comodificationnaure ecoturism

8/3/2019 ComodificationNaure Ecoturism

1/13

B i o d i v e r s i t y a n d C o n s e r v a t i o n 5 , 293-305 (1996)

E c otour i sm and c om m odi fic a t ion: p r o tec t ingpeople and p lacesD A V I D A . K I N GProfessor Emeritus, School o f Renewable Natural ~,esources, University o f Arizona, Tucson, AZ85721, USAW I L L I A M P . S T E W A R TAssociate Professor, Departm ent of Recreation, Park and Tourism Sciences, Texas A & M University, CollegeStation, T X 77843-2261, USAReceived 10 September 1995; accepted 27 Septem ber 1995

Th e abil i ty of ecotourism to pro tect bo th people and places is an unresolved, and growing, concern.Com mo dif ica tion of hos t cul ture and envi ronm ent is a widely repor ted social impact of tour ism an dspawns an array of implications regarding indigen ous people 's view of their places a nd themselves.The degree of impact f rom ecotour ism developm ent i s re la ted to the degree of market dev elopm entwi th in the indigenous com mu ni ty and the i r s ta te o f decline regarding natura l resource scarc ity.Pre-exis ting pow er d i f ferent ia ls be tween local people and o ther groups ma y be exacerbated byecotour ism developm ent . To protec t bo th people a nd the i r p laces , na t ive people 's c laim to con t ro lshould be legit imized by conservat ion and governm ent author i t ies , par t icular ly indigenous people ' sro le in technica l m anage m ent of the p rotec ted area . R egional and n at ional govern me nt contro ls a r ere levant a t the incept ion of ecotour ism developm ent , but u l t imate ly should be reduced to one ofinf ras truc ture p lanning and coordinat ion .K e y w o r d s : conserva tion; tourism; cultural survival; internatio nal t ravel; rura l d evelo pm ent policies.

I n t r o d u c t i o nE c o t o u r i s m is p r o m o t e d a s a m e a n s o f a ch i e vi n g c o m m u n i t y d e v e l o p m e n t a n dp r e s e r v a ti o n o f n a tu r a l e n v i r o n m e n t s . T h e h o p e o f e c o to u r i s m i s t h e f o r m a t i o n o f as y m b i o t ic r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n t o u r i s m , i n d i g e n o u s p e o p l e a n d n a t u r a l a r e a s . I n a ni d e a l i z e d m o d e l o f e c o t o u r i s m , a n i n t e g r a t io n o f c o n s e r v a t i o n a n d d e v e l o p m e n t o c c u r s inw h i c h e n t r e p r e n e u r s , g o v e r n m e n t a g e n t s , a n d t o u r i s t s s t r i v e t o c r e a t e s u s t a i n a b l er e l a ti o n s h i p s w i t h t h e e n v i r o n m e n t w h i l e i m p r o v i n g t h e w e l f a r e o f l o c al p e o p l e ( cf . K u t a y ,1 98 9; F e n n e l l a n d E a g l e s , 1 99 0; L e e a n d S n e p e n g e r , 1 99 1; W a l l a c e , 1 9 9 2) .

T h e o b j e c t i v e s in t h is p a p e r a r e t o r e v i e w c r i t ic a l l y t h e p r o m i s e s a n d r e a l i t y o fe c o t o u r i s m i n r e l a t i o n t o t h e g o a ls o f c o n s e r v a t i o n a n d d e v e l o p m e n t , a n d t o s u g g e s t s o m el im i t s t o t h e p o t e n t i a l o f e c o t o u r i s m t o m o v e t o w a r d s t h o s e g o a ls . S p e c u l a t i o n is p r o v i d e do n w h a t e c o t o u r i s m c a n a n d c a n n o t o f f e r h o s t s a n d g u e s t s . E c o t o u r i s m c a n h a v e b o t hp o s i ti v e a n d n e g a t i v e e f f ec t s o n i n d i g e n o u s p e o p l e . I t is a r g u e d t h a t p r o m o t i n g e c o t o u r i s mo n t h e b a s is t h a t i t i m p r o v e s t h e w e l f a r e o f i n d i g e n o u s p e o p l e is d i s in g e n u o u s , a t b es t .R a t h e r , e c o t o u r i s m s h o u l d b e p o r t r a y e d a s a s o u rc e o f r e v e n u e t o f u n d p a r k s a n d o t h e rp r o t e c t e d a r e a s t h a t n e e d s m u l t i p l e l e v e ls o f c o n t r o l i f i t i s t o h a v e a p o s i ti v e n e t e f f e c t o ni n d i g e n o u s p e o p l e .0960-3115 1996 Ch apm an & Ha ll


