Citizen Science for Sustainable Tourism Governance in a Mexican Coastal Community

Abstract

Citizen science is seen as a valuable tool for improving sustainable tourism governance. This is especially true in environmentally sensitive and socially complex areas that need inclusive knowledge. This research examines how citizen science can capture the views of local stakeholders regarding tourism impacts. It aims to create a community-based evidence base that supports better decision-making. The study takes place in a rapidly transitioning coastal tourism community in northwestern Mexico. Perceptions were collected using a basic participatory model from 150 actors, including local residents, school representatives, business community members, civil society organizations, and public agencies. The survey covered economic, social, and environmental dimensions, providing broad insights into how residents experience tourism expansion. Results indicate that tourism is widely perceived as an important economic driver: over 80% of respondents associate tourism with job creation and regional economic growth, and 100% recognize its role in supporting local crafts and production. At the same time, 84% of participants report rising living costs, and approximately 70% perceive restricted access to public spaces linked to tourism development. Environmental concerns are even more pronounced, with 87% of respondents associating tourism expansion with declining water and air quality, and 77% noting increased pressure on energy and water resources during peak seasons. The findings emphasize growing dissonance between national narratives on sustainability and the lived realities of communities. Stakeholders view tourism as a major driver of the local economy, crafts, and job creation. However, respondents also report rising living costs, displacement pressures, and restricted access to public spaces. Environmental concerns are even more apparent: respondents link tourism to declining air and water quality, habitat destruction, biodiversity loss, waste generation, and resource competition. The study suggests that even simple forms of citizen science can provide early, community-driven signals of social and environmental risks, offering valuable insights into more flexible and inclusive tourism governance in coastal areas.

1. Introduction

1.1. Global Tourism

Tourism is a major driver of the global economy. It contributes about 10% to global gross domestic product (GDP) and accounts for over 330 million jobs as of 2023. Its share of global GDP is expected to increase by nearly 11% by 2034 [1]. In the first quarter of 2025, international tourist arrivals totaled 304 million, a 5% rise from the previous year. At the same time, aviation passenger arrivals grew by 9%, reflecting strong recovery progress. Global tourism receipts reached US$1.7 trillion in 2024, roughly 6% of global exports of goods and services [2]. At the regional level, while the contribution of tourism to GDP is highly divergent, with some 6 percent in Asia and the Pacific, approximately 4–5 percent in Europe and the Americas, and around 3 percent for Africa and the Middle East, the overall trend is growing [3]. This regionalization is a stark reminder of the continued importance of tourism as a cornerstone economy throughout the world, with fluctuations in response to temporary events, such as COVID-19.

1.2. Paradoxes and Risks of Tourism Expansion

On the contrary, sustainable tourism specialists argue that tourism must be viewed not merely as a lever for the global economy but as part of a broader sustainability framework. Under this paradigm, it is possible to reconcile economic growth with environmental stewardship and social development to determine whether growth strategies are consistent with the principles of sustainable development [4]. This multidimensional approach positions tourism not just as a source of prosperity but as a catalyst for inclusive development. Reference [5] further contends that sustainable tourism requires a systemic perspective where economic benefits, cultural preservation, and environmental protection are interconnected pillars, with well-being serving as a key outcome for both visitors and host communities.

In the course of time, sustainability has taken a central stage in international discussions on tourism with the United Nations leading its cause for preserving natural and cultural values [6]. Since the Earth Summit in 1992, efforts such as Agenda 21 have encouraged ecotourism and sustainability particularly in sensitive environments [7]. The UN World Tourism Organization (UNWTO) would later promote tourism as an “instrument for development” focusing more closely on the role of tourism in promoting economic growth through responsible and sustainable practices, particularly in developing countries where tourism so often constitutes a large portion of service exports, such as reducing poverty and providing employment to help accomplish the Millennium Development Goals [8]. Today, the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development continues to reinforce this vision, explicitly recognizing tourism’s contribution to sustainable development through Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) targets 8.9, 12.b, and 14.7, which emphasize its potential to promote inclusive growth, monitor sustainability impacts, and support marine economies in vulnerable regions [9].

Despite decades of progress in sustainability policies, tourism presents a fundamental paradox: while it promotes economic growth and fosters global connections, its expansion often leads to environmental harm and social stress. The Baseline Report on Climate Action in Tourism by [10] warns that extreme weather and resource shortages are already weakening destination competitiveness, as more operators see climate change as a direct threat to their business, citing higher operational costs and infrastructure damage. The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development [11] supports these concerns by noting that climate-related disruptions and fluctuations in energy prices are among the most significant risks to tourism businesses, threatening profits and long-term stability.

