Responses to tourism development and governance in a core-periphery context.

This study examines responses to the development and governance of tourism on a small peripheral island. The Mediterranean island of Gozo, the second largest of the Maltese islands, is used as a case study. Responses are evaluated for three groups of respondents: the residents of Gozo, specific tourism-related actors in Gozo, and for specific tourism-related actors from the neighbouring main island of Malta. Malta is situated on the southern periphery of Europe and although a member of the European Union it remains on the socio-economic and political margins. Gozo is both geographically and economically peripheral to Malta. This puts Gozo on the periphery of the periphery, and thus it faces especially difficult core-periphery relations.Using interviews and other sources the study examines opinions about the processes of tourism development for the peripheral island of Gozo. Consideration is given to views about whether the processes of tourism development and tourism governance meet the needs of residents and specific tourism-related actors in Gozo. Attention is also paid to opinions about the most appropriate future development path for the island. Further, the differing perspectives between the residents and actors at the core and the periphery are evaluated. Core-periphery theory provides a geographical framework to understand disparities in power and development levels, and all these issues are evaluated in the context of core-periphery relations, and in the context of Gozo's internal and external networks of socio-economic and political relations, with some of these relations being largely local to the island and with others, by contrast, being with the main island of Malta and also further afield. Many dependency and core-periphery theorists have argued that peripheral islands will inevitably be dependent on their respective cores for economic and political support. This study revealed instances which both support and challenge some of these assumptions. In terms of formal political power, control over Gozo's tourism development clearly lies at the core, primarily with the government but also with the Malta Tourist Authority and Malta Environment and Planning Authority. However, analysis at the micro-level also reveals several instances where Gozitans have shown they have the potential to influence decisionsat the core, albeit through indirect and informal channels. These results challenge the dependency theorists' common portrayal of a subordinate island that is controlled and manipulated by its core, and instead highlight the potential power of local level actors in creating 'room for manoeuvre' in tourism development arenas.