2/13

294 K i n g a n d S t e w a r tEmergence of ecotourismOver the past few decades, tourism has grown to be among the world's top three industries.along with oil and motor vehicles (World Tourism Organization, 1991: Harrison, 1992a:Fletcher and Latham, 1995). Along with this growth, market segmentation, based on anincreasing diversity in traveller preferences and spurred by the travel industry's ability tocater to such diverse preferences, has occurred. Interest in the environment also hasincreased and has been a major influence on segmentation within the travel market.

In response to the rhetoric of the current environmental movement emphasizing theneed for individuals to become involved in conservation on a daily basis and in all aspectsof their lives (Miller, 1994), a well-educated, globally aware segment of travellers hasemerged. They are keenly interested in learning first-hand about natural areas, and want toprovide incentives to indigenous people to protect such areas (cf. Eadington and Smith.1992: Boo, 1992). Contributing to the formation of this travel segment is a disillusionmentwith impacts of resort-style tourism in places such as Waikiki in the US, Costa Brava inSpain, and the Gold Coast in Australia (Farrell, 1992). The response of the travel industryhas been to cultivate various segments of an environmentally-aware market (e.g.ecotourism, alternative tourism, science tourism, cultural tourism).

Government agencies, planners, and development bankers view tourism as a means ofproviding jobs, incomes, foreign exchange and tax revenues. Compared to other types ofindustrial development, the environmental impacts of tourism development are perceivedas being less negative. Thus, the international development community is motivated to usetourism, based on the attract ion of natural environments, to improve the economic welfareof indigenous people.Ecotourism takes advantage of travellers interested in natural areas and theirprotection. The li terature on ecotourism, however, encompasses more than just a mergingof conservation with capitalism, With varying degrees of explicitness, the literature alsoembraces concern for the economic and social welfare of indigenous people, and at times,appears to portray ecotourism as a weapon for the defence of cultures (Farrell andRunyan, 1991 ). From its inception, Hetzer ( 1965, as cited in Grenier et al. 1993) proposedthat ecotourism should have a minimum impact on, and maximum respect for, hostcultures. Boeger (1991, p. 2) discusses ecotourism as respecting "the dignity and diversityof other cultures'. The brochure of the Ecotourism Society (a non-governmental tradeorganization founded in 1990) states that ecotourism "sustains the well-being of localpeople'. A series of reports from the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) have been mostcautious about claiming links between ecotourism, local people, and protected areas (e.g.Boo, 1992). However, the WWF recognizes the relevance of local peoples in globalconservation efforts and has initiated a programme to "improve the quality of life" of suchpeople. In this sense, ecotourism has been presented as different from other kinds oltourism in that it claims to be controlled development that builds healthy relationshipsbetween protected areas, tourists and indigenous people.In championing ecotourism as beneficial for indigenous people, however, its promotershave stumbled upon issues concerning the social justice of tourism. Although exceptionsexist, the tourism literature is generally cynical regarding the relationship betweenindigenous people and their encounters with tourists. (Injustices thai occurred whennatural environments were opened to tourists and closed to tradit ional uses by indigenouspeople are well-documented (Reynoso y Valle and de Regt, 1979: Eadington and Smith,1992).) A framework upon which much of this cynicism is built can be usefully applied to


3/13

Pro tec t ing peop le and p lacese c o t o u r i s m , a n d s e r v e s t o d e l i m i t t h e s c o p ed e v e l o p m e n t .

