Introduction

Saarinen (2004) argues that tourism can be one of the very few examples of potential growth for peripheral and rural dry border regions where low population density and long distances compromise other industries development. Tourism has become an activity of building cross-border cooperation and has been able to transform the spatial organization of these regions. According to Prokkola (2007), tourism is a pioneering industry in the process of cross-border regionalization, transforming national boundaries into tourist landscapes, which attract tourists by their unique cultural and natural attributes (Timothy, 2001). There are several factors, which are attractive to cross-border regions, such as geopolitical, historical, natural and cultural aspects. It is, therefore, of interest, to develop a work on the Portuguese-Spanish border, commonly known as the Portuguese-Spanish line, being the oldest border in Europe and one of the most extensive. Some authors like Uriarte (1994) understand that there is a border culture in the Portuguese-Spanish region, characterized by complementarity and interdependence. Cooperation between neighbouring tourist destinations is important in that it can contribute to increasing the tourist efficiency of the region (Prideaux and Cooper, 2002). Also, Prokkola (2007) points out that permeability at European internal borders has increased, challenging the development of tourism in border regions, in contrast to policies too centralized in central governments. It is therefore necessary to realise whether efforts are being made in the sense, not only of the development of innovative and diversified tourism products and services, but also if there has been a reinforcement of strategic partnerships in terms of cooperation between the north of Portugal and Galicia, regarding the tourism sector of Euroregion, in a particular way, the dry border.

Literature Review

According to Castro (2013), “(…) Since the Middle Ages, the attention given to the border, by the Iberian Central Powers, was reinforced, in times of conflict, by the construction of defensive structures, but in periods of calms the populations acted and moved as if the territorial separation did not exist, with the establishment of commercial relations, the use of common land and the creation of family bonds, so that in time of conflict, and against what was emanated from the central power, the populations, locally, were able to settle forms of solidarity to not put at risk the economy and family relations (…)”, which shows, in reality, the strong proximity between the border regions, regardless of the political division. The author also mentions that the presence of the border, with political boundaries for the states, was actually little recognized by the populations, despite the different ways of life and languages, having this intimacy among the residents been possible over the centuries, due to the negligence of the Central Powers concerning these areas, in times of stability and political normality, periods in which these regions had to assert themselves.

The border areas have a double condition of separation and proximity. In the perspective of Costa (2008), borders should be understood as zones and not as formal lines. This seems to be the opinion of Charrié (2000:147) when he says that “(…) The border is no longer a line, but a space that operates as part of the mediation between communities and societies involved with identity in a cross-border area”. In the perspective of Reigado (2002), in general, border regions are disadvantaged and depressed, due, at least in part, to their geographical, economic and political periphery and distemper from national decision-making centres, regional and local consumption (Hernández, 2000). This is also the opinion of Lange (2012), because it states that border regions present a situation of double periphery, geographic and distally to decision-making centers, which cause social, economic and structural disadvantages. It is essential to find ways to integrate internal border areas into a single market in order to reduce their isolation (DGDR, 2003). Also for Figueroa et al. (2014), one of the greatest difficulties detected in the study of the dry border tourism, in Galicia-North of Portugal region, was the reduced collaboration between the agents-since the existence of this collaboration would make feasible the presentation of an integrative tourism offering, based on the use of resources and the design of convergent strategies among the economic, institutional and social agents of the region. The authors highlight, as an example for the dry border, the networks of horizontal economies, as the case of the thermal cluster as being relevant to support the initiatives arising in the region, considering that the networks allow the exchange of knowledge, products and services. Local production systems can become a system of networks, based on cooperation and competitiveness.

The private actors are aware of the permeability among the products offered, as well as the importance of creating strong relationships with each other, with the primary objective of attracting tourists to the region, and thus potentiate the distribution of benefits among themselves. According to Pardellas (2010), there are common aspects in the behaviour of tourists visiting the Euroregion. For tourists, the Euroregion presents as main attractions: history, culture, heritage and nature, landscape and gastronomy. Pardellas (2010) also mentions that visitors from the Iberian Peninsula feel more attracted by natural endogenous resources, while residents in the rest of Europe visit the region particularly for the historical value of their heritage. In addition to the language, there is similarity in economic activities, especially in those that are linked to agriculture and the sea, as well as at the cultural, religious, heritage and traditions level (Sampedro, 2012).

