Sustainable tourism development and planning

Individual Critical Analysis.
This assignment requires students to analyse and critically evaluate theories of tourism development and/or sustainable tourism by providing a synopsis of a key academic paper.

Learning Outcomes evidenced by this assignment:

1. Demonstrate appropriate knowledge and critical understanding of the major theoretical and conceptual debates and ideas related to tourism development and sustainability; and their relationship.

2. Identify and critically discuss the major economic, political and environmental forces shaping tourism development in a number of destinations.

Assignment Instructions
Based on your reading of the following paper, Britton, S.G. (1982) The political economy of tourism in the third world, Annals of Tourism Research, 9(3): 331-58, please provide a brief summary and analysis of the main characteristics of dependency and underdevelopment theory as they relate to tourism.

In your answer you should pay particular attention to the strengths and weaknesses of this approach together with an assessment of its continued validity for our understanding of third world tourism development.
Structure
You have been asked to produce a short reflective analysis of an academic paper. In your critical review you should consider the following:

A brief outline of the main theoretical assumptions on which dependency and underdevelopment theory are grounded
Outline the key concepts developed in the work and how these have been applied to the analysis and understanding of tourism in developing and emerging economies.
To compare and contrast with the work of others who have adopted both similar and distinctive theoretical perspectives, highlighting key areas of agreement and disagreement.
A clear indication of its applicability and relevance to a particular context (in addition to the areas mentioned in the paper).
Presentation
Your work should be word processed in accordance with the following:
Font size 12
1.5 line spacing.
The page orientation should be portrait
Margins on both sides of the page should be no less than 2.5 cm
Pages should be numbered
Your name should not appear on the script.
Your student number should be included on every page.

Referencing
Students should use Harvard referencing as specified in Cite them Right. Refer to

Word Count
You should provide your word count at the end of your report (excl. your abstract, contents, reference list or appendices). Exceeding the word count by more than 10% will result in a penalty of 10%. If your work is significantly shorter, it is likely that you will have failed to provide the required level of detail.
Detailed Assessment Criteria:

Criteria Weighting (%)
Accuracy and Grasp of the Paper: does the analysis present a coherent and accurate synopsis of the main arguments and ideas presented in the paper? 30
Quality of the Analysis: does the analysis provide evidence of independent thought and critical thinking? 20
Quality of Academic Writing: is the writing clear and grammatically correct? Is the text well-organised and coherent? 20
Research: does the analysis highlight particular areas of agreement/disagreement with the work of others? 20
Bibliography and references: Is the paper properly and accurately referenced? 5
Formatting and presentation 5
TOTAL 100%
?
General Grading Criteria Used To Assess Work

Sustainable tourism development and planning

Undergraduate Programmes:

General guidelines for standards expected at different levels of study.
Grade Level 1 Level 2 Level 3
First
(70% or above) Thorough understanding of relevant ideas. Clear and well referenced argument. Coherent structure. Ideas critically analysed. Argument is clear, succinct and well supported. Evidence of a wide range of reading and some independent thought. Critical work evidencing excellent synthesis and application of ideas. Work is exceptionally well constructed and presented.
Upper Second
(60-69%) Sound understanding. Well written and relevant argument. Appropriately referenced. Critical consideration of relevant ideas. Arguments are precisely defined and appropriately referenced. The work is structurally sound and well written. Ideas are critically applied and coherently presented. Evidence of wide reading and some originality. Well referenced
Lower Second
(50-59%) Evidence of understanding and independent reading. Adequate referencing, but some unsubstantiated material. Weaknesses in spelling, structure & grammar. Reasonable understanding of the relevant concepts, but some inconsistencies in application. Arguments are referenced, but disjointed. Poor structure, spelling or grammar. Clear grasp of concepts and some critical application. Appropriately referenced and relevant argument. Reasonable structure and syntax. Well presented
Third
(40-49%) Indication of some understanding, but poor application of ideas. Minimal referencing. Generally weak structure. Generally descriptive work with limited evidence of a critical consideration of ideas. Inadequate referencing. Weaknesses in structure, spelling and grammar. Evidence of good understanding of issues, but crudely applied. Work indicates some critical thinking, but tends towards description. Argument may be unbalanced. Poor structure and presentation
Fail
(below 40%) Irrelevant or poorly analysed material. Indication of weak grasp of concepts. Inadequate structure. Poor grammar and spelling. Uncritical. Poorly referenced. Argument indicates little use of relevant literature. Chaotic structure and generally badly written. Poorly referenced and suggests inadequate exploration of relevant literature. Chaotic structure and generally badly written.
Currently 1 writers are viewing this order