o f i t s e f f ec t i venes s a s295

a t oo l f o r l oca l

T h e r e a l i ty o f t h e t o u r i s tIn h i s e s say on t he l o s t a r t o f t r ave l , B oor s t i n ( 1987) po i n t s ou t t ha t t r ave l l i ng w as onceuncomfor t ab l e , d i f f i cu l t and expens i ve . I n t r ac i ng t he e t ymol og i ca l r oo t s o f ' t r ave l ' , hef o u n d t h e m t o b e s y n o n y m o u s w i th t h e r o o t s o f ' tr a v a il ' ( m e a n i n g ' t r o u b l e ' , ' w o r k ' , o r' t o rmen t ' ) and sugges t ed t ha t , p r i o r t o t he 19 t h cen t u ry , t r ave l l i ng w as cons i de r ed as t r enu ous s ea r ch fo r o t he r peo p l es and ad ven t u re (B oo r s t i n , 1987 , pp . 84 -85) . I n con t r a s t ,he cha rac t e r i zes p r e sen t -day t r ave l l e r s a s be i ng pas s i ve , expec t i ng t o pu rchase t r ave l -re la ted services eas i ly , and gul l ib ly enjoying the thr i l l s of r i sk ing the i r l i fe wi thout t akingany rea l r i sks a t a ll (p . 80; c f. M acC ann el l , 1973; Co hen , 1988).

T h e c h a n g e d n a t u r e o f tr a v e l is p a r t ly a r e s u l t o f i m p r o v e m e n t s i n b o t h a c c e s s a n dg e o g r a p h i c a l k n o w l e d g e . F o r m e r l y ' r e m o t e ' a r e a s a r e n o lo n g e r s u c h b e c a u s e o f i m p r o v e dt r a n s p o r t a t i o n . C a r t o g r a p h e r s h a v e m a p p e d t h e g l o b e a t i n c r e a s i n g l y l a r g e r s c a l e s( J o h n s t o n a n d E d w a r d s , 1 99 4). A n t h r o p o l o g i s t s h a v e s tu d i e d a n d r e p o r t e d o n m o s t o f t h ew o r l d ' s cu l tu r e s . Jou rna l i s t s and t he m ed i a l i te r a l ly b r ing t he w o r l d to ou r f r on t do or s t ep so n a n e v e r y d a y b as is .

P r i o r t o t h e 2 0 th c e n t u r y , tr a v e l t o r e m o t e p l a c e s r e q u i r e d a n e n t o u r a g e o f p a c k s t o c k o rb e a r e r s a n d h e a v y c a m p i n g e q u i p m e n t , a l l u n d e r t h e d i r e c ti o n o f g u id e s . W i th i n t h e p a s tf ew decades , t h i s exp l o r e r s t y l e o f t r ave l has been r ep l aced w i t h r ap i d , l e s s s t r enuousm o d e s o f tr a n s p o r t a ti o n , l ig h t w e ig h t g e a r , a n d e x p a n d i n g o p t i o n s f o r w e s t e r n - st y l el o d g i n g . I n e s s e n c e , t h a t w h i c h w a s o n c e a y e a r ' s j o u r n e y b e t w e e n c o n t i n e n t s a n d i n t ou n c h a r t e r e d t e r r i t o r y , i s n o w a c a r e f u l l y s c h e d u l e d , r i s k - f r e e , t w o - w e e k ' a d v e n t u r e '(Turne r and A sh , 1975 ; B oor s t i n , 1987) .A n t i c i p a t i o n i s a n i m p o r t a n t p a r t o f th e t r a v e l e x p e r ie n c e , a n d t h e e x p e c t a t i o n s a n di m a g e s o f th a t e x p e r i e n c e h e l d b y t o u r is t s a r e c r e a t e d a n d f e d b y n u m e r o u s a g e n ts . T r a v e lg u i d e b o o k s , m a g a z in e s a n d v i d e o s a r e a v a i l ab l e b y t h e h u n d r e d s . T h e b e h a v i o u r e x p e c t e dof t ou r i s t s comes f rom t he adv i ce o f va r i ous p ro fes s i ona l s i n t he t r ave l i ndus t ry w hoe n c o u r a g e t h e m t o ' d i s c o v e r ' re m o t e a r e a s . C o n v e r s a t i o n s w i t h fr i en d s a n d a c q u a i n t a n c e s ,w h o h a v e c o m p l e t e d t h e j o u r n e y , s e r v e t o d e f i n e t h e p r o s p e c t i v e e x p e r i e n c e . T h e m a s sm a r k e t i n g o f o u t d o o r w e a r a n d t h e i m a g e s p r e s e n t e d i n m a i l- o r d e r c a t a l o g u e s f u r n is hp r o s p e c t i v e t o u r i st s w i t h p o w e r f u l i n d u c e m e n t s f o r c o n f o r m i ty . F r o m a v a r i e ty o f s o u r c e s,p e o p l e h a v e b e c o m e t h o r o u g h l y a c c u s t o m e d t o a c c e p t i n g i m a g e s a s i n v i t a t i o n s t ob e h a v i o u r a n d a s n o r m a t i v e s t a n d a r d s b y w h i c h to e v a l u a t e t h e ir o w n b e h a v i o u r ( B o o r s t in ,1987 , p . 192) . I n many w ays , t r ave l oppor t un i t i e s have come t o be packaged expe r i encest h a t a r e s o l d as c o m m o d i t i e s to a c o n s u m i n g c u l tu r e . N o t o n l y c a n a d v e n t u r e b e p a c k e di n to t w o w e e k s , b u t t h e w e l l- d e f in e d e x p e c t a t i o n s a r e g u a r a n t e e d !

