Festival and Events Management

Ian Yeoman, Martin Robertson, Jane Ali-Knight, Siobhan Drummond, Una McMahon-Beattie, Ian Yeoman, Martin Robertson, Jane Ali-Knight, Siobhan Drummond, Una McMahon-Beattie

• Verlag: Routledge
• Jahr: 2012
• ISBN:
  9781136403460
• Auflage: 1
• Thema: Business
• Thema: Hospitality, Travel & Tourism Industry

Festival and Events Management: an international perspective is a unique text looking at the central role of events management in the cultural, tourism and arts industries. With international contributions from industry and academia, the text looks at the following:
* Events & cultural environments
* Managing the arts & leisure experience
* Marketing, policies and strategies of art and leisure management Chapters include exercises, and additional teaching materials and solutions to questions are provided as part of an accompanying online resource.

Part E Case studies and contemporary issues of arts and leisure festivals and events

DOI: 10.4324/9780080477701-24

20 Attitudes of visitors and residents to the impacts of the 2001 Sidmouth International Festival

Peter Mason and John Beaumont-Kerridge

DOI: 10.4324/9780080477701-25

Introduction

This chapter is based on research investigating the attitudes of visitors and residents to the impacts of the 2001 Sidmouth International Festival. According to the organizers, the Festival is the largest folklore festival of its kind in Europe (S. Heap, pers. comm., 2001). The Festival takes place during the second week of August, and in excess of 60 000 domestic and international visitors come to the small coastal resort in Devon, in South West England, which has a resident population of only 12 000 (S. Heap, pers. comm., 2001). The Festival has been held annually since 1955, but in its early days was small scale and locally oriented in terms of performers and audience. However, by the late 1960s it was a major folk festival in the UK and, since the mid-1970s, has provided visitors with an opportunity to watch internationally renowned folk singers and musicians. Traditional dance troupes from the UK, Europe, Africa, Asia and the Pacific Region have helped give the Festival its international dimension. Unlike many similar events, the Festival is dispersed around Sidmouth itself, in a wide variety of venues, including cinemas, theatres, clubs, public houses and church halls as well as in specially erected marquees. Originally organized by the English Folk Dance and Song Society (EFDSS), by the 1990s it was run by an organization that specializes in music events called Mrs Casey’s Music. Although the Festival has been in existence for almost half a century, no research relating to tourism themes has been published.

The research discussed here took place in August 2001 during the Festival itself and later in October 2001. At the Festival, a questionnaire survey was distributed to 490 visitors and, using closed, Likert-scale, and also open-ended questions, gathered demographic data and asked views on the impacts of the Festival. A total of 411 returned questionnaires were usable (representing a response rate of 84%). Focus group interviews were conducted with Sidmouth residents during the Festival and in October and these investigated local views on the Festival.

Research on the Impacts of Festivals

Economic Impacts

The majority of research in tourism, in general, has been concerned with impacts and most of this has focused on economic impacts (Pearce, 1989; Mason, 1995). In terms of research into festivals, assessing economic impact has been a very significant element of all research in the field (Getz, 1997). Hall (1992) argued that, in fact, this has been the single most researched area in event tourism. Economic impact research at festivals has investigated such aspects as the amount of money injected into the local economy, examined various economic multipliers and considered the extent and nature of job creation (Getz, 1997; Hall, 1992).

Nevertheless, Getz (1997) and Crompton and McKay (1994) have indicated that there are problems with these approaches, particularly when calculating multipliers. A key issue is attempting to assess the direct contribution of the event or festival and separating this effect from others in a particular location. Daily spend on accommodation, food and drink and entertainment can be measured in an attempt to ascertain the contribution to the local economy and this approach can help overcome the limitations of the more traditional approach of trying to determine tourism multipliers within aggregated data (Getz, 1997).

Festival impact research has often been driven by the need to discern the economic gain to the venue hosting the event (Getz, 1997). Such research may be an attempt to lend support to existing policy statements on tourism development or to assist in the creation of new policy. As Hall (1992) indicated, events tend to be seen positively by government and industry, not only because of their perceived economic impacts, but also because of their commercial and promotional benefits.

Largely as a result of the perception that they bring economic gain to the hosting venue, festivals and events are often viewed in a positive light by governments and other bodies (Hall, 1992). Festivals and events are also seen as beneficial because they are viewed as adding to the status of the location in which they take place (Select Committee on Culture, Media and Sport, 1999; Getz, 1997). There is certainly some research evidence to support both the contention that events bring economic benefits and can enhance the status of the hosting location (Bowdin et al., 2001; Lilley and DeFranco, 1999; Policy Studies Institute, 1992).

