Second home owners in Tūja village

Transcription

1 NordPlus 2014 intensive course Second home owners in Tūja village Case study report Authors: Elza Žumbure Szabina Laskai Ronny Giambelluca Parnu, 2014

2 Table of contents Introduction (Elza) Executive summary - Tūja village (Elza) Theory that is relevant (Szabina & Ronny) Sources and methods of analysis and their weaknesses (Elza) Methods Weaknesses Analysis of the interviews Society groups (Elza) Economic situation Tūja village linked with the second home owners and tourists (Elza) The utilization of places in Tuja (Szabina & Ronny) Psychology of the community members (Szabina & Ronny) Conclusion (Elza) Appendix Bibliography

3 Introduction Nowadays there are many territories and houses that are used by owners seasonally. The definition second - house is a term that makes an important role in many settlements. The term second house in Oxford dictionary is explained as a house where people stay during the good weather not all year long. Also as one Swedish geographer explains, the second homes are non - mobile, privately owned single family dwellings for secondary use (Marjavaara, 2008). Nowadays in Latvia, there are many areas, where people own summer houses and many areas where the amount of summer house owners makes a big percentage of the population. This is an important figure in the place development. And as one of the best examples in Latvia is Tūja village. Tūja is one of the most famous beach places/resorts in Vidzeme region where people tend to go. There isn`t a precise amount of people who visit Tūja every summer, but the number of people is so big, that Tūja needs to improve its infrastructure (roads, tourism information center and so on). In Tūja village most of the population lives seasonally and also Tūja is just a famous place among holidaymakers from all over the world and also famous for called `second home tourism` (Rozīte et.al, 2011.) The aim of this report is to find out the number of second house owners and what are the impacts for the local citizens in the area. Due to that the main question in this research in Tūja village is What are the relationships between the local people who live in Tūja and the visitors, like second home owners and tourists? There are many ways how to look to this topic but mostly it is important to see the amount of permanent residents and the summer house owners. So afterwards we can analyze the economical situation, the infrastructure and relationships among residents in Tūja. This goal will be achieved with the help of the local people during the field course in Tūja village in May The issue is an important topic in every municipality, because tourists make a big impact on country economy and the local governments (Cohen, 2008). Impact is positive as well as negative and can have simultaneously different impact on its stakeholders (Hall, 2009). The negative impacts are that it can affect the nature as biodiversity changes, pollution increase (noise, air, water) or it can affect just society, its groups (Williams, 2009). It can affect society positive by changing the lifestyle of 3

4 permanent residents, or more important, it can improve the demographic changes in the area. As Tūja is a tourism place for its beach, the summer house residents make a big impact of the village, so we can call it as second home tourism. As both tourists as well as inhabitants use one and the same resources for recreation, it is not possible to ignore the pressure and impact created by recreation while analyzing tourism pressure (Hall, 2006). 4

5 1. Executive summary - Tūja village Tūja village is situated in the Salacgrīva county and Liepupe parish. Salacgrīva County is located in the NE part of Latvia next to the Gulf of Riga. Salacgrīva County is the border area between Latvia and Estonia. It is the 35 county by the area (637 km 2 ) and 39 by the population (9408 people) in Latvia in year 2013 (Central Statistic Database, 2013). The counties border has been changed during the land reforms in Latvia in 2008, when Limbažu district, Salacgrīva city and its rural area, Ainažu city and its rural area and Liepupe parish were united. In Salacgrīva County there are 2 cities - Salacgrīva, which is the center of the county, and Ainaži, the biggest villages: Liepupe, Svētciems, Jelgavkrasti, Tūja and others (Picture 1). Picture Nr. 1, Salacgrīva County territory (Made by author, E.Žumbure, 2014). 5

