Until quite recently "tourism" was principally a feature of, and was largely confined to, the developed countries. During the past two decades, however, tourism has become an income earning alternative to the many Third World countries, and many have capitalized on the industry which has become known as a "passport to development." In recent years the situation has worsened for these former exporters of primary agricultural products. These products are suffering from the general fall in world commodity prices and competition from larger and more efficient agricultural producers. In addition, the world economic impact has been translated to ever-burgeoning foreign debt crisis and the further deterioration of balance of payments. The need for foreign currency has been intensified by the new export promotion policies which are replacing import substitution as the dominant development policy in Third World manufacturing. Tourism under these circumstances is a mixed blessing, and until very recently economists have pondered tourism's contribution carefully and have applied a wide range of theories to a description of the benefits of extended tourism business. In addition, with the new surge in tourism literature not only have the economic benefits of tourism been questioned, but tourism's social, cultural, and environmental impacts have become major issues of contention. The complex matrix of advantages and disadvantages ensures that governments must face an unenviable task of trying to weigh gains from new income and employment against certain less direct and long-term losses. While tourism on the one hand is blessed as the passport to development," on the other hand it has been characterized as a force which destroys uncomprehendingly and unintentionally cultural values and social customs. In order to enhance and secure the positive influences of tourism in the long run and ensure its sustainability as an alternative means of income, an elaborated national tourism policy is required. An effective policy would guide the industry through certain development plans in accordance with the overall national development policies. The current study suggests that Turkey's tourism development was subject to various deliberate influences and spontaneous dynamics without a prior policy formulation in the form of a national tourism policy. This study further suggests that the tourist boom of 1980s caught the government and private sector by surprise because of the lack of pre-planning or policy research. This is obvious when one examines the tourism organization and administration which is centrally controlled and implemented. The interaction between various levels of government is a critical point. This study also suggests that Turkey's position as a new tourist destination related positively to its new export promotion policies or the shift from an import substitution industrialization (lSI) economy to an export-oriented growth (XOG) economy. To note, motivations to develop tourism in Turkey are first, to gain foreign exchange, and second, to establish that Turkey represents a politically stable environment for foreign investment. However, the lack of a national tourism policy has confined the industry to only a "short term economic gain" objective which has ruled out any effort to measure its net economic value instead of gross economic revenue. Furthermore the "planning" process has remained limited to physical planning to the detriment of social, environmental, and territorial planning. The lack of regional planning with goals to reduce disparities are obvious signs of the failure of planning in the tourism sector. Therefore, this study suggests that tourism has not been employed in a fashion to alleviate or minimize spatial inequalities, but rather the trend has been to its intensification. "Domestic tourism" has been neglected in terms of policy and planning, and social tourism, will likely disappear because many will not be able to afford the uncontrolled tourist prices in the new crowded tourist centers. The result of the study, suggests that tourism development cannot be separated from the "development" ideologies and theories which are translated to policies in the national level. In order to achieve a better understanding of tourism's role within the national development policy, one needs to examine the extension of analysis beyond the core periphery relation which is manifested in "dependency theory." The new international division of labor will most likely devise a new pattern for capital accumulation. This new process has been manifested in "dependent development" which produced new formations (i.e., NICs) or "semiperipheral" economies. In order for tourism to be a viable economic and social sector, it must overcome the disadvantages of "dependent development." The prime task of this study was to examine the complex nature of the tourism industry in Turkey as it relates to the government's effort to tourism development. The study reveals that the government's involvement in the tourism industry was hampered by an impasse in development strategies and ideologies due to the retreatment from the etatist philosophy to the export oriented/privatization scenario. This resulted in a distortion characterized by inactivity in tourism (i.e., the absence of a national tourism policy. Tourism was perceived as a short-term remedy to the lack of foreign capital as an invisible sector (replacing worker's remittances from abroad). All told, the tourism industry, regardless of its myriad potentials, was confined to a few enclave developments as directed by market forces rather than as a derivative of formal planning decisions. The government's role remains passive at this point despite a requirement for active intervention in tourism activity_