Data confirms the magnitude of this challenge: transportation alone accounts for 60–96% of tourism-related emissions in European destinations, with air travel being the main contributor, while food services contribute up to 26% and lodging up to 14% [12]. Globally, tourism’s carbon emissions are expected to increase by 45% by 2030, driven by energy-heavy transport and accommodation systems [13]. Additionally, panel studies in European Union countries indicate that tourism spending, economic growth, and energy demand significantly increase CO₂ emissions in both the short and long term, highlighting the sector’s reliance on fossil fuels and its vulnerability to unsustainable practices [14]. Recent panel studies confirm that tourism growth significantly increases the ecological footprint in both Latin America and Europe, challenging the assumption of automatic convergence toward sustainability. This evidence indicates that, without deliberate mitigation strategies, tourism expansion will continue to exacerbate environmental pressures rather than mitigate them [15].

1.3. Governance, Justice, and Socio-Spatial Inequalities

Environmental risks are not the only concerns associated with tourism; social inequalities and spatial segregation have also sparked protests from locals, who argue that enclave tourism has limited public spaces and restricts economic involvement. As [16] explain, “enclave tourism refers to a form of development characterized by socio-spatial regulations of host–guest relations and related mobilities in tourism. Typically, such developments are managed and owned by multinational corporations, resulting in segregated areas that restrict tourists’ engagement with local communities and concentrate economic benefits within the enclave.” These enclaves often lead to high leakages and weak connections to local economies, hindering prospects for inclusive growth and poverty reduction [17]. Similar patterns appear in urban areas, where mobility infrastructure favors certain groups while immobilizing others, creating “premium spaces” for some and zones of marginality for others [18].

These socio-spatial dynamics also hold in urban areas, where tourism-led economic development can, if not effectively managed, erode the availability of affordable housing, create infrastructure demand pressures, and stimulate cultural displacement [19]. Indeed, recent experience indicates that financial agendas are often advanced at the expense of social and environmental issues, limiting the potential to move towards equity, including resilience, even in destinations considering sustainability [20]. These imbalances are evident in historic cities, which are facing the threats of gentrification and rising housing prices, undermining local quality of life and contributing to social tensions [21]. Moreover, in urban areas, short-term rental platforms are causing significant disruption and increasing the loss of regional identity, underscoring existing governance gaps that intensify these pressures [22].

In places like Venice, Barcelona, and Mallorca, citizens’ tensions have escalated through anti-cruise ship protests, out-of-control tourist numbers, and the commercialization of urban spaces [23,24]. Venice’s example is one of many where cruise tourism, through accelerated spatial segregation and powerful social backlash, prompted the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) to place Venice on the World Heritage Sites in Danger list. Such perceptions demonstrate how uncontrolled patterns of tourism movement can erode local identity and displace residents, causing governance crises that threaten the sustainable future of destinations [25]. Scholars argue that maintaining business-as-usual during a climate emergency is untenable, and the concept of “deep adaptation” calls for abandoning harmful practices in favor of resilience and community-centered models [26].

UNWTO and the Organization of American States [27] contend that tourism is a key enabler of inclusive economic growth, and when effectively managed, it can create jobs, diversify economies, and enhance livelihoods at the local level by providing income-earning opportunities in the value chain. Consistent with this view, [9] also highlight that well-managed tourism investments have the potential to make measurable contributions to the SDGs by improving local productivity, supporting community participation, and promoting more sustainable consumption and production patterns. Community-based tourism provides additional evidence of the alignment between responsible tourism management and job creation, as it generates jobs and contributes to local economies, which is related to SDG8 through the promotion of locally based, inclusive income opportunities [28]. Initiatives related to cultural and participatory tourism indicate that engaging local communities contributes to increased cultural understanding, promotes social inclusion in regard to SDG10, preserves heritage such as systems and structures, and fosters community participation [29]. Moreover, environmental analyses of major tourism hubs underline the need to reduce resource use and emissions within the sector, highlighting the relevance of SDG 12 in steering tourism toward more sustainable consumption and production practices [13].