6 The `village` status Tūja got in 2000, by Latvian laws village defines as a rural residential inhabited area where the distance between the buildings is not more than 200 meters. In the area should have been united also the socially and economically important buildings if they are not further than 500 m of the other ones (churches, schools, hospitals etc.) (Turlajs, 1998). Tūja village is located in the South par of Salacgrīva County. Its area is 1,32 km 2 and the population based on the registration data in 2013 is 323 (Krūze, 2013), in 1998 there were 388 residents, residents, , so the number of people has increased because most of the youngsters moved to Riga and also people who were unemployed travelled abroad (Telpiskās attīstības plāns, 2008.) (Table 1). Table Nr. 1. Number of inhabitants in Tūja (Telpiskās attīstības plāns, 2008). Tūja village population is seasonal, during winter time the number of people who live there permanently may decrease till 150 (Krūze, 2013). In Tūja village there is no register with official data by nationalities, although according to the data collection during the field course, it was said that in Tūja there are Russian and Latvian speaking persons, but due to that there are no arguments. Public transportation system in Tūja village is poor. Tūja village is only linked with the biggest cities in the county and also with the capital city of Latvia - Riga only 6

7 by the bus. The main directions are connected with the highways A1 Riga- Ainaži and P11 Kocēni- Limbaži- Tūja. The bus time table shows that to Riga there are 4 buses to Riga during a day, 3 buses to Saulkrasti, 3 buses to Limbaži, and 3 to Valmiera and 1 to Salacgrīva. There are some buses that drives on the highway Via Baltica, but doesn`t drive into the village, so the locals need to walk for more than 2 km to the village centre. The main facilities in Tūja are: library, which works as a social place for the permanent residents and second home owners; two food shops- Latvian companies were in total 6 people employed together; cafe - owned by the local people; 1 hotel Jafa Hotel ; 2 camp sites - Jūrasdzeņi and Krimalnieki ; bakery Tūjas bakery, that deliver fresh bread to the local shops; Pharmacy. The history of Tūja village is linked with the spatial planning nowadays (Picture 2). Tūja village started as a fisherman cottage area, when houses were built next to the sea coast line. In the year 1930 the mole in the sea was built, so more fisherman s started to build their houses in village. The export to Riga city by the ship increased the bacon and butter where the main exported goods. During the economical development of the area in the 1963, when brick factory was made, the city expanded (Telpiskās attīstības plāns, 2008). The housing moved more into the inland. Two storied, typical cooperative houses were built. Nowadays, the factory territory is a brownfield area that is owned by private company and not interested in development of the area. Village is separated in the North part and South part because of the river that flows through the city. Nowadays the borders of the village can be seen not only on the map but also in the nature. Forests are the outside border of the village that you can understand it easily where the village ends. Another important fact is that Tūja village area, that the same as Salacgrīva County, Tūja is located in the North Vidzeme Biosphere reserve. North Vidzeme 7

8 Biosphere Reserve comprises 53 km of the coastline of the Gulf of Riga and borders to the north the frontier with Estonia. It covers 474,447 hectares corresponding to the catchment basins of the Salaca, Svetupe and Vitrupe Rivers (North Vidzeme, 2012). It is a vast territory in which nature and landscape treasures of international significance are being preserved, ensuring sustainable social and economic development and because of the some restrictions are made in the area. 8

9 2. Theory that is relevant There are 5 studies we chose they are strongly related to our research question. The first is a lecture in Nordplus Programme held by Kjartansdóttir (2014), she argues that place have important role for community, it creates community and the community create the place itself. Interactions (experiences and relations) are placed (e.g. in the streets, shops), and therefore we can examine these places by specific features such as sociability, comfort and image etc. For us sociability of the community members is essential in this research. Higher level of sociability refers to more intense community-making, so place-making by community as well. It means more complex social networks, higher level of volunteerism in any kinds of activities for common goals and other quantitative measurements. The qualitative part of this figure (cooperative, diverse etc) can be used for this research as well as some quantitative points to articulate sociability which contributes to higher level of community participation (Picture Nr.2. ). Picture Nr.2. Peopling Places (Kjartansdóttir, 2014) 9