According to Pardellas (2010) several studies highlight the potential of the Euro-region regarding tourism activity. One of the main challenges of the Euro-region will be to enhance the attraction of tourists to the region of the so- called dry border. Pereira and Pereiro (2014:286) indicate, concerning crossborder tourism, that “in the Iberian case, between Portugal and Galicia, there is a third country, which is the “line”, “carved” by time and inhabited by humans who suffered the wars between States and changes, and often threatening, political regimes. The dry border is becoming a cultural (and natural) heritage and consequently in a cultural-tourism product, starred by cultural mediators that contribute to the creation of thematic narratives such as smuggling routes, smuggling museums and other cultural tourism routes, (…) in which the processes of patrimonialization and turistification relate to the reinvention of ruralities in crisis”. The Regional Tourism entity of Porto and North of Portugal (ERTPNP) has been disseminating some thematic publications on the tourism resources present in the coordinating territory, and partially covering the Euroregion North of Portugal – Galicia. The information presented by the ERTPNP entity aims to support the hospitality entrepreneurs, tourist entrepreneurs, as well as visitors and tourists moving in the North region, in order to support and guide the stay with diversified offers referenced in the territory. This information is available in the interactive stores along the cities in the north of Portugal, at the Francisco Sá Carneiro Airport in Oporto, and in Santiago de Compostela, as well as in the hotel units located along the region.

The Eurocity Chaves – Verín created the “Thermal and Water route” (Euro-thermal region and water), as a common project, which includes circuits between Verín-Chaves-Vidago, framed to the strong dynamism and strategic vision associated with this project, and still in the use of tourist resources that complement the two border regions, namely the mineromedicinal sources that have been converted into modern thermal spa facilities – and whose use, in complementarity with other offerings will surely convert the region, into a destination of excellence concerning health and well-being, reinforcing the strategic vision of Galicia and the province of Ourense in the context of this typology of tourism. The remaining equipment in the region (wineries, historical and cultural heritage, the hotel Palace Vidago – associated with golf, the hotel Chaves Casino) can reinforce the complementarity of experiences, extending them to the wine and gastronomic tourism, nature, among others, and reinforcing the Eurocity as a destination of excellence in this sector, by geographic enlargement and increased demand. As a result, economic activity has been boosted, constituting itself as an anchor project, polarizing other activities, such as the mineral water bottling industry. Alongside this route, which will be an example of good practices, and which should be followed by other local entities along the whole border, there are other initiatives, from a municipal level, aimed at disseminating the existing offer, promoted mainly by the ERTPNP in Iberian market, and Tourism of Portugal, in the other international markets, and also specific examples of collaboration with Spanish Border regions.

There are still many possibilities to explore, in the cooperation between border areas in the north of Portugal and Galicia, in the region of the dry border. It should also be addressed the importance of the Romanesque route, created in 1998 in the municipalities that comprise the Association of Counties of Vale do Sousa-Castelo de Paiva, Felgueiras, Lousada, Paços de Ferreira, Paredes and Penafiel (Valsousa), and enlarged, in 2010, to other municipalities of NUT III – Tâmega (Amarante, Baião, Celorico de Basto, Cinfães, Marco de Canaveses and Resende), allowing the union of a common historical and cultural legacy, in a municipal entity-with several points of support to the route, distributed by North of Portugal, and pre-defined routes according to the desired route by the visitor or tourist. The Romanesque route may present continuity and permeability to the territory of the dry border.

Concerning Galicia region, Galicia Tourism Plan 2014-2016 presents as elements/tourism resources existing in the region:

• The Camiño de Santiago (Way of Saint James), the first European Cultural itinerary classified (1987) with 8 routes in the community, crossing over 100 municipalities, and still classified by UNESCO as World Heritage, in 1993;
• The integrated resources in the Natura 2000 network – 59 Places of Community Interest (LIC) and 16 areas of special protection for birds (ZEPA); the 2 protected landscapes; 72 areas of special protection of natural values (ZEPVN) and 3 natural sites of natural interest; About 12% of the protected territory (National Park of the Atlantic Islands, 6 biosphere reserves – including the Parque Gerês-Xurés – 6 natural parks, 7 natural monuments);
• The material and intangible heritage: the four classifications as World Heritage by UNESCO, the 671-real estate of Cultural interest, 98 festivals of tourist interest (for the Galician market), 7 festivals of international tourism interest and 12 festivals of National tourist interest.