Governance frameworks must reconcile economic imperatives with social and environmental justice while embedding sustainability in decision-making. Sustainable community-based tourism research highlights that governance has historically underrepresented justice, ethics, and equity, despite their relevance for community well-being; an integrated framework proposes participatory planning, transparency, and fair benefit distribution as critical elements [30]. In parallel, international policy guidance stresses that destinations must adopt multi-level governance and an integrated policy–industry–community approach, prioritizing environmental and socio-cultural pillars alongside economic goals to avoid repeating pre-crisis imbalances [31]. Closing governance gaps also requires recognizing relational inequalities, such as spatial marginalization, in which residents are pushed to the periphery of decision-making and everyday practices [32]

1.4. Citizen Science in Tourism Contexts

Citizen science, defined as the engagement of non-specialist users in scientific research, is increasingly recognized as a viable approach to sustainable tourism, as evidenced by frameworks that enable visitors and local residents to contribute to biocultural conservation by collecting observational data [33]. By empowering local residents to collect environmental data, monitor sustainability indicators, and co-develop locally adapted strategies, citizen-science approaches promote transparency and shared responsibility in tourism governance, thereby advancing innovative forms of community-led knowledge production [34]. Empirical studies show that meaningful citizen participation increases information flows and accountability within destination decision-making processes [35]. Other empirical examples from participatory Geographic Information Systems (GIS) work in mountain tourism demonstrate that citizen-led monitoring can inform ecological risk assessment and management practices [36]. Likewise, combining nature observation with citizen science platforms improves data quality and community involvement and supports equity and resilience in tourism systems [37]. These participatory methodologies also enhance decision-making and the visitor experience, thereby contributing to sustainable partnerships [38].

Recent advances in participatory technologies demonstrate how citizen science can expand its influence in tourism through data-driven collaboration. Affordable Internet of Things (IoT) infrastructure, along with interactive visualization platforms, allows communities to track mobility patterns, monitor environmental conditions, and interpret complex dynamics in real time, promoting awareness of sustainability issues and better decision-making [39]. Likewise, participatory workshops supported by geospatial analytics and social media data have proven effective in bringing together diverse stakeholders around shared goals for managing recreation and tourism demand, showing the importance of co-produced knowledge for adaptive governance [40]. Furthermore, immersive citizen science experiences have demonstrated the potential to influence perceptions and encourage pro-environmental behaviors, underscoring their role in connecting local communities and visitors with sustainability objectives [41].

Citizen science initiatives vary widely in the extent of citizen involvement, but contributory models typically rely on low-threshold tasks such as reporting observations or perceptions, which constitute an entry-level form of participation designed to remain accessible to the broader public [42]. Studies of engagement in online and field-based initiatives show that participants often begin with simple acts of noticing, describing, or documenting conditions in their environment, a pattern that confirms the relevance of perception-based contributions as a minimal yet legitimate participation pathway [43]. Ethnographic research further demonstrates that volunteers in contributory biodiversity programs frequently start with basic observational practices before progressing to more complex forms of involvement, underscoring that perception-based reporting aligns with the first and most inclusive tier of citizen participation [44].

1.5. Research Gap and Objectives

Despite the extensive global and regional evidence on the environmental, social, and economic pressures associated with tourism expansion, there remains limited empirical understanding of how local communities in rapidly transforming coastal areas perceive these changes and how such perceptions can be systematically incorporated into tourism governance. Existing studies have emphasized environmental monitoring, technological applications of citizen science, or broad governance challenges, yet few have captured community-level perceptions in an integrated, participatory manner within emerging tourism destinations. This gap constrains the development of governance approaches that reflect the lived realities of residents and the contextual complexities of tourism-driven change.

Accordingly, this study addresses the following research questions:

(1)

How do local stakeholders perceive the economic, social, and environmental impacts of tourism in this coastal community?

(2)

To what extent can a first-level citizen-science approach effectively capture, organize, and communicate these perceptions?

(3)

How can the resulting community-generated evidence contribute to more inclusive, adaptive, and sustainability-oriented tourism governance frameworks?