10 Matarrita-Cascante et al. (2006) studied community participation among seasonal and permanent residents in southern Utah, focusing on the relationship with community level indicators. According to their study, local inhabitants and extensive in-migrants have different socio/economic status, lifestyles, values or other features which might lead to social conflict by creating barriers (deficiencies in resources, for example, dissatisfaction with inadequate infrastructure in the form of channels for collective action) to communication and community interaction. This affects the participation in community affairs which is important aspect in local community development which focuses on enhancing the quality of life of the community (socially, economically, culturally, spiritually and ecologically), based on local participation. Differencies among seasonal and permanent residents influence social interaction (expressing interests), interactions redefine and articulate relationships between community members. It is not static, this ongoing process is the social field, and community field is broader (covering some social fields) and is consequence and cause of community actions. Community participation is a form of community action, including involvement in local clubs, civic groups, and projects that address specific community problems. Improved community participation results in improved community living conditions. There are relationships between community attachment, community satisfaction and social interaction. Although, community attachment is tied to an emotional state and indicates a sense of rootedness to a specific place, community satisfaction implies an evaluative judgment of achievements and aspirations. According to the systemic model, longer-term involvement with community, higher social standing as well as increased age help the emergence of local sentiment for the community. This community attachment consists of three dimensions: community involvement, amity (interpersonal relations, social networks, social ties, and/or social bonding), and sentiments (socio-psychological variables that examine feelings about one s community). We highlight these 3 dimensions in this case study. Satisfaction with an area refers to values for meeting needs (e.g. shelter, safety). It contributes more to power distribution, participation, neighborhood control, and conflicts and so on than economic factors. As we mentioned, the approach of social psychology is useful for our case study. It helps to understand the meaning of places among seasonal homeowners. This is based on deep emotional attachments and bonds to specific places. There are 2 10

11 meanings in common: place of escape more likely for seasonal residents and social/home place for permanent and seasonal residents who stay for longer time. This suggests a better understanding in relationships between the meanings of home and escape, how people explain (e.g. by seeking refuge in nature for escaping modernity it is like an oasis from normal everyday life) and account for their actions and evaluations (e.g. more concerned about nature and damage of their home in their absence, adjusting their life to more natural rhythms) which might lead conflicts, linked to land ownership and lack of involvement in local management decisions (Van Patten & Williams 2008). One of the articles we chose outlines some important points linked to distinctive usage of rural landscape which is influenced by these different values, attitudes and interests of permanent and non-permanent residents (Kati Pitkänen et al. 2014). According to Kati Pitkänen et al (2014), rural communities consist of different kinds of dwellers; therefore, they use rural landscapes for different purposes. These purposes can be related to quality of life, recreation, escapism and proximity of nature. This study sets out more than 2 categories as there are different valuations of different leisure activities among local inhabitants and second home owners, thus second home owners can become real locals, having the same or similar values, interests and attitudes as locals, interacting with them. To examine the relationships of people and groups of people in Tūja, we need to regard shared ways of their life, interests and activities they do there which are important in the construction of local and rural community. Permanent residents make a living there, meanwhile second home owners might have relationship with the place not for only recreation; they might use their homes as permanent residence. They argue that second home owners are like investors of the place, having a property there and they often have interest in community-making, described them as between locals and tourists. Leisure activities might be the same for permanent residents as well as for second home owners, thus, many permanent residents might be no longer involved with rural production where they use the rural space for dwelling and recreation. Locals are attached more to the community, the second home owners place attachment links to the meanings of environmental quality and escape from everyday life. They are not socially isolated, but might have smaller social networks. Motives of second home owners are often inversion (contrast to everyday routine, stress and obligations) and 11

12 the move back to nature (contact with natural environment and a retreat to a simpler life) for recreational activities, work and passive ways of spending time. 3 styles of vacationing exist at second homes: navigating, inhabiting and drifting. Pitkänen (2008) distinguishes three categories: holiday activities (consumptive and nonconsumptive), creative work and relaxation (for rest and escape). In general, the differences between seasonal and permanent populations are smaller than we imagined (Pitkanen et.al, 2014). By using these theories, we aim to answer to the following research question as it was mentioned in the introduction, and mostly to understand the relationships in different terms, we made subquestions. One of them is to examine the sociability of community members, especially permanent residents and second home owners. In other words, are there any differences between permanent and seasonal residents in community participation? What kind of social ties and contacts are perceived between them? Is there any conflict which disables community attachment? The other focus is on the usage of places affected by interests, values and attitudes toward the landscape. These are influenced by their backgrounds (e.g. social status, sources of livelihood and lifestyles). Is there any connection between their social status, motivation and the mode and place of utilization of rural places? How can we categorize these community members? In the following chapters, we try to find out the answers for better understanding of second home tourism in Tūja. 12