Tour i sm has t he po t en t i a l t o b r i ng a new soc i o - cu l t u r a l r ea l i t y t o t he hos t communi t y .T h e t o u r is t s c o m e t o t h e h o s t c o m m u n i t y n o t o n l y w i t h th e i r e x p e c t a t i o n s a n d i m a g e s , b u tw i t h t h e e c o n o m i c p o w e r t o f ulfil th e m . T h e i r e x p e n d i t u r e s a r e a p o w e r f u l f o r c e a n d c a nsubs t an t i a l l y a l t e r t he hos t com m uni t y ' s w ay o f l if e (N ash , 1981 ; G r en i e r et al. , 1993). Thed i f fe r e n ti a l in e c o n o m i c p o w e r b e t w e e n h o s t s an d g u e s t s c a n l e a d t o d e p e n d e n c y , c a u s i n gsom e scho l a r s t o v i ew t ou r i sm as i mper i a l i sm (de K ad t , 1979 , pp . 50 -67 ; M eyer , 1988 ;N ash , 1989), neoco l on i a l i sm (Tu rne r and A sh , 1975 ; B r i t t on , 1982), o r s t ruc t u r a l l y -m a i n t a i n e d u n d e r d e v e l o p m e n t ( L e a , 1 9 8 8 , H a r r i s o n , 1 9 92 a).


4/13

296 King and StewartC o m m o d i f ic a t i o n o f n a t u r eThe intrusion of guests, along with their monetary power, transforms the hosts' nativeenvironment and culture into commodities. What were once places for the activities ofdaily life, as well as the activities themselves, have become valued as market commodities(Watson and Kopachevsky, 1994). What may have been a traditional relationship betweenone's people and environment, becomes a pattern of living in which behaviour isinfluenced by, and dependent upon, market transactions.

In a widely cited example of the commodification of culture, Greenwood (1977)discusses the collapse of the Alarde, a Basque festival in Spain. The centuries-old festival.celebrating the victory by the Basques over the French siege of 1638 AD, symbolized theBasques' collective valour. The festival was a source of pride for the townsfolk, andpreparations for it took months to complete and involved most of the townsfolk -- youngand old, rich and poor.