This article presents a case study of a coastal community in northwestern Mexico where the economy is increasingly driven by tourism. Despite its modest size, the town exemplifies the complex dynamics of tourism-based development in ecologically sensitive and culturally rich areas. Drawing on the perceptions of local stakeholders, including residents, educators, entrepreneurs, civil society organizations, and public officials, this study explores how citizen science can serve as a participatory tool to reveal and address community-level social, economic, and environmental perceptions of tourism impacts. By emphasizing community input, the research aims to contribute to a more balanced and sustainable tourism approach aligned with the principles of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and its Sustainable Development Goals. In addition, this study advances the field by demonstrating how a first-level, perception-based form of citizen science can generate early, community-grounded signals that extend the value of conventional resident perception studies and offer an accessible participatory design that informs adaptive governance and policy frameworks in rapidly transforming coastal destinations.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Study Design

This study employed a mixed-methods design. The qualitative component included the characterization of the local context, identification of stakeholders, and interpretation of community dynamics, while the quantitative component consisted of a structured survey using a five-point Likert scale, from which descriptive statistics and cross-tabulations were derived to assess perceptions across stakeholder groups. This design captures community perceptions at a single point in time rather than examining longitudinal trends.

Phase 1 involved the identification and characterization of the tourism offer and the local socioeconomic context.

Phase 2 focused on identifying and classifying community stakeholders into five groups.

Phase 3 assessed community perceptions through the structured survey instrument

In addition, the study incorporated an entry-level, contributory citizen-science approach, consistent with perception-based participation models in which residents contribute simple observational input during data collection and interpretation.

2.2. Study Scope

The present study was conducted in a coastal community in northwestern Mexico, on the Gulf of California within the state of Sonora. It specifically assessed the perceptions of local residents aged 18 and older.

2.3. Participant Identification and Segmentation

The identification of key stakeholder groups was based on the Sustainable Tourism Manual by the Deputation of Valencia [45]. As a result, the population was divided into five main stakeholder groups: Local Population, Educational Institutions, Businesses, Organizations, and Public Administration.

2.3.1. Local Population

This group comprises local residents whose activities are directly or indirectly related to tourism, such as artisans, merchants, real estate agents, tour guides, and service personnel in hotels, condominiums, rental homes, shops, food stalls, or restaurants. It also includes residents with indirect links to tourism who nonetheless interact with tourism-related activities, for example: fishers, livestock producers, students, healthcare professionals, homemakers, retirees, and unemployed individuals.

2.3.2. Educational Institutions

This category includes teachers and school authorities from public and private educational centers in the coastal area, as they foster an understanding of the need for sustainable tourism from early learning stages.

2.3.3. Businesses

This group includes entrepreneurs, business owners, and Mexican investors living in the community. The study focuses only on local members working in these businesses, not on external investors. Given the area’s emerging tourism, hotels, craft shops, and recreational centers are not considered businesses here, as they are small establishments run by local residents and fall within the first category. Participating in businesses are involved in various economic activities directly related to regional tourism, such as food services, fishing, and construction. The profile also covers companies indirectly connected to tourism, including real estate agencies, transportation services, gas stations, and fuel suppliers.

2.3.4. Organizations

These social groups include civil or non-governmental organizations that advocate for the community and promote projects such as environmental conservation, financial resource management, and ecological, cultural, and sports activities.

2.3.5. Public Administration

The final group comprises federal and local government agencies that regulate or directly oversee tourism activities, such as the Federal Tourism Secretariat, the local Tourism Development Commission, and the Local Economic and Tourism Development Commission. It also includes entities that indirectly influence tourism management, such as the Navy Secretariat, the Fisheries Office, the Communications and Transportation Secretariat, and local emergency services, including police, fire departments, and the Red Cross.

2.4. Sampling

A pilot questionnaire administered to 30 residents was used to verify the clarity of the 29 items included in the data collection instrument, as well as the suitability of the response scales and the average completion time, which was approximately five minutes. The pilot data were also used to estimate the proportion of favorable responses (“agree” or “strongly agree”) for each item, which served as the basis for calculating the required sample size using proportional stratified sampling. For this purpose, the following parameters were applied: p = success proportion (“agree” and “strongly agree”); q = 1 − p; e = 0.05 (margin of error). With a 95% confidence level (Z = 1.96, approximated to 2), the initial per-item sample size was computed as n₀ = (Z² · p(1 − p))/e². The study sample size was set to the maximum n₀ across items, rounded and adjusted for logistics to N = 150 surveys.

To ensure that participants were likely to have direct or indirect exposure to tourism-related activities, the sampling frame was based on the population aged 15 to 60 years reported in the 2020 Population Census by the National Institute of Statistics, Geography and Informatics (INEGI), which included 3957 residents [46]. However, in accordance with ethical guidelines and eligibility criteria, only adults aged 18 and older were invited to participate in the survey.