13 3. Sources and methods of analysis and their weaknesses In geography researches, where case studies are involved, it is important to use either qualitative data and quantitative. It is important to sort out the best methods for each question and each area separately, to focus more on the concrete issues. During the field course in Tūja, that was held starting from May 18 till May 21 we focused on different ways how to communicate with local people and tourists, and to find out their main interests in the area. We chose to start our case study field work on Sunday, because most of the summer house owners and holidaymakers stay there for weekends not for the weekdays. The data that was used in the report is based mostly on the interviews made by research authors. Statistics about the area and population is taken from Central Statistic database of Latvia and Salacgrīva Municipality. The data for mapping is taken from Latvian Geospatial system from year 2010 and also University of Latvia map browser - And all the maps were made in ArcMap software. 3.1 Methods Oral methods - semi structured interviews and questionnaires. Semi - structured interviews help to access the local people more than just a questionnaire, they are more representative (Jensen, 2014). The semi - structured interview was asked on ~ 10 questions about Tūja village, the society lifestyle, their main issues and also their and village plans for the future. The interviews were held in three languages: Latvian, Russian and English. It was important to translate the interviews exact the same way as the answers were, so that there is no misapprehension between the researchers. In total during the field course, 13 semi - structured interviews were made. In all interviews the most important part was to get out the information about the things that usually are not said by people. For the interviewer, it is important to get the critics from positivists, so that the real situation is explained, not only the good things about the area (Jensen, 2014). The interviews show objective results, that depends on what 13

14 kind of people answered the questions. Out of the 13 respondents 4 are second house owners, 9 are permanent residents. It means that the output data from the people could be more about the permanent residents than the summer house owners, who actually are the biggest number of people in Tūja. Firstly, we divided the people in two groups: permanent residents and second house owners. For both groups it was important to find out their nationality and their age, because in many cases these are one of the most important things why the conflicts are caused. There were other questions prepared for each group. Apart from the questions it was really important to listen what are the people answers and take the most out of it. The semi structured interview questions for the permanent residents: 1. Are you a permanent resident in Tūja? 2. For how long time do you live in Tūja? 3. Do you own an apartment or a house? 4. Do you work and if yes, where? 5. Would you use an opportunity in Tūja if there would be one? 6. What kind of transport do you usually use in Tūja and from one place to another daily? 7. What are the things that you would like to improve in Tūja? 8. Do you use the facilities in Tūja? 9. Do you feel safe in Tūja? 10. What are your relationships with your neighbors and others? Are there any problem situations? The semi structured interview questions for the summer house owners: 1. For how long time do you own or rent a house in Tūja? 2. Where are you from? 3. For how long period do you come to Tūja? 4. Which facilities do you use in Tūja while you live here? 5. What are the main reasons for choosing Tūja as your second house area? 6. Which are the people do you mostly communicate with during your stay? And do you have any problem situations with others? 7. Do you feel safe in your house and village? 8. What are the improvements that should be done in village? 14