In the late 1960s, the Spanish government declared that the performance central to theAlarde be performed twice on the festival day in order to accommodate the growingnumber of tourists. This order transformed the Alarde from a festival for and by theresidents into a show for tourists. Atti tudes toward the Alarde consequently changed fromenthusiasm to indifference; two years after the declaration, the Spanish government wasconsidering paying the townsfolk to perform in order to maintain the festival (Greenwood.1977, pp. 131-135).

Since Greenwood's essay was published, others have identified touristic situationsinvolving commodification. The common thread in these discussions is a change in themeaning at tributed to a host activity or object. This change is from one of intrinsic valuewithin a customary context to that of an artifact of exchange (Cohen, 1988). In addition.the audience for an activity or object has changed from the host to the guest. Watson andKopachevsky (1994), in fact, argue that the relationship between host and guest presumescommodification (see also Simmel (1950) for his insight on interaction with "strangers').Guests require access to, and information about, the local environment . The hosts are in aposition to sell access and expertise, leading them to a market relationship with theguests.

For indigenous people, the commodification of nature implies a change in the meaningof their environment from a source of direct sustenance with a use value to a commoditywith an exchange value. This change expresses a shift in the relationship between theindigenous people and their environment, from one of working with the land to one ofworking for tourists (who observe the land). This shift, from traditional, life-sustainingactivities to service activities, may be perceived as negative in many indigenous cultures(Lea, 1988; Place, 1991). Hence, the commodification of nature not only changes anindigenous people's view of their places, but also their view of themselves.Commodification is facilitated by concepts such as 'national park', "protected area'."endangered species" Wirgin forest' and 'intact ecosystem" that are social constructs ofwestern societies and cultural artifacts of the developed world (cf Huth, 1957; Nash, 1982).Areas designated as parks or protected areas become objects in the western mind and arelikely to be thought of as existing independently of man and culture (Hayles, 1995:Shepard, 1995; see also Whitehead (1931) for his discussion on "misplaced concreteness ').To the ecotourist, they are places to be seen and experienced, that is, consumed. Theybecome identified as ecological travel objectives and the travel industry proceeds to create


5/13

Protecting people and places 297the facilities necessary for travellers to reach and experience them. In other words, amarket for them is created.

Parks, though they may be viewed as 'preserved' or 'pristine' environments, aremanaged in varying degrees of intensity to appear natural (cf. Allen and Hoekstra (1992)pp. 271-274, regarding the 'pristine' biosphere and the human impacted world; see also,McKibben (1989), Cronon (1984), Kaufman (1994) pp. 97-101). In this sense, parks arecontrived settings often staged as authentic representations of untainted, raw nature (cf.Chase (1986), Bonnicksen (1989), Botkin (1990) pp. 193-197). Their authenticity is aperceived property, rather than an intrinsic property of the park itself (cf. Ehrentraut,1993; Soule, 1995).

Hummon (1988) has suggested that alienation in modern lifestyles motivates some totravel in search of authentic experiences. Sociologist Erving Goffman (1959) dividedenvironments into ' front' and 'back' regions. The front is the meeting place of hosts andguests, the back is where the hosts relax between 'performances'. The back, being closed tooutsiders, is thought to be authentic; the front is thought to be a show. Adapting Goffman'sframework, MacCannell (1973) argues that tourist settings represent a staged authenticity.He claimed that most tourist settings are false backs - fronts in the guise of backs - in whichauthent icity is objectified by the tourist (Cohen, 1988). Coming from a different approach,Boorstin (1987, p. 99) reached a similar conclusion about touristie experience:

'Attractions' offer an elaborately contrived indirect experience, an artificial product to beconsumed in the very places where the real thing is free as air.In his essay on the contemporary inability to understand nature, Shepard (1995, pp.

17-18) criticizes the recently emerged discipline of restoration ecology by arguing that:Restoration ecologists are fin the same boat with museum curators making dioramas or habitatgroups; who claim to be making artificial reproductions of the past or present world - and whoare, therefore .. . lost in the vapors of their own imaginations without a compass or a satellite'.

Such dioramas, be they a protected area or contained in a museum, become authentic tothe observer owing to their contextual staging and the interpreted meanings consequent tothat staging. In this sense, the authent icity of the diorama is a socially defined constructrather than a discovery about the external world, but no less real to the observer.