Given the absence of precise data on the number of individuals directly or indirectly involved in tourism and on the distribution of stakeholder subgroups, a proportional stratified sampling strategy was implemented. Stratification was based on each group’s relative activity weight, estimated from the number of establishments associated with them.

Accordingly, the 150 surveys were distributed proportionally among the previously identified stakeholder groups most engaged in tourism activities, as shown in

Table 1. Composition of the Sample by Stakeholder Group.

Population Group	Description	Activity Weight	Subgroup Sample Size
Local Residents	Handicraft shops	17.33%	26
	Food Establishments	29.33%	44
	Rental Homes	5.33%	8
	Recreational Venues	2.67%	4
	Hotels	8.00%	12
Educational Centers	Schools	4.67%	7
Businesses	Businesses	22.00%	33
Organizations	Organizations	3.33%	5
Public Administration Offices	Public Administration	7.33%	11
Total		100%	150

Source: Author’s own elaboration based on data from [47,48].

.

2.5. Questionnaire Design and Validation

The data collection instrument was a descriptive questionnaire divided into four sections. The first section gathered general information—age, gender, and occupation—to classify participants into groups. The second section addressed perceptions in the economic dimension, the third perceptions in the social dimension, and the fourth perceptions in the environmental dimension. These sections aimed to capture local stakeholders’ perceptions about the tourism impacts within each category.

The questionnaire included multiple-choice items and a five-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree, 2 = disagree, 3 = neutral, 4 = agree, 5 = strongly agree) selected for their suitability in measuring respondents ‘reactions, attitudes, and behaviors [49]. Its design was supported by the validation of three instruments from previous studies on community perceptions of tourism impacts in different contexts [50,51,52]. These instruments provided a total of 71 statements: 26 related to the economic dimension, 25 to the environmental dimension, and 20 to the social dimension.

To ensure coherence and avoid redundancy, only statements that appeared in at least two of the three instruments were retained. Applying this criterion resulted in a final set of 29 items: 3 in the general information section, 10 in the economic dimension, 7 in the social dimension, and 9 in the environmental dimension (See Appendix A).

2.6. Data Collection and Analysis

Data were collected through in-person surveys administered to adult residents across stakeholder groups. Participation was voluntary and anonymous, and respondents were informed of the study’s purpose and their rights before completing the survey. Informed consent was obtained through both written and verbal procedures prior to administering the questionnaire. Descriptive statistics are used to analyze perceptions across the economic, social, and environmental dimensions. Octave Software and Microsoft Excel served as the primary digital tools for data processing and analytical procedures. These platforms were used to organize, clean, and compute the descriptive statistics required to generate the results for each stakeholder group.

3. Results

The survey included 150 local residents, of whom 48% were male and 52% were female. Over half of the participants were aged 18–29, and 93% were aged 18–49. Stakeholder representation followed proportional activity weights: 62.97% were local residents working in tourism-facing roles—food establishments (29.63%), handicrafts (17.46%), hotels (7.94%), rental homes (5.29%), and recreational venues (2.65%); 22.22% represented local businesses, 7.41% public administration, 4.23% educational institutions, and 3.17% civil organizations. All questionnaires were fully completed.

3.1. Community Perceptions of Economic Impacts

As shown in

Table 2. Community Assessment of Economic Dimension Items.

Statements on Economic Impacts of Tourism	Agree	Disagree	Neutral
E1. Tourism supports the region’s economic development	78.00%	20.67%	1.33%
E2. Tourism creates job opportunities for local residents	84.67%	15.33%	0.00%
E3. Tourism improves the quality of life of local residents	70.00%	22.67%	7.33%
E4. Tourism promotes the development of handicrafts and local goods production	100.00%	0.00%	0.00%
E5. The region has better infrastructure (roads, energy, water supply) due to tourism development	57.33%	42.67%	0.00%
E6. Tourism increases the cost of living for the local population	84.67%	14.67%	0.66%
E7. Products and services are more available due to tourism development	36.67%	32.00%	31.33%
E8. Tourism has increased the prices of goods and services for local residents.	78.00%	0.00%	22.00%
E9. Tourism increases community participation in local development	83.33%	0.00%	16.67%
E10. Tourism has caused a decline in fishing and other traditional economic activities	66.67%	20.00%	13.33%

Source: Authors’ own elaboration.