15 During the first interviews it was clear that people tend to find peace and calmness when they come to Tūja, so also the questionnaire was made for the holidaymakers who visited the beach on Sunday to not interrupt them too much. The questionnaire, as was mentioned, is not as representative as the interview, so while giving the questionnaires we tried to get more information from the tourists as we could. In total 12 people answered the questions in different age groups and different family statuses. The questionnaire questions were: 1. Gender 2. Age 3. Occupation 4. Where do you come from? 5. Why did you choose Tūja beach as a destination for weekend? During our stay in Latvia, we arranged a group meeting with the Salacgrīva Municipality. This meeting was important to find out what are the relationships between the highest level of authority and the local people in village. To find out municipality future plans for Tūja development. Textual methods - mostly are linked with the theory and method part of the research. It is important not only to base the research on the qualitative data, but also find the relevant topics in the scientific reports. Those articles help to find the differences in similar case studies in other countries and to find the similarities in these topics. The local newspapers also gave some information about the territory and its development, so it was important to read trough the latest articles of Salacgrīvas county newspaper Auseklis. Observational - looking at the area, taking pictures, seeing the architecture of the buildings and looking to the area as a tourist. It is important to feel the place where the case study area is located. In geography field, the architecture of the buildings is related to the spatial planning. In the Tūja village the architecture shows a big difference between the society and their welfare that can be discussed in the report. 15

16 Mapping - cartography is a big part of geography study field. Mapping was used in the spatial plan of Tūja village that was made from the interviews. Also the mobility from one place to another is important to map, so it can be seen how far the people need to go for the doctor, local municipality and so on. To sum up, with the help of maps it is easy to see the overview of the common processes in the area and to link those processes with the interaction between the locals and second house owners Weaknesses The data processing from the interviews was based on the subjective answers from the respondents. It means that the data analysis is made on the situation that is only in the start of the summer season and it doesn`t show the real facts in figures all summer long. Of course, the day when the interviews were made also makes a big impact on the results, on Saturday there would be even more second owners that we talked to on Sunday. In consideration it is important to take the amount of people that answered the questions and also what kind of people, their nationality, gender, age, welfare and so on. As one of the objective facts that should be taken into the analyze part is the meetings and interviews with the municipality members. We arranged the meeting with the Salacgrīva county chairman and also the Tūja village unofficial chairman, but there is no information from the Liepupe parish. So it means that the information is from the highest and lowest levels, not from the middle institutions, those who usually work as moderators between these different authorities. It means that the information could more precise if we would meet them. During the interviews not too many people were strict about the development improvements in the village. It could be as one of the reason how people show, that they actually do not participate in the daily society life and live by themselves. For the results it is important to take it into consideration. 16

17 4. Analysis of the interviews All the references from the interviews are written in the Appendix Nr Society groups As one of the main focus was put to find out where the named three society groups spend their time in Tūja village, where the second home owners mostly are situated and what areas the tourists/holidaymakers usually visit. This kind of data analysis is linked with the topic that differences among seasonal and permanent residents influence social interaction (expressing interests), interactions redefine and articulate relationships between community members (Pitkanen et al.,2014). Results of the interviews Tūja village is a mostly a second house owner area (Reference Nr.3.). There is more than a half of the decrease of population during the winter time, so the local residents do not have the most impact on the daily life processes during the summer season (Reference Nr.3.), but at the same time permanent residents do not feel any pressure from the newcomers (Reference Nr. 7.). As it is seen on the map (Picture Nr. 3.) the area can be divided by social groups and by their resting place. As the number of summer residents is so high, it is understandable that the maps show that only in some areas the permanent residents live. The central part of village is the busiest part, where all the permanent residents and mostly summer house owners meet each other (Reference Nr. 10). It is the place where not only the oral communication between the locals is happening, but also it is a place where people can find out the information from the village information board. This place is important figure in the interaction between the society groups, because the interaction we can see not only while talking but on the streets and shops. At the same time we can see that usually all society groups live by their own, because of the division of the living areas. But we cannot say that they are unsocial. 17

18 Picture Nr.3. The spatial characteristics of Tūja village (Made by author, Žumbure, 2014) According to the interviews we understood that the neighborhood interactions are really good. People communicate trough phones, on the streets and so on (Reference Nr. 2.), but still many of the permanent residents could improve with their interaction in community (Reference Nr. 10.). The interesting fact about the permanent residents is that many of them who live in the central part of the city are Russian speaking people, who moved to Tūja while the brick factory was working and they now live in the two stored houses (Reference Nr. 9). Latvian speaking permanent residents live in the cottage area that is on the East part of Tūja (Reference Nr.9.). The most important issue among Tūja village inhabitants either permanent residents and summer house owners, is the holidaymaker stay during the summer time (Reference Nr. 10.). It is thought that there are different values and interests for each 18