The ecotourist arrives with a reality created from a culturally derived set of images of thehost natural environment and culture. Hosts work to maintain the ecotourist's reality byaccommodating the images he or she brings. The hosts stage the precise aspects ofexperience that ecotourists view as marks of authentici ty (Cohen, 1988). Indeed, seriousecotourists, with their enthusiasm for environmental causes, may be eager to embrace asgenuine the eeotour events which they are served. Thus, they leave feeling that the park isin some state of 'protection', that their travelling - at least in principle - advanced 'globalconservation', and that indigenous people are in some transitional stage of a 'substainable'lifestyle. Such meanings come from the ecotourists' interaction with the entrepreneurs,indigenous people, and environments of their ecotour.

The ecotourism industry, by its efforts to maintain the reality of ecotourists, can producecontrasts in value and behaviour that overwhelm the local culture. Not only does theindigenous people's environment become commodified, but so does their labour. Whenindigenous people's lifestyle turns to serving the tourists, rather than working in the fields


6/13

298 King and Stewartor forests, the authent ic aspects of their way of life become blurred (Turner and Ash, 1~75:Sweet, 1989).

I m p l i ca t io n s o f c o m m o d i f ic a t i o nThe discussion has described commodification as a socio-cultural process from thestandpoint of the tourist and the indigenous culture. This section addresses socio-cultural-economic implications of that process.

One of the cultural complexities is the meaning of "indigenous people'. It is not clear whosuch people are. Are they the local people of whatever origin') Are they only the "pureblooded' descendants of those people who inhabited the area/region prior to its 'discoveryby the western world? Are they the collection of all the people in the host country? As thegeographical scale of one's perspective increases, one's view of who constitutes"indigenous' becomes more inclusive. The diversi ty of the cultures and people representedincreases with scale (Durning, 1992), with subcultures existing in, and making up. a largercultural matrix. For the purposes of this paper, a working description of ~indigenouspeople' follows: descendants of original inhabitants; distinct in language, culture, orreligion from the dominant population: who see themselves as custodians and caretakers.not owners, of their habitats: who define themselves partly in terms of their habitat: whohave a subsistence economy involving direct dependence on their habitat: and wh~,manage resources collectively, often by consensus of elders.

For these people, the negative impacts of ecotourism arc likely to be very large. Theirtraditional and insular cultures are easily overwhelmed by the injection of the stronglycontrasting, external cultural influences, primarily commodifieation, that accompanyecotourism development.

At base, commodification is the process of changing a cultural element, such as ahousehold craft, or a natural object such as a native plant or animal community, into acommodity that can be exchanged in a monetary market: in essence, taking something lhalwas not marketed and turning it into something that is. Most cultures have been affected tosome degree by the market-oriented culture of the western industrial world (Harrison.1992a): tourism, typically, is not the instrument by which a culture is initiated to markets.The degree of market development already present in a local economy will influence theimpact of commodification: the greater the degree of market developmenl, the lessdisruptive will be the development of ecotourism.Pre-existing political and economic power differentials may be reinforced by ecotourismdevelopment (Harrison, 1992b). Indigenous people usually are in the weakest powerposition compared to other segments of society. Typically, they lack the capital andeducation necessary to invest in ecotourism and have only their labour to sell to thetourism industry. Due to a variety of socio-cultural barriers, they "qualify" for only the mostmenial jobs in the industry. Tourism typically parallels other forms of developmentwherein outside organizations gain control of a community's basic natural resourcesleaving the indigenous people almost totally dependent upon those same outsideorganizations for their livelihoods. Since indigenous people are unlikely to participatecomfortably in decision-making forums, their ability to affect change, in an emergent socialsystem in which they find themselves, is limited. In addition, pre-existing power relationswithin some indigenous populations have prompted Johnston and Edwards (1994) to


7/13

Protect ing peo ple and p laces 299argue that even if local participation in tourism decision-making was attainable, it wouldnot necessarily ensure participation for the socially collective good.