The impacts of tourism on residents have been widely studied by authors such as Allen et al. (1988), Ap (1992), Haralambopoulos & Pizam (1996), Archer and Fletcher (1999), Ashley (2000), Ko & Stewart (2002), Andereck, Valentine, Knopf  & Vogt (2005), Haley et al. (2005), Boley et al. (2014), Stylidis, Biran, Sit & Szivas (2014), Rasoolimanesh, Jaafar, Kock & Ramayah (2015), Bimonte and Faralla (2016), Bimonte & Punzo (2016), Xu, Barbieri, Anderson, Leung & Rozier-Rich (2016), Rivera, Croes & Lee (2016), Strzelecka, Boley & Woosnam (2017), Ribeiro, Pinto, Silva & Woosnam (2017), and Lee & Jan (2019), applicating models and theories that aimed to perceive, on the one hand, the impacts of tourism activity, and on the other, their perception by residents, mostly in developed countries. Also, the perception of the impacts of activity in regions with natural spaces has been studied, due to the growing demand for tourism and diversification of activities associated with this type of destination (Worboys et al., 2001), and the benefits that result for residents and tourists, of the interaction generated (Nepal, 2000). In these approaches, it was considered extrinsic factors such as seasonality and intrinsic factors such as involvement with activity, socio-economic characteristics and length of residence in the studied region. Rátz (2000) argues that during the stay of visitors/tourists in the destination, interactions with residents are inevitable, and in the medium term, leads to changes in quality of life, social and cultural values, and still behaviours. Because of such modifications, which may be economic, social and cultural, tourism has been analysed as an agent of change in destinations, positive or negative. The nature of the change depends on the planning and management of the activity at the destination. For Mason (2003), Anderek et al. (2005) and Hall (2008), the proper planning and management of tourist destinations maximizes the positive impacts and minimizes the negatives. Still according to Rátz (2000), the main objective in assessing the impact of tourism activity is to provide local stakeholders with information that can be revealed as strategic and decisive for the development of the sector.

Methodology

Based on the studies of Allen et al. (1988), Ap (1992), Haralambopoulos & Pizam (1996),  Archer and Fletcher (1999), Ashley (2000), Ko & Stewart (2002), Andereck, Haley et al. (2005),Valentine, Knopf  & Vogt (2005), Musinguzi (2012), Boley et al. (2014), Stylidis, Biran, Sit & Szivas (2014), Rasoolimanesh, Jaafar, Kock & Ramayah (2015), Bimonte & Punzo (2016), Bimonte and Faralla (2016), Xu, Barvbieri, Andreson, Leung & Rozier-Rich (2016), Rivera, Croes & Lee (2016), Strzelecka, Boley & Woosnam (2017), and Ribeiro, Pinto, Silva & Woosnam (2017), the main objective, regarding residents, was to assess their perception of the impact of tourism in the region of the EuroCity Chaves-Verín.

For the investigation application, a non-probabilistic sampling method was used, and represents the resident’s characteristics, in the Eurocity Chaves-Verín, as an example of strategic planning development of tourism policies, regarding the territory competitiveness. Within the non-probabilistic sampling methods, the sampling method was used for convenience, selected according to the availability and accessibility of the target population elements. The sample consists of 179 elements, which correspond to questionnaires applied to residents in the Eurocity region, 97 of which in Chaves and 82 in Verín.

Results

Table 1: Sample Residents Origin

Source: Authors

In the sample, 54% of residents are from Chaves and the remaining 46% from Verín. The most important characteristics of the sample of residents surveyed in the Eurocity Chaves – Verín:

• 64% were females and the remaining 36% were males;
• 40% are 35-44 years, 36% are 45-54 years, 11% are 25-34 years, 7% are 18-24 years, and 6% are 55-64 years;
• 64% have higher education, 31% have secondary education, and 5% have a medium course;
• 38% have an individual monthly illiquid income up to 1001-2000 €, 32% up to €1000, 29% between 2001-3000 € and 1% (only one element) has more than €3000;
• 32% live in the region of origin for 25-34 years, 26% for 45-54 years, 18% for 35-44 years, 13% live for 11-24 years, 6% for 55-64 years, and 5% for less than 10 years;
• 18% work in the tourism sector or in another related sector;
• 31% have family members who work in the tourism sector or in another related

Table 2: Do you develop your profession in the tourism sector or in another related sector?

Source: Authors

Table 3: Do your family members develop their profession in the tourism sector or in another related sector?

Source: Authors

Table 4: Classify the importance of tourism resources/attributes existing in the region for tourist demand (tourism potential)

The values indicated report to the measurement scale:

1-nothing important; 2-little important; 3-important; 4-very important; 5-Extremely important.

