tourism for pilgrimage in Mashhad, Qom, Shiraz, Ray, Roomier and Yazd. So, on the whole, Iran is a rich country in the world from the tourism point of view.
Tourism could be one of the main sources of development in the country and can utilize for this purpose. Utilization of tourism potentials in Iran have been related to the ideology and policies of the governments. Also there has been differentiation between internal and external tourism.
Before the Islamic Revolution (1979 A.D), there was a secular government in Iran. This government was related to the global capitalism and harmonized with the West and its values. So development of tourism especially for the foreigners, according to the global western values was not problem. Therefore, the tourism programmers and activities were developed and portion of currency revenue from the tourism gradually increased (Table 1).
As the Table 1 shows, the portion of tourism revenue in this period have gradually increased and the average of tourism incomes have been 15.7% in the non-oil exports of Iran. Also during this period some tourist places re-built and re-organized in the shores and islands of Caspian Sea and Persian Gulf such as Babolsar, Kish, etc., as well as in the cultural and historical places such as Isfahan, Shiraz, Hamedan, Percepolis, etc.
After the Islamic Revolution (1979), the government of Iran changed and separated from the USA and the west and a religious independent government came into the power. The ideology of the government and the policies were different with the past Regime (Shah Regime). In new government with the Islamic identity, the Islamic values appointed as the basis for setup the law and regulations in the society of Iran. In the articles No. 2, 4, 72 and 94 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran emphasized on this matter (Amin, 2001). This means that the tourism policies and its activities should be according to the Islamic laws, values and regulations.
For example in Islam covering the hair of the head and the body by women, in the society is necessary (Ayatollah Khomeini, 1986), or drinking of wine (alcoholic) is forbidden (Ibid) and some kinds of music and dance by women and sexual relations out of marriage are prohibited. Therefore some tourists from aboard encounter with such problems and restrictions.
On the other hand, there was a political factor for limitation of tourist attraction from aboard. Because in the political culture of the Iranian society, many people have a negative view to the foreigners (Fuller, 1994) specially from Europe, America, Russia, etc. which many tourists were coming from there. In Iran it is a culture or belief among people and state crafts, that they can not confident to the foreigners especially from the countries which have been as a colonialist or imperialist. Many people in Iran think that such countries (USA, UK, USSR and some European states) have threatened their independence during last two or three centuries (Hafeznia, 2003). The third factor which affected on the process of tourist attraction was the war between Iran and Iraq (1980-1988). This factor caused an insecure environment in Iran and made prevention to attraction of the tourist industry declined dramatically during the war with Iraq in the 1980s but has subsequently revived. The majority of the 300,000 tourist visas granted in 2003 were obtained by Asian Muslims, who presumably intended to visit important pilgrimage sites in Mashhad and Qom. About 1,659,000 foreign tourists visited Iran in 2004; most came from Asian countries, including the republics of Central Asia, while a small share came from the countries of the European Union and North America. Several organized tours from Germany, France and other European countries come to Iran annually to visit archaeological sites and monuments.
| Table 1: | Percentage of currency revenue from tourism in the non-oil export of Iran during 1966-1978 |
| Source: Sarlak, 1997 | |
| Table 2: | Percentage of the currency revenue from tourism in the Non-oil exports of Iran during 1979-1988 |
| Source: Sarlak: 1997 | |
The government reported that in 2004 some 4 million tourists, including over 2 million Iranians on vacation, spent nearly US$2 billion in Iran, an increase of 10% over 2003. However, in the early 2000s the industry still faced serious limitations in infrastructure, communications, regulatory norms and personnel training.
Iran currently ranks 68th in tourism revenues worldwide. Iran with attractive natural and historical sites is rated among the 10 most touristic countries in the world. Close to 1.8% of national employment is generated in the tourism sector which is slated to increase to 10% in the next five years. Iranian hospitality is one of the unique and distinctive features of its people.
Therefore three factors, namely religious and political culture and security influenced on the view and policies of the government about tourism after the Islamic revolution. These factors caused less attention to the attraction of tourists from abroad, so the portion of the currency revenue of tourism decreased in the non-oil export of the country (Table 2).
As the Table 2 shows, the average tourism incomes during this period has been 6.8%, which in comparative to 15.7% related to the past decade is more less.
Such decreasing might be due to the changing in the governmental ideology and policies about tourism.
