For tourist destinations, sustainable economic development requires, together with the attainment of economic efficiency, environmental protection and social cohesion. This latter aspect implies that the local community has to be actively involved in the planning and in the management of the tourism sector, and that (the great part of) tourism earnings have to be fairly distributed among the residents. Desires and aspirations of local residents, and their attitudes towards tourists should be carefully taken into consideration by tourism planners (Akis et al., 1996; Faulkner and Tideswell, 1997). The success of many tourism development programs depends on a local management that is sensible both to the social impact of tourism on the host population, and able to increase the benefits derived from tourism by preventing or reducing its negative aspects. Overall, tourism has both positive and negative externalities on local populations. Previous studies corroborate these effects: Doxey (1975) finds that local residents' attitudes towards tourism may oscillate between euphoria and antagonism (see also Castellani et al., 2007). In this paper we studied how residents are affected by tourism and how they adjust their choices with respect to these effects. This approach might lead to important policy implications: policy makers are aware that tourists and residents needs are often conflicting, and they need precise tools of analysis in order to measure this trade-off and to design their policies. In the last 15 years, the socio-economic impact of tourism and the factors affecting attitudes towards tourism in host communities have received significant attention (Alberini et al., 2005; Akis et al., 1996; Crotts and Holland, 1993; Faulkner and Tideswell, 1997; Haralambopoulos and Pizam, 1996; Lindberg and Johnson, 1997a, b; Lindberg et al., 1999; Zanatta et al., 2005). In particular, tourism impact is often disaggregated into three categories: economic, socio-cultural and environmental (Bull, 1991; Pearce, 1989; Ryan, 1991;Williams, 1979). Since tourism generally disrupts social, cultural and environmental local systems, the non-economic impact often tends to be negative as a whole (Liu et al., 1987), whilst economic effects are perceived as positive.1 Economic impacts are known and well measured because estimated for different purposes (Dwyer and Forsyth, 1993), whereas social and environmental effects are of difficult evaluation. Therefore, the overall benefit of tourism development is often overestimated, and might drive to sub-optimal policy decisions (Freeman, 1993). The intensity and the direction of the overall impact depends on a variety of socio-cultural and economic factors associated to the local destination, including the nature of tourism activities, tourists' personal characteristics, and the pace of tourism development (Haralambopoulos and Pizam, 1996;Wall and Mathieson, 2005). Our study analysed residents' preferences by means of the choice modelling, a survey-based technique often used to place a value on a non-marketable or semipublic good. Its use has spread in many research fields (marketing, cultural, health, transport and environmental economics) and in recent years it has often been applied in tourism economics to analyse tourists' preferences with respect to trip attributes, recreational and heritage demand, the attractiveness of the destination and tourism policies.2 In contrast to the main stream of the tourism literature, our paper focussed on the preferences of residents and local stake-holders regarding possible and hypothetical modifications in the urban and territorial configuration. Interviews to a representative sample of the population were conducted to estimate the willingness to pay (WTP) for (hypothetical) changes in the composition of goods. Stated preference methods offer advantages in analysing trade-offs between tourists and residents. In particular, the possible trade-off with the local population stems from the fact that the most important resource for tourism - the environment or, more generally, the territory - is to be shared with residents. Since the "holiday" can be seen as a set of different characteristics which compose a generic good, choice experiments seem to fit data better than other stated preference methods. The destination analysed in this paper, Rimini, is one of the major Italian seaside resorts and mass tourism destinations, with more than ten million overnight stays only in the summer months (Orsingher, 2004). Located on the Adriatic sea, Rimini is a middle-size city, with about 130,000 inhabitants and an income per capita of more than € 17,000 (higher than the Italian average). Although tourism represents one of the main economic sectors of the city, Rimini is now a destination in the mature stage of its development, and has been undergoing a strong diversification in the manufacturing sector and in business and cultural tourism. To summarise, different types of tourists and different types of residents3 share the destination and ask for alternative uses of the (scarce) territory. In this paper, we focussed on residents' preferences, while we refer to Brau et al. (2008) for the analysis of tourists preferences; in the final discussion we compared our results with those of Brau et al. (2008) in order to identify synergies or trade-off in the use of the territory and to discuss some policy implications. In particular, we aimed to detect the effects on residents preferences of changes in the intensity (levels) of six key characteristics (attributes) that identify the use of Rimini's territory.4 Residents were interviewed in Spring 2006 and asked to indicate their preferred choices among several pairs of hypothetical alternative scenarios differing in the levels of the six attributes. Conditional logit models enabled us to estimate the relative weight of each attribute in affecting the residents' choice and allowed us to compare their preferences with those of tourists. To the best of our knowledge, this is one of the few attempts to explicitly use choice modelling to analyse residents preferences in connection with tourism. Lindberg et al. (1999); and Lindberg, (2001) used choice experiments in are (Sweden) to evaluate residents' willingness to accept negative impacts of tourism development (in particular in a sky resort) provided that they also receive positive effects. The remaining of the paper is structured as follows: in Sect. 9.2 we briefly review the methodology applied and we describe the questionnaire. Section 9.3 illustrates some descriptive statistics. Section 9.4 presents the main econometric results of the choice experiments while Sect. 9.5 discusses the policy implications and sets the agenda for future research.