Source: Authors

Based on the information presented in table 4, we can confirm the valorisation of the resources “the gastronomy” and “The way of Saint James”, followed by “Gastronomy and Wine”, “the thermal resources” and “natural spaces/landscape/nature”. The less valued are “the museums” and “others”.

Analysing the information presented in table 5, it is possible to observe the superior agreement for “Tourism allows to know new cultures”, followed by “Tourism is a factor of dynamization of the cooperation north of Portugal-Galicia, especially in the dry border (Chaves – Verín)”.

Table 5: Concerning your opinion about tourism, you can say that:

The values indicated report to the measurement scale:

1-I disagree; 2-I partially disagree; 3-I agree; 4-I agree enough; 5-I fully agree.

Source: Authors

It must be highlighted, for the items “tourists spend little in the EuroCity (-)”, “The cost of living significantly increased (-)”, and “tourism contributed to the degradation of the region’s environmental resources (-)”, the level of lower agreement, an analysis in an inverse perspective, once they represent a positive perception of the activity for residents, since they disagree, respectively, that “tourism has contributed to the degradation of the region’s environmental resources”, “The cost of living has increased significantly”, and “tourists spend little time in the Eurocity”.

The mode highest values are presented for the items “tourism allows to know new cultures” and “tourism is a factor of dynamization of the cooperation north of Portugal-Galicia, especially in the dry-border (Chaves-Verín)”, but also for the item “tourism investment in accessibility and other public infrastructure and services”, as well as for the items “tourists spend little in the Eurocity (-)”,”The cost of living has increased significantly (-)”, and “tourism has contributed to the degradation of Environmental resources of the region (-)”, analysed in an inverse perspective.

Table 6: Concerning your attitude/reaction to tourism in the region, classify the following statements

The values indicated report to the measurement scale:

1-I disagree; 2-I partially disagree; 3-I agree; 4-I agree enough; 5-I fully agree.

Source: Authors

Regarding the information presented in table 6, referring to the reactions to tourism in the region, the average values are higher for “I am friendly in welcoming tourists”, followed by “I feel empathy for the tourist”, being important to highlight the Mode value of the item “I can prospect the potential of tourism development”. However, it also obtained a high concordance with the finding that “there is seasonality in tourist demand”. It should be highlighted the positive values obtained for the items “avoid tourist concentration zones (-)” and “the negative aspects due to tourism displease me (-)”, since they are analysed inversely.

Conclusions

At the level of the Iberian Peninsula there is, between Portugal and Galicia, the line, which is considered a third country, regarded as a cultural and natural heritage, and, consequently, a tourist-cultural product (Pereira and Pereiro, 2014). According to Campesinos (2003), the new 21^st century heritage, such as infrastructures and high-level equipment (conferences and exhibitions, auditoriums, museums, multi-purpose buildings), should be valued and boosted, for the development of cultural offer (music and dance festivals, exhibitions, concerts,…) of public and private cultural operators (administrations, foundations, universities) for all possible segments of demand (from the search for masses to the minority), allowing the organisation of large congresses or smaller business meetings – which can be measured at the competitive level, not only by the capacity of its facilities, but also by the professionalism of cultural, public and private agents that streamline this tourist market (Convention Bureau, catering, interpreters,…).

Tourism has been taking on a decisive strategic role for the development of the Euro-region Galicia-North of Portugal and can be assumed as such in the dry border region. In this sense, strategic plans have been presented at the level of the region, but also at the level of the different typologies of tourism, due to regional endogenous resources, to be potentiated.

Borders theme is current and of concern, not only at the local level. There have been notorious incentives, at the European Union level, to stimulate the development of border regions and cooperation between them. Cross-border cooperation between regions presenting the same problems and similar characteristics can become very positive. The border itself arises, as Martins (1997:150) essentially refers, as “(…) the place of alterity. That is what makes it a singular place. At first glance, it is the meeting place of those who, for different reasons, are different from each other (…). But the conflict makes the border essentially, at one time, a place of discovery of the other and of disagreement”.

Regarding the opinion of residents concerning tourism, we should highlight the values above the average for the recognition of tourism in contact with new cultures, as well as a factor of dynamization of the cooperation North of Portugal-Galicia, especially in the dry border (Chaves-Verín), and which encouraged investment in accessibility, other infrastructures and public services, items with a Mode value of 5. This evaluation allows us to conclude by recognizing the need for cooperation of territories in the tourism sector, as a dynamic and strategic activity for economic growth in the region, without impacts, nowadays, on the degradation of environmental resources. It also stands out, for the sample in both cities, the high mean value attributed to empathy regarding tourists, and the Mode value (4) for the prospect of the development potential of tourism in the region and recognition of the maintenance of cultural heritage by the activity. However, residents of Euroregion recognise seasonality in tourism demand, which should be analysed by decision-makers, through the search for a combination in the supply of tourism products, in order to diversify the region’s tourism demand.