The main elements of this ideology were: Islamic religious tendency, anti-super powers and anti-imperialism, anti western values. All were opposite to the policy of foreign tourist development.
After 1988 some events happened in Iran. The war came into the end, Ayatollah Khomeini as the founder and the leader of the Islamic revolution as well as the great religious leader dead, the constitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran amended, the new presidential elections taken place and Hashemi Rafsanjani as a powerful clergyman and politician came as the president of the state, the first five year plan of the country (1989-1993) prepared and approved by the parliament, many economical and social problems in the society from the last decade came arise, for example the population growth was in high rate -3.2% in 1986 (Hafeznia, 2000b), the construction idea of the country was formed and leadership of the state designated the strategy and policies of such construction. All these events caused a new approach to the development and administration of the society. So some attitudes in religious beliefs changed and some policies adopted for purpose of adaptation to new situation of the Iranian society and the world circumstances. Under the new conditions, the view about tourism to some extent changed and came better than the last decade.
Under this new condition The Islamic Republic of Iran plans to develop both domestic and international tourism. Part of the intended strategy for developing and expanding tourism potential includes:
| • | Revival, strengthening and introduction of historical, cultural and natural zones and centers of attraction in line with national land-use policies. |
| • | The planning and development of particular areas and projects (including land-use planning and the designation of zones and land Reserves). |
| • | Development of suitable conditions for promoting national and international tourism in order to create more job opportunities. |
| • | The development of access to the country and the easing of entry/visa requirements and processing. |
| • | Marketing activities aimed at boasting the country’s share of number of tourists and tourism income, emphasizing Islamic countries and the Silk Road. |
| • | Development of an advocacy and marketing programme to present the correct image of the Islamic Republic of Iran in relation to the tourism industry. |
| • | The formulation and implementation of comprehensive human resources development strategies. |
| • | Development and expansion of training, research and planning programme to expand the tourism sector according to international standards. |
| • | The qualitative promotion of human resources and tourism services in line with international standards. |
| • | Enhancement of privatization and cooperative activities in the development of the tourism industry (public-private partnership projects). |
| • | Strengthening planning, policy-making and supervision of the tourism industry through ITTO. |
| • | Preparation of a tourism master plan with collaboration from UNDP and the World Tourism Organization. |
Cultural heritage is one of the main tourist attractions in the Islamic republic of Iran. Therefore, enhancement of the cultural tourism experience is among the priorities of the government strategy.
| Fig. 1: | Comparison currency revenue from tourism between two periods (1969-1978) and (1979-1988) |
| Table 3: | Comparison between the periods on the No. of tourists and tourism revenue |
| Source: Iran Statistical Yearbook 2002, 2003, Mahallati, 2001 | |
| Table 4: | Comparison of tourism situation between pre and post Islamic Revolution of Iran |
The effects of such changes reflected on the number of foreign tourists who came to Iran, as well as on the currency revenue from the tourism section (Table 3 and Fig. 1).
As shown in Table 2, at the first period (before the Islamic Revolution) the level of revenue and number of tourists were high, but during the second period this level came down. With changing the conditions in Iran after one decade of the revolution, the situation of tourism became better and this trend continued up to now. But the point is this that, the situation of tourism especially foreign tourism not suitable to the potentials of tourism in Iran. Because those factors which mentioned above to some extent not completely according to the development of tourism. In other words the religious atmosphere and beliefs of the majority of the Iranian society as well as the formal Islamic laws and regulations of the government no permit to development of tourism patterns which are being seen on other countries especially on the shores and beeches. In Iran, there is a special pattern of tourism which is according to the Islamic values and laws. In this pattern the tourists, external or internal, (foreigners and Iranians) must observe the Islamic regulations. For example the ladies must cover their hairs and bodies and all tourists no permitted drink wine during they stay in Iran. Also in the shores and beeches, there are the separate site and places for men and women (Eshaqi and Sheedfar, 2000). The women can enjoy from the beech and shore of the see in the special places and so on. The Islamic pattern of tourism differs with the current pattern of tourism in other part of the world especially in the pattern of marine tourism.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
On the basis of hypotheses, a questionnaire was made and distributed between the sample. Data which obtained from the sample are as under:
As the Table 5 and 6 show, 317 persons (88.06%) from the sample believe that, the attitude on tourism after the revolution changed and the majority of them believe that the ideological difference and changing in values after the revolution have been effective on tourism policy making.