19 of the society group, so the way of living differs (Pitkanen et.al. 2014). The tourist recreation area is somehow separated from the local resident, so it is one of the ways how to get the peace and calmness that usually people are looking for in Tūja (Reference Nr.2). In the North part, there is the biggest camp site of the area; those people are separated from the activities that are held in village centre and also the camp site which is more in the centre of city is separated by the river Zaķupīte. In these two cases (campsites), we can stress out that the people who come to Tūja as holidaymakers are with different statuses and backgrounds. Actually it is even important to divide the holidaymakers into those who come to Tūja only for a weekend and those who come for a week. So in the end in Tūja village the group `tourists` can be subdivided: campsite visitors and beach visitors (Reference Nr. 11, Nr.3.). But even after the division of the groups it is clear that all the society groups are interested in Tūja for its main resource `sea` and no matter what their backgrounds people get along well (Reference Nr.11.). The other big group summer house owners make the biggest impact on spatial characteristics. The summer house owners usually spend their time in Tūja starting from May till the end of August (Reference Nr.1.). The elderly people stay in Tūja for all summer long, but the ones who are in their working ages come to Tūja usually on weekends and during their vacation time (Reference Nr.2., Nr. 6.). The second home owners mostly are linked with the Tūja because of their heritage (Reference Nr. 1, Nr. 3.). According to the interviews nowadays there are some houses that are sold to new families and also are on a sale, but most of them are kept in heritage, so it means the interaction between the groups is not affected or changed too much during the years (Reference Nr.1.). Also if we check the real estate information on the webpage like it shows that there are 2 houses that are on the sale and also one house for the rent in May The spatial characteristics in the place are linked with the society groups and their mutual interaction. In the end, there is no strict border between the society and their living places, so it means, mostly people are with common way of thinking. Even if usually the locals are attached more to the community than the second home owners as the Pitkanen said in her article, in Tūja case we can see that the different people groups that come to Tūja are determined to work together to find the peace and calmness and escape from the everyday life. For example, they will take care of the 19

20 garbage on the coast line; inform the tourists about the laws on the streets and other activities (Reference Nr. 8) Economic situation Tūja village linked with the second home owners and tourists During the field course observations, it was clear, that Tūja village has only a few working places and also a lack of leisure activity places. So it was important to find out, how do local people and also second home owners look to this situation. Are they satisfied with the local facilities offers? Because somehow the people welfare definitely leads to their satisfaction of the place and also it is important to look do the three different types of groups have the same idea about Tūja village development. As you can see on the map (Picture Nr. 4.) in Tūja village there is one central area, where the local facilities are situated. According to the interviews with the locals in total in Tūja there are around 12 work places (Reference Nr.3.). Plus there are 2 work places from the 100 Lats program, when people do a part time job in municipality and so they earn ~150 EUR (Reference Nr. 10.). In Tūja one of the participants of program works in library and other one as a street sweeper. This number of employees increase change during the summer time (Reference Nr.3.). According to the interviews local people agree with the second home owners that the local shops offer a big choice of goods starting from food products till household goods. People understand that because of the big amount of summer house owners it would be uneconomical to invest money in new local shops. If people need to buy something bigger, they usually drive to Limbaži or Rīga, depending on their needs (Reference Nr. 4.). Also if we look to the welfare of the Tūja village, it was observed that there are big differences between the lifestyles of local people. In Tūja there are many unemployed residents, who lost their jobs after the brick factory was closed, so they would like to renew the factory work, so they would have a job in their permanent residence (Reference Nr. 8). At the same time there are local people who see the future in tourism and as for example, will invest their money in the old camp sites in the North par of village to improve the tourist attraction to the place (Reference Nr. 4.). But it is important to add, that the local people know the need for the permanent 20