, responses overall in the economic dimension mainly indicate a positive perception of tourism’s impact. High agreement levels were observed for statements about job creation (84.7%), regional economic growth (78%), and community involvement (83.3%). Notably, all respondents (100%) agreed that tourism supports local crafts and production. However, concerns about rising living costs (84.7%) and increased prices for goods and services (78%) emerged, suggesting perceived economic pressures alongside benefits. Opinions on infrastructure improvements were mixed, with only 57.3% agreeing and 42.7% disagreeing. Additionally, 66.7% of participants noticed a decline in traditional activities like fishing, pointing to possible trade-offs between tourism growth and local economic practices.

3.2. Community Perceptions of Social Impacts

The analysis of social impacts, summarized in

Table 3. Community Assessment of Social Dimension Items.

Statements on Social Impacts of Tourism	Agree	Disagree	Neutral
S1. Tourist flow (during peak season) bothers residents and causes stress	71.33%	13.33%	15.34%
S2. Tourism development leads to changes in the local and traditional lifestyle	26.67%	48.00%	25.33%
S3. Tourists increase crowding and queues for services	77.33%	0.00%	22.67%
S4. Social problems such as drug abuse and excessive alcohol consumption are more frequent in areas visited by tourists	80.67%	5.33%	14.00%
S5. Tourism contributes to the preservation of local traditions and customs	58.00%	39.33%	2.67%
S6. Tourism displaces the local population in favor of tourism development	78.67%	20.67%	0.66%
S7. Tourism prevents locals from accessing community sites reserved for tourists	70.00%	30.00%	0.00%

Source: Authors’ own elaboration.

, reveals a complex pattern of perceptions toward tourism. While some aspects are viewed positively, concerns about social stress and exclusion are prominent. For instance, a large majority (80.7%) linked tourism to increased social problems such as drug abuse and excessive alcohol consumption, and 71.3% reported that peak-season tourist flow causes stress among residents. Similarly, 78.7% agreed that tourism displaces local populations, and 70% indicated restricted access to community sites reserved for tourists. Conversely, cultural resilience appears strong: nearly half of respondents (48%) disagreed that tourism alters traditional lifestyles, and 58% considered tourism as contributing to the preservation of local customs, although 39.3% held the opposite view.

3.3. Community Perceptions of Environmental Impacts

The analysis of environmental impacts, shown in

Table 4. Community Assessment of Environmental Dimension Items.

Statements on Environmental Impacts of Tourism	Agree	Disagree	Neutral
Env1. Tourism reduces the diversity of flora and fauna in the region	66.00%	34.00%	0.00%
Env2. Tourism disturbs and destroys the region’s natural habitats	68.67%	31.33%	0.00%
Env3. Tourism reduces water and air quality	87.33%	10.67%	2.00%
Env4. Tourism has contributed to increased traffic congestion and noise in the region	58.00%	26.00%	16.00%
Env5. There is high energy and water consumption by tourist establishments during peak season	76.67%	16.00%	7.33%
Env6. Tourism increases waste production	68.00%	32.00%	0.00%
Env7. Tourism enhances the aesthetic value of the area	100.00%	0.00%	0.00%
Env8. Tourism causes environmental pollution (water, soil, and air)	75.33%	0.00%	24.67%
Env9. Tourism creates conflicts of interest by conducting business using natural resources	73.33%	0.00%	26.67%

Source: Authors’ own elaboration.

, reveals a mostly negative perception of tourism’s effects on natural resources and ecosystems. Most respondents agreed that tourism decreases water and air quality (87.3%) and adds to environmental pollution (75.3%). Similarly, high agreement levels were seen for statements about habitat disturbance (68.7%), biodiversity loss (66%), and increased waste generation (68%). Concerns about resource use were also common, with 76.7% noting high energy and water consumption by tourist facilities during peak season. Additionally, 73.3% perceived conflicts of interest stemming from business activities that exploit natural resources. The only positive aspect mentioned was aesthetic enhancement, with unanimous agreement (100%) that tourism improves the visual appeal of the area.

As a complement to the descriptive results presented above,

Table 5. Summary of Cross-Tabulation Results by Stakeholder Group.