Concerning the valorisation of tourism resources in the Eurocity, residents have very similar opinions, given the average value above 4 and mode value 5, for gastronomy, the way of St. James, gastronomy and wine, the thermal offer, and the natural spaces/landscape/nature. Stakeholders and DMO’s must analyse strategies for the continuity of cooperation policies between the northern regions of Portugal and Galicia (strategic conciliation and coordination between several stakeholders in the cross-border region), in the medium or long term, at a later stage of Community funding programmes’ support such as POCTEP/INTERREG.

References

1. Allen, , Long, P., Perdue, R., Kieselbach, S. (1988). “The impact of tourism development on residents’ perceptions of community life”. Journal of Travel Research, 27 (1), 16-21.
2. Andereck, L., Valentine, K. M., Knopf, R. C., Vogt, C. A. (2005). “Residents’ perceptions of community tourism impacts”. Annals of Tourism Research, 32 (4), 1056-1076.
3. Ap, (1992). “Residents’ perceptions on tourism impacts”. Annals of Tourism Research, 19 (4), 665-690.
4. Archer, , Fletcher, J. (1999). “The economic impact of tourism in the Seychelles. Annals of Tourism Research, 23 (1), 32-47.
5. Ashley, (2000). The impacts of tourism on rural livelihoods: Namibia’s experience. Overseas Development Institute. Available: http://www.odi.org.uk
6. Bimonte, S., Punzo, L. (2016). Tourist development and host-guest interaction: an economic exchange theory. Annals of Tourism Research, 58, 128-139.
7. Bimonte, S., Faralla, V. (2016). Does residents’ perceived life satisfaction vary with tourist season? A two-step survey in a Mediterranean destination. Tourism Management, 55, 199-208.
8. Boley, B.B., McGehee, N.G., Perdue, R.R. and Long, P. (2014), “Empowerment and resident attitudes toward tourism: strengthening the theoretical foundation through a weberian lens”, Annals of Tourism Research, 49, 33-50.
9. Campesino Fernández, J. (2003). “Planificación estratégica del turismo cultural en ciudades patrimoniales. Calidad, innovación y sostenibilidad”. En BLANQUER, D. (Dir.). 6º Congreso de Turismo Universidad y Empresa. Turismo cultural y urbano, Valencia, 41-81.
10. Castro, (2013). A fronteira Portugal/ Espanha, 18 anos depois de Schengen. O caso de Portalegre/Elvas – Valência de Alcântara/Badajoz. PhD Thesis in Human Geography and Territorial Planning. Lisbon University.
11. Charrié, P. (2000). La frontière luso-espagnole. De la frontière à l’espace transfrontalier. In: Trigal, L.L. e Guichard, F. La frontera hispano-portuguesa: Nuevo espacio de atracción y cooperación. Fundación Rei Afonso Henriques. Serie Monografias y Estúdios. Zamora.
12. Costa, , Fernandez, M., Figueiredo, A., Figueroa, P., Melo, C., Pardellas de Blas, X. (2008). Chaves – Verín: A Eurocidade da Água. Agenda Estratégica. Vigo: Eixo Atlantico do Noroeste Peninsular.
13. DGDR (2003). Iniciativa comunitária. INTERREG II-A Desenvolvimento e cooperação transfronteiriça: Relatório Available: http://www.dgdr.pt/qca2/Interreg_transf.pdf
14. Figueroa, , Padín, C., Otero, A., Gallego, D., (2014). “El termalismo como producto turístico en la raya seca luso-gallega”, Turismo de Frontera (III): Productos turísticos de la Raya Ibérica. Dirección, Antonio José Campesino Fernández, José Manuel Jurado Almonte. Huelva: Universidad de Huelva, 2014.
15. Haley, J., Snaith, T., Miller, G. (2005). The social impacts of tourism: A case study of Bath, UK. Annals of Tourism Research, 52 (3), 647-668.
16. Hall, (2008). Tourism planning: Policies, processes and relationships (2ndEd.). Essex: Prentice Hall.
17. Haralambopoulos, N., Pizam, A. (1996). Perceived Impacts of Tourism, The case of Samos. Annals of Tourism Research, 23(3), 503-526.
18. Hernández, J.C. (2000). Cooperación Transfronteriza: Castilla y León y Portugal, Centro de Documentación Europea, Universidad Salamanca, Editorial Tecnos.