21 residents, second home owners and the tourists, so even as a businessman she will provide the peace and calmness to all involved groups (Reference Nr. 4.). Picture Nr.4. Tūja village facilities (Made by author, Žumbure, 2014). As there are no official data about the amount of summer house holders in Tūja, the main idea was to find out the approximate increase number from Tūja local businesses. From the local shops we found out that the income for the shops is three times higher than during the winter time and most of the increase is because of the 21

22 summer house owners (Reference Nr. 7.). Also in the library the total amount of readers increases during the summer time. In 2013 there were 152 registered readers per year. Till 20 th of May in 2014 there were 92 readers registered, so librarian believes the number will increase for at least 60 persons starting from June (Reference Nr. 10). But still there no is precise number for the summer house owners in Tūja. In Tūja village all the social groups are linked with library as an authority and its services. The library at the same time is working as a social place and place where people can pay their taxes, pay for their water supply and other things. The library is used by permanent residents, by second home owners and also by holidaymakers (Reference Nr. 10.). That is place where people can get free access to the internet, to computers, read latest newspapers, scan documents and so on. And as you can see on the map, the library is situated in the central part of the city, so everyone can easily go to it. During our interview many people visited the library and as a newcomer we felt, that people are really welcome and always greeted, even if we were strangers to them. During the semi - structured interviews we wanted to find out what do people want to improve in the village to improve its economical situation and people welfare. From the interviews we found out that almost the same interests are for second home owners and for permanent residents. Firstly, we found out during the observation in the village, that in the old post office building the new `Science Centre` will be opened in autumn. It will be a place where people will have a free access to internet, a room for meetings and small concerts and so on (Reference Nr. 10.). Secondly, people in the village would like to have a doctor; they think that it is really good to have a pharmacy, but at the same time, because of the big amount elderly people would be important to have a doctor visit at least once in a week (Reference Nr. 6.). But as it was said in the interview at the Salacgrīva Municipality, there are no plans for that by now. The questionnaire results The questionnaire was made on Sunday, for the people who we characterized as `tourists`, they are the ones who come to Tūja only for one day. For the tourist group it is important to find out where do people usually come from and for what reasons. 22

23 4.4. The utilization of places in Tuja The questionnaires represent some specific features which create trends among tourists and second home owners. There is no difference between these segments, but we can see the same trends within those groups. This means the utilization of places are the same due to their common interests. Their choice to go to Tūja is mostly linked to closeness to their hometown and habits that they used to visit certain places for decades. Few of them mentioned the nature and clean beach as a motivation to go. This shows in general, awareness about this place is high, attachment to Tūja is strongly perceived (loving the place, aiming for improvements, concerning about youth) due to long - term habits and having experiences (living or owning second home or creating new social ties such as marriage) through generations. In general, tourists do not face any conflicts with the locals. According to the questionnaires, most of the people live in another village or city close to Tūja (Valmiera and Cēsis and Limbaži). People who live in Tūja are students, non-workers (e.g. housewife). Locals outside of Tūja have higher social status by examining their jobs. Despite the fact they are not concerned about development in general they miss some kinds of facilities or they feel the need for certain improvements. This concern links to their dissatisfaction. Most of them are not satisfied with current infrastructure (toilets, sport facilities, roads etc). In general, they more often use shops in Riga and cities close to Tuja. They aim to improve the place but they are not part of any development processes or any social actions. As Salacgrivas Municipality explained, there is no common sense for better quality of community (The name of the member). They usually do not use local facilities in Tuja, which might have more positive effect on local economy. For some reasons, they did not mention any need for workplaces, only for youth centre for the sake of youth and other facilities related to leisure time. It seems they might see the solution in tourism rather than development of other sectors because leisure activities and peace are the main needs for all segments of the community. 23