Dimension	Highest Agreement (Most Supported Item)	Lowest Agreement (Group with Lowest Support for That Item)	Largest Divergence (Item with Largest Difference Across Groups)	Groups with Highest Score	Groups with Lowest Score
Economic	E2 Job opportunities	Organizations (80%)	E5 Infrastructure improvements	Organizations (100%)/Businesses (93.94%)	Educational Centers (0%)/Local Residents (44.68%)
Social	S3 Crowding & queues	Educational Centers (71.43%)	S6 Displacement	Businesses (84.85%)/Local Residents (81.91%)	Public Administration (45.45%)
Environmental	A3 Lower water/air quality	Public Administration (81.82%)	A9 Resource-use conflicts	Organizations (100%)	Organizations (100%)

Source: Authors’ own elaboration based on survey data. Note: Percentages represent the proportion of respondents within each stakeholder group who selected Agree or Strongly Agree (values 4 and 5) on a five-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree … 5 = strongly agree).

summarizes key cross-tabulations that highlight how perceptions differ across stakeholder groups. In the economic dimension, Local Residents, Organizations, and Public Administration show the highest levels of agreement on perceived economic benefits, particularly job creation, whereas perceptions of infrastructure improvements vary considerably, with Organizations and Businesses reporting very high agreement and Educational Centers and Local Residents expressing substantially lower support. In the social dimension, all groups identify crowding and pressure on services as prominent issues during peak tourism periods, but concerns about displacement differ markedly, with Businesses and Local Residents reporting high levels of agreement and Public Administration showing much lower concern. In the environmental dimension, Organizations consistently display the highest levels of agreement regarding negative impacts, while Public Administration and Local Residents report comparatively lower but still notable levels.

4. Discussion

The survey results show that residents associate tourism primarily with employment opportunities and with increased visibility for locally produced crafts. Patterns of resident perceptions similar to those observed here have also been documented in coastal and rural destinations where tourism is linked to short-term income derived from small businesses and artisanal activities [53]. Respondents additionally highlighted increases in living costs and price adjustments influenced by external tourism demand. Comparable situations have been reported in destinations exposed to strong currency-indexed markets and cross-border tourism flows [54].

Responses in the social dimension indicate residents’ concerns about crowding, pressure on public spaces, and perceived displacement associated with tourism-related development. Similar perceptions are evident in studies of coastal communities, where urban expansion and tourism activity increase pressure on housing and local mobility systems [55]. Respondents also described reduced access to traditional gathering spaces and changes in the locality’s everyday use. Empirical work in comparable destinations reports that such adjustments in spatial use are frequently associated with increased visitation and tourism-driven land-use changes [56,57].

The environmental results of this study confirm long-standing concerns documented for this coastal zone, where early assessments had already identified cumulative ecological stress and governance gaps affecting marine and terrestrial ecosystems [58]. These findings align with broader evidence from coastal destinations, which show that rapid tourism expansion is commonly associated with deteriorating water and air quality, increased waste, and habitat disturbance [12]. Beyond these localized and well-known pressures, international analyses warn that tourism-dependent regions often lack effective mechanisms to prevent biodiversity loss, placing sensitive ecosystems at heightened risk as visitor flows intensify [59]. The findings also reveal several perception-based indicators that may serve as early warning signs for governance challenges in the community. A substantial share of respondents reported restrictions on access to public spaces, perceived displacement linked to tourism-driven development, and tensions arising from the use of natural resources. Similarly, many participants associated tourism growth with deteriorating water and air quality, increased waste generation, and heightened pressure on local infrastructure. These patterns suggest that social and environmental stress is already visible at the community level, even before formal governance systems register it as a critical issue.

Although citizen science has gained visibility in sustainability research, its application within sustainable tourism governance remains uneven, as most documented initiatives focus on environmental monitoring, biodiversity observation, or visitor-generated data supported by digital platforms, participatory GIS, or sensor-based technologies (e.g., refs. [33,34,36,39]). Empirical studies that explicitly link citizen science to inclusive decision-making continue to be limited, and systematic reviews show that participation often remains tokenistic rather than meaningfully community-led [35]. Evidence from coastal destinations in the Global South, particularly in Mexico, also remains sparse despite rapid tourism-driven environmental and social change [60,61,62]. In this sense, the present study offers an initial contribution to this gap by showing how a basic, perception-based form of citizen science can provide locally grounded insights that support early reflections on sustainable tourism governance in a rapidly transforming coastal community. Moreover, the findings support broader recommendations from the UNWTO and the Organization of American States (OEA) that sustainable tourism governance should include local participation as an essential component rather than a secondary consideration [27].