19. Koa, D., Stewart, W. (2002). A structural equation model of residents’ attitudes for tourism development. Tourism Management, 23, 521-530.
20. Lange, (2011). “A Cooperação Transfronteiriça Institucional na Região Norte de Portugal – Sobreposição ou Complementaridade?”, In Atas do 17.º Congresso da APDR – Gestão de Bens Comuns e Desenvolvimento Regional Sustentável. Junho/Julho 2011, 1575-1590, Bragança.
21. Lee, T., Janb, H. (2019). Can community-based tourism contribute to sustainable development? Evidence from residents’ perceptions of the sustainability. Tourism Management, 70, 368-380.
22. Martins, S. (1997). Fronteira: a degradação do outro nos confins do humano. São Paulo: Hucitec.
23. Mason, (2003). Tourism impacts, planning and management. Oxford, England: Butterworth Heinemann.
24. Nepal, K. (2000). “Tourism, national parks and local communities”. In R. W. Butler & S. W. Boyd (Eds.), Tourism and national parks: Issues and implications (73-94). New York: John Wiley & Sons.
25. Pardellas, (2010). “O Turismo como Factor de Cooperación entre Galicia e a Região Norte”. Eixo Atlântico: pasado, presente e futuro, 45–56.
26. Pereira, C., Pereiro, X. (2014). “Turismo Transfronteiriço Na Euro-região Galiza-Norte de Portugal”. Revista Turismo & Desenvolvimento, 21/22. 285-294.
27. Prideaux, , e Cooper, C. (2002). “Marketing and destination growth: A symbiotic relation or simple coincidence?” Journal of Vacation Marketing, 9 (1), 35-51.
28. Prokkola, (2007). “Cross-border regionalisation and tourism development at the Swedish-Finnish border: “Destination Arctic Circle”. Scandinavian Journal of Hospitality and Tourism, 7, 120–138.
29. Rasoolimanesh, S., Jaafar, M., Kock, N., Ramayahc, T. (2015). A revised framework of social exchange theory to investigate the factors influencing residents’ perceptions. Tourism Management Perspectives, 16, 335-345.
30. Rátz, (2000). “Residents’ perceptions of the socio-cultural impacts of tourism at Lake Balaton, Hungary”. In G Richards & D. Hall (Eds.), Tourism sustainable community development (36-56). London: Routledge.
31. Reigado, M. (2002). “Desenvolvimento Regional Transfronteiriço”; in Costa, J.S, (Coord.), Compêndio de Economia Regional, Colecção APDR, 571-596.
32. Ribeiro, M., Pinto, P., Silva, J., Woosnam, K. (2017). Residents’ attitudes and the adoption of pro-tourism behaviours: The case of developing island countries. Tourism Management, 61, 523-537.
33. Rivera, M., Croes, R., Lee, S. (2016). Tourism development and happiness: A resident’s perspective. Journal of Destination Marketing and Management, 5, 5-15.
34. Saarinen, (2004). “Destinations in Change. The transformation process of tourist destination”. Tourist Studies, 4 (2), 161-179.
35. Sampedro, (2012). Para compreender a Euro-região Galiza-Norte de Portugal. Master Dissertation. Coimbra University, Coimbra.
36. Strzelecka, M., Boley, B., Woosnam, K. (2017). Place attachment and empowerment: Do residents need to be attached to be empowered? Annals of Tourism Research, 66, 61-73.
37. Stylidis, D., Biran, A., Sit, J., Szivas, E. (2014). Residents’ support for tourism development: The role of residents’ place image and perceived tourism impacts. Tourism Management, 45, 260-274.
38. Timothy, J. (2001). Cross-border partnerships in tourism resource management: International parks along the US-Canada border. In B. Bramwell & B. Lane (Eds.), Tourism collaboration and partnerships, 20–43. Clevedon, UK: Channel View Publications.
39. Uriarte, M. (1994). La Codosera: Cultura de Fronteras y Fronteras culturales. Asamblea de Extremadura. Mérida.
40. Worboys, , Lockwood, M., De Lacy, T. (2001). Protected area management: Principles and practice. Melbourne: Oxford University Press.
41. Xu, S., Barbieri, C., Anderson, D., Leung, Y., Rozier-Rich, S. (2016). Residents’ perceptions of wine tourism development. Tourism Management, 55, 276-286.