24 4.5. Psychology of the community members In this particular case social psychology between local people and tourist is quite distant. Most of the people with a second home in Tūja are used to go just for weekend and stay in the beach part of the area without disturbing the habitants of the village and who stays for the whole season knows the right approach to maintain the right distance with the permanent residents for not to make conflicts. This is possible because they live in a little village, everybody knows each other, so it is easier to understand which is the lifestyle that the residents are used to have and try to not affect in negative way this balance that is created. In one little touristic village like Tūja we cannot perceive any conflicts or misunderstandings. The main reason is trying to avoid, not bothering each other, so they can be satisfied with full peace and back to the nature feeling. It does not cause confusion and disorder around the village. People who came to the beach only for short-term (few hours etc) from neighboring villages, have less social interaction with others. In Tūja due to its smallness, everybody knows each other and they try to maintain the right balance to live peacefully, except some second home owners and locals who prefer some social fields to be created (common events, youth centre). In general, They are not so interested in participating in any community activities, they prefer to stay isolated in their homes and have life experiences within smaller groups (e.g. among neighbours). 24

25 Conclusion The aim of this report was to find out how many summer house owners are in the Tūja village and what their relationships with the permanent residents are. There wasn`t precise number of the second home owners figured out, but the percentage of the second home owners definitely makes a big impact on the Tūja population. Due to the three different types of people groups who inhabit Tūja permanent residents, tourists and second house owners the most important question was to find out their daily interaction and their motivation to visit or live in the village. As we founded out there is one common thought for all the groups: most of the people enjoy the `peace and calmness` and they are seeking to find it there mostly during the summertime. People are attracted to the place, not in the community. The main focus group in this research second house owners are somehow similar to the permanent resident. Mostly people own their houses and apartments from their relatives and they are interested in keeping the area safe and protect it because they have stayed in Tūja from their childhood. To sum up, Tūja villages the key ingredients are `sea` and `peace`. That is the only attraction that Tūja can offer and what people are willing to find there. If in the future society will improve their communication skills between each other it could help Tūja to develop faster and increase its welfare status. 25

26 Appendix The respondents 26

27 Bibliography Scientific articles and books Cohen, E.,2008. The changing faces of contemporary tourism. Soc., 45(4), Hall, C.M., Lew, A.A.,2009. Understanding and Managing Tourism Impacts: An Integrated Approach. London and New York: Routledge. 365 p. Hall, C.M., Page, S.J., The Geography of Tourism and Recreation. Environment, Place and Space. 3rd ed. London and New York: Routledge, 427 pp. Marjavaara, Roger, Second home tourism. The Root to Displacement in Sweden? Umea University, Sweden Matarrita-Cascante, David, A. E. Luloff, Richard S. Krannich, and Donald R. Field,2006. Community Participation in Rapidly Growing Communities in Southern Utah. Journal of the Community Development Society, Vol. 37, No. 4, Winter 2006 Pitkänen, Kati, Czesław Adamiak and Greg Halseth, Leisure Activities and Rural Community Change: Valuation and Use of Rural Space among Permanent Residents and Second Home Owners. Sociologia Ruralis European Society for Rural Sociology. Sociologia Ruralis, Vol 54, Number 2, April 2014 Rozīte, M., Vinklere, D., Tourism and Recreation as a driving force for forecasting biodiversity changes: lake Engure watershed area as an example. Proceedings of the Latvian Academy of sciences. Section B, Vol. 65 (2011), Turlajs, J., Milli, G., Latvijas apdzīvotās vietas. apgāds Jāņa Sēta, Rīga. Van Patten, Susan R. and Daniel R. Williams,2008. Problems in Place: Using Discursive Social Psychology to Investigate the Meanings of Seasonal Homes. Leisure Sciences, 30: , 2008,Copyright C Taylor & Francis Group, LLC. Williams, S.,2009. Tourism Geography: A New Synthesis. 2nd ed. London and New York: Routledge. 309 pp. Interviews Vineta Krūze, Salacgrīva county main planner. 19 th of May, NordPlus 2014 Lectures Kjartansdóttir, Thorbjörg K., Theories of place making and local development planning. Holt - Jensen, A., The case study approach; how to design a good interview guide and make arrangements for interviews. 27

28 Internet Resources Central Statisic Database of Latvia, Liepupe territorial plan , upe/_paskaidrojuma_raksts_final.pdf North Vidzeme,