'Protection ' of all or portions of their places of daily living for ecological purposes mayresult in drastic impacts on indigenous people. Protection of natural areas may mean thataccess to and use of them by indigenous people is restricted. (In many cases, the indigenouspeople have held de facto property rights to these resources, but receive no compensationfor them when areas are 'protected' because their governments have not recognized theirrights as de jure.) Moreover, given the direct physical and spiritual dependence of thesepeople on their habitats, withdrawal of access and use can cause great harm to them. Aconsequence may be their strong opposition to, and possible obstruction of protectionefforts.

Positive impacts of ecotourism are likely to be the grea test when the indigenous cultureis already in a state of decline as a result of natural resource scarcity. In such cases, thepeople may realize that change is needed and may be prepared for it. The AnnapurnaConservation Area Project in Nepal was appealing to local villagers, in part, because oftheir recognition of the severe deforestation and erosion, and felt a need to change(Rowell, 1989).Opportunities for profit in the transportation, accommodation, and guide serviceelements of the ecotourist travel system are avenues from which commodificationemerges. Two major determinants of these profits are the number of tourists served andtheir lengths of stay. In general, ecotourist firms have an incentive to encourage visitationup to that point at which their profits are maximized. Unfortunate ly, the profit maximizinglevel of visitation may be associated with undesirable levels of impact and overwhelm theindigenous culture, causing serious social problems.Those who make profits from environmental attractions seemingly would haveincentives to prevent degradation of the attractions. One of the difficulties, however, is thatthe attractive nature of environmental phenomena is socially defined. As the globallydesirable dioramas of ecotourism change, the local tourism industry will strive to maintainits authenticity for the ecotourist, and probably will be successful enough to maintainvisitation levels that threa ten the perceived ecological health of the protec ted area. Suchchanges in the staging of the ecotourism context is a politically difficult issue to address, butone tha t should be done within a context of checks and balances.

The nexus of ecotourism and commodification, and especially its implications forindigenous peoples, demonstrate the need to work to avoid negative social andenvironmental impacts.P r o t e c t i o n v e r s u s lo c a l c o n tr o l: d i l e m m a ?Ecotourism development often has been imposed from the national level with localindigenous people excluded from the planning, preparation, and implementation phases ofecotourism development projects. The exclusion of indigenous people is an artifact ofprotectionist policies which elevate an area from being a local resource to being a nationalor international attraction. As the resource becomes valued at these higher levels, theperceived validity of the claims of the indigenous people declines. Moreover, while theconsumptive uses of an area by indigenous people are readily observed, more so thannon-consumptive uses, outsiders may be ignorant of indigenous land-use practices. Thesefactors can lead to a spurious conclusion that the ecologicalprotection of an area and localcontrol of an area are mutually exclusive.


8/13

300 King and StewartW h o s h o u l d c o n t r o l e c o t o u r i s m d e v e l o p m e n t ? T h i s q u e s t i o n n e e d s t o b e d i s ti n g u is h e d

f r o m ' W h o can c o n t r o l e c o t o u r i s m d e v e l o p m e n t ? ' . T h e f o r m e r q u e s t i o n is i d ea l is ti c a n dassoc i a t ed wi th b road po l i cy goa l s ; t he l a t t e r ques t i on i s rhe to r i ca l and as se r t s t he g r imp r a c ti c a li ty t h a t c o n t r o l o v e r a n y t y p e o f e c o n o m i c d e v e l o p m e n t i s p r o b l e m a t ic . R e g a r d i n gt h e ' s h o u l d ' q u e s t io n , i n d i g e n o u s p e o p l e ( t h o s e d i r e c tl y d e p e n d e n t o n t h e r e s o u r c e ) h a v e ac la im t o c o n t r o l b e c a u s e t h e y k n o w t h e r e s o u r c e , m a y h a v e a t le a s t de facto p r o p e r t y r ig h tsto i t , and have t he f ewes t a l t e rna t i ve sources o f l i ve l i hood . However , agenc i es andorgan iza t i ons a t t he r eg iona l , na t i ona l an d in t e rna t iona l l eve ls m ay have t he po l i ti ca lpower , o rgan i za t i ona l sk i l l s , cap i t a l and t echn ica l know-how to manage p ro t ec t ed a r easand to deve lo p t he eco tour i sm fac il it ie s . I dea ll y , con t ro l sh ou ld com e f rom mu l t ip l e l eve ls ,w i th a s much pa r t i c ipa t i on by i nd igenous peop le a s poss ib l e . The p ro t ec t i on o f an a r eacoupled wi th l oca l pa r t i c ipa t i on i n dec i s ion-making a re no t mutua l ly exc lus ive , bu t a r cc o n s i d e r e d a n i m p o r t a n t c o u p l in g f o r s u s ta i n a b le d e v e l o p m e n t .