Reference to the concept of ‘positive impacts’ indicates that it is customary to subdivide tourism impacts under two headings: positive and negative (Bowdin et al., 2001; Mathieson and Wall, 1982; Mason, 1995). In relation to events, Bowdin et al. (2001) grouped positive and negative impacts into subgroups with the following subheadings: social and cultural, physical, political and economic. Hall (1992) provides a similar classification of the impacts of events. Bowdin et al.’s (2001) classification of the impacts of events is shown in Table 20.1.

Table 20.1 The impacts of events

Sphere of event	Positive impacts	Negative impacts
Social and cultural	Shared experience Revitalizing traditions	Community alienation Manipulation of community
	Building community pride	Negative community image
	Validation of community groups	Bad behaviour
	Increased community participation	Substance abuse
	Introducing new and challenging ideas	Social dislocation
	Expanding cultural perspectives	Loss of amenity
Physical and environmental	Showcasing the environment	Environmental damage
	Providing models for best practice	Pollution
	Increasing environmental awareness	Destruction for heritage
	Infrastructure legacy	Noise distribution
	Improved transport and communications	Traffic congestion
	Urban transformation and renewal
Political	International prestige	Risk of even failure
	Improved profile	Misallocation of funds
	Promotion of investment	Lack of accountability
	Social cohesion	Propagandizing
	Development of administrative skills	Loss of community ownership and control Legitimation of ideology
Tourism and economic	Destinational promotion and increased tourist visits	Community resistance to tourism
	Extended length of stay	Loss of authenticity
	Higher yield	Damage of reputation
	Increased tax revenue	Exploitation
	Job creation	Inflated prices Opportunity costs
Source: adapted from Hall, 1989 (Bowdin etal., 2001).

Although much research into festivals has investigated supposed economic gain, it is not clear that festivals and events bring the major benefits that are desired (Hall, 1992; Crompton and McKay, 1994) and the intended economic gain may not be as large as expected. One significant reason is that locals often make up a significant proportion of a festival audience (Crompton and McKay, 1994; Getz, 1997). Events also have costs (Wang and Gitelson, 1988) and these are likely to include, for example, pre-event promotion and marketing, as well as policing during the festival and clearing up afterwards.

Crompton and McKay (1994) indicated that there is such a strong belief that festivals bring economic benefits, they felt the need to challenge this conventional wisdom. They discussed what they regard as a number of myths about festival impacts and particularly the economic impacts. They suggested that of the seven myths they propose, three of these are concerned with the supposed economic benefits and another is about employment creation. They argued that an important myth is that festivals create economic benefits. Although this may be partially true, Crompton and McKay claimed that as local people make up a relatively large proportion of any festival visitors, the impact on the local economy is proportionally smaller than if all visitors were non-local. Crompton and McKay’s second economic myth relates to the fact that, often, festival organizers derive a good deal of their funding from sponsors. In their efforts to obtain financial support from the sponsors, organizers tend to inadvertently overestimate the economic value of the impacts of the festival. A third myth, Crompton and McKay argued, refers to the issue that such is the pressure on festival organizers that they may deliberately insist that the festival makes money when it does not. Organizers also may claim that the event creates jobs in the local economy, but as Crompton and McKay argued, many of these jobs will be given to those from beyond the local area.

Sociocultural Impacts

Although there is some doubt about the supposed economic gain, most research focusing on events until very recently has concentrated almost exclusively on economic impacts (Hall, 1992). Hence, the majority of festival research has tended to ignore or at least play down the other impacts that can be classified under the headings of environmental, sociocultural or political (see Table 20.1). This may be the result of the research being commissioned by festival organizers or councils and requiring a particular focus on economic aspects. Sociocultural impacts are also less easy to quantify than economic impacts (Mason and Cheyne, 2000). It is also likely that research concerned with sociocultural effects may produce results that are less politically palatable than research on economic aspects. This may be true, particularly if what might be regarded as negative consequences, such as increases in crime or conflict between locals and visitors, are seen to outweigh the perceived economic gains. However, as Craik (1988) argued, it is the social effects of events and not the economic that are probably more important. Craik made this claim when referring specifically to the need for local community members to take a positive view of the festival or event in their locale. Without this, she contended, the festival was likely to be unsuccessful. Hall (1992) also claimed that the relationship between the host community and the event is vital for the event to be a success and this point is discussed in more detail below.

A major reason that sociocultural impacts of festivals have tended not to be the focus of research is that th...