The results of this study show that residents perceive growing pressures related to access, displacement, and environmental change, signaling issues that warrant early attention within local governance. Information derived from the survey was synthesized into a technical report, which was generated and disseminated through the institutional mechanisms of the postgraduate sustainability program of a leading higher-education institution in northwest Mexico, which has a long tradition of fostering regional sustainability partnerships, as documented by [63] and subsequently shared with state tourism authorities. The absence of follow-up actions underscores the need for governance arrangements that can translate community-based evidence into timely institutional responses.

Comparative research shows that destinations enhance governance capacity by establishing permanent structures for participatory monitoring, as illustrated in [64] analysis of tourism observatories and their role in integrating resident perspectives into decision-making processes. Evidence from mountainous tourist regions further demonstrates that citizen observations can be incorporated into official management platforms to support early identification of emerging pressures, as reported by [65]. Together, these insights suggest that an entry-level, contributory citizen-science approach can function not only as a means of community data collection but also as a foundational instrument for strengthening anticipatory and more accountable tourism governance.

5. Study Limitations and Future Research

This study presents several methodological limitations that merit consideration. Although the sample size (N = 150) was calculated using a proportional stratified sampling strategy to ensure representation across stakeholder groups, generalizability remains limited because selection within each stratum relied on non-probabilistic procedures, including convenience and snowball sampling, which preclude statistical inference beyond this specific community. Voluntary participation may also have introduced selection and response biases, as individuals more directly exposed to tourism or more motivated to express their views could be disproportionately represented. Furthermore, the exclusive use of in-person surveys conducted within a defined seasonal window may have influenced participants’ perceptions, thereby constraining external validity in contexts where tourism intensity varies substantially throughout the year.

Another important limitation is the cross-sectional nature of this study, which captures community perceptions at a single point in time and therefore cannot identify temporal variations associated with seasonal tourism dynamics, changing environmental conditions, or evolving governance responses. The absence of longitudinal follow-up restricts the ability to determine whether the social and environmental pressures reported by residents are intensifying, stabilizing, or diminishing as tourism expands.

Future research would benefit from expanding the range of stakeholders to include households not directly involved in tourism activities; although they do not participate in the tourism economy, they are indirectly affected by tourism-driven changes in prices, mobility conditions, access to services, and environmental pressures, and their perspectives would enrich the understanding of community-wide impacts. Moreover, research employing probabilistic sampling frames, broader multi-community comparisons, and longitudinal or mixed-mode data collection would help strengthen the robustness and transferability of future findings. Moreover, future studies could extend this work by incorporating analyses of demographic subgroups, particularly gender and age, to examine whether these attributes shape differences in tourism-related perceptions.

Finally, this study employed a basic, perception-based form of citizen science; this level of engagement was intentionally aligned with the exploratory purpose of generating an initial, community-grounded understanding. However, future studies could incorporate more participatory or collaborative forms of citizen science to deepen and broaden community involvement.

6. Conclusions

This study shows that community-generated information reveals social and environmental pressures that are emerging in this coastal tourism destination in northwestern Mexico. The results yield three core analytical insights specific to tourism in this coastal area of Sonora. First, the changes perceived by residents, including loss of access, higher prices, and signs of ecological stress, function as early indicators that tourism governance institutions should address without delay. Second, the concentration of perceived impacts in domains such as mobility, coastal access, basic services, and natural resource use suggests the need to strengthen tourism governance mechanisms to coordinate environmental monitoring, land-use regulation, and community participation. Third, the study demonstrates that simple forms of citizen participation can support evidence informed tourism governance in this locality by generating timely and context-specific information that complements official datasets and technical evaluations

Residents report increases in living costs, reduced access to traditional public spaces, perceived displacement associated with tourism-related land-use changes, and visible environmental deterioration, including declining water and air quality, habitat disturbance, and increased waste generation. These perceptions are consistent with prior assessments made for this coastline over nearly two decades and confirm the persistence of locally experienced impacts as tourism expands in this area. Thus, it is possible to conclude that an entry-level, perception-based form of citizen science can add value to formal tourism planning processes by drawing attention to emerging threats and local needs that could otherwise be neglected.

These results suggest that local authorities in this coastal region could strengthen tourism governance by establishing routine participation mechanisms, monitoring public access to coastal spaces, and incorporating community-generated indicators into planning and management instruments. Although the findings of this study are specific to this coastal tourism community, the dynamics documented here illustrate mismatches between policy expectations and local outcomes that, if present in other coastal destinations, could hinder progress toward national objectives associated with SDGs 8, 10, and 12.