| Table 5: | Q1: Are you feeling a different attitude between pre and post Islamic revolution on tourism policies? |
| Table 6: | Q2: If yes, what are the effective factors? |
| Table 7: | Q 3: How were the effects of policy making of tourism on the coastal recreative and spatial institutions in pre and post Islamic revolution? |
| Table 8: | Q4: What are the effects of policies and programmers of tourism on the pollution of the coasts? |
| Table 9: | Relation of variables of tourist institutions between pre and post 1979 (quantitative) |
| A = More before the Islamic Revolution; B = More after the Islamic Revolution | |
The information of this table shows that the majority of the sample has been in belief that the quality of the institutions and services of tourism have become better than the past (Table 7).
Results of the questionnaires show that the majority of the sample have been in belief that pollution of the coasts and adjacent waters have become more than the past (Table 8).
As it has previously been mentioned, before the Islamic Revolution (1979) there was a secular government in Iran. So the tourism programmers and activities were developed and portion of currency revenue from the tourism gradually increased. After the Islamic Revolution, the government of Iran changed and a religious independent government came into the power. The ideology of the government and the policies were not according to the tourism pattern in the past government. So these factors along with the others, caused less attention to the foreign tourists and the portion of the currency revenue from tourism decreased.
Results from the field also confirm this that there is a difference between the attitude and view of the governments of pre and post Islamic Revolution on tourism, as the 62.47% of the sample have been in belief that, different ideology and values between the two governments, have produced the two different pattern of tourism in Iran as well as in the case of Babolsar on the coast of Caspian Sea.
Data from the field studies show that the variables related to the tourist institutions, from the qualitative and quantitative point of view have become more and better than the past. The statistical tests show there is no any relation between the event of Islamic Revolution and the reduction of tourist institution, but on the contrary such institutions increased for the domestic tourism, because the ideology of the Islamic government was agree with the development of domestic tourism on according to the Islamic values such as covering the hair of head by the ladies and separating the men and women from each other in the coasts and swimming places. Table 9 and 10 explain such relation.
Since p-value is less than 0.05, so (A) and (B) are not equivalent and there is a significant difference between them.
| Table 10: | Relation of variables of tourist institutions between pre and post 1979 (qualitative) |
| A = More before the Islamic revolution; B = More after the Islamic revolution | |
| Table 11: | Significant tests of the variables of pollution in pre and post 1979 |
| A = More before 1979; B = More after 1979 | |
Since p-value is less than 0.05, so (A) and (B) are not equivalent and there is significance between them.
About the pollution of the coasts and adjacent waters in the sea, field studies show that pollution has increased.
The statistical tests show that there is a difference between the situation of variables in pre and post 1979 and the pollution in the coasts have increased than the past (Table 11).
Significant tests of the variables of pollution in pre and post 1979.
Since p-value is less than 0.05, so the hypothesis of equivalence for A and B is failed.
CONCLUSIONS
Iran has big potentials for tourism, especially marine tourism in the north as well as south of the country (Caspian Sea and Persian Gulf, etc.).
Policy making on tourism section in Iran has been under the influence of governmental ideology. Before the revolution, government of Iran was secular and pro-western. So the policy of government was development of tourism especially for foreigners. After the revolution (1979) the government changed and its ideology was Islamic as well as anti-western. So the new government did not have a policy for development of tourism up to the first decade after revolution (1988). At that time a chain of political, social and economic events, caused a turning in the view of the government. Then tourism considered as a section for development, but a new pattern of tourism created, which in it normal tourism combined with the Islamic values. This event to some extent had a positive role on the development of the internal tourism. But the foreign tourists, who came to Iran, were mostly from the neighbor countries and were pilgrims (religious tourism). The portion of tourism in non-oil exports and also the ratio of tourism revenue to population before the revolution have been more than the first decade of after revolution.
The results of the case study (Babolsar) show, due to the expansion of internal and domestic tourism specially in the coasts of the Caspian Sea, the spatial features, institutions and economic activities related to the tourism have been better and increased after the revolution (especially in the recent decade), but the pollution of the shores and coastal environments have been increased than the past. This shows that the management and planning in the shores have not been good.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authors are grateful for the research grant support provided by the Tarbiat Modarres University, Tehran.