P a r t i c ipa ti on by i nd igenou s peo p le in t he p l ann ing , p repara t i on , an d implem enta t i on o feco tour i sm dev e lop m ent r a i ses a nu m ber o f i s sues (Ki s s, 1990). The ex t en t o f pa r t i c ipa t i onby ind igenous peop le i n dec i s ion-making i s d i r ec t l y r e l a t ed t o t he i r t endency to suppor tp ro t ec t i on po l i c i e s . Through pa r t i c ipa t i on , i nd igenous peop le pass on t he i r knowledge o fr esource s a s we l l a s i n fo rma t ion ab ou t t he i r t rad i t i ona l l and-use p rac t ices . Th i s know ledgeand in format ion would l eg i t imize con t inued access and would pa r t i a l l y de l imi tm a n a g e m e n t g o a l s o f t h e p r o t e c t e d a r e a .

I d e n ti fi c a ti o n a n d r e c r u i t m e n t o f re p r e s e n t a t i v e s f r o m w i th i n t h e i n d i g e n o u s c o m m u n i t yis an imp or t an t i s sue . I f an e l i t e g roup is r e l i ed up on tha t i s no t r eco gnized b y t he r e s t o f thecommuni ty a s hav ing au thor i t y , t hen dec i s ions wi l l no t be r e spec t ed , and suppor t fo rdeve lopment w i l l be l ack ing . On the o the r hand , pa r t i c ipa t i on based on a mode l o finc lus ive democracy i s a mi s t ake i n communi t i e s where dec i s ion-making i s done t h roughc o n s e n s u s a m o n g a g r o u p o f e ld e r s. W h i le t h e i n t e r n a ti o n a l c o n s e r v a t io n c o m m u n i t y t e n d sto favour inclus ive par t ic ipatory decis ion-making, i t i s impor tant to ident i fy the propel"ind igenous i ns t i t u t i ons and l eader s w i th whom to work .

P ar t i c ipa t i on by t he i nd igenous communi ty i nc ludes pa r t i c ipa t i on i n t he benef i t s o fdeve lopment (K i s s , 1990) . P ayment t o l oca l peop le may be necessa ry un t i l t he d i r ec tb e n e f i ts o f e c o t o u r is m b e c o m e a r e a l it y , o r s u ch p a y m e n t s m a y b e v i e w e d a s c o n ti n u in gc o m p e n s a t i o n t o i n d ig e n o u s c o m m u n i t i e s a s s t e w a r d s o f a n a t io n a l r e s o u rc e . T h ed i s tr ib u t i o n o f s u c h p a y m e n t s a m o n g m e m b e r s o f t h e c o m m u n i t y is b e s t l ef t t o a lo c a li ns t it u t ion , p rov ided i t is t r u ly r eprese n t a t i ve o f t he co mm uni ty and i ts au thor i t y isr e s p e c t e d .Ne gat ive cul tura l imp acts of a l lowing tour i s t v i s i ta t ion to tradi t ional lands can ber e d u c e d i f i n d i g e n o u s p e o p l e b e c o m e d e c i s i o n - m a k e r s r e g a rd i n g t h e a m o u n t , l o c a t io n ,t iming an d na tu re o f t our i s t v is i t a ti on t o p ro t e c t ed a r eas . S uch pa r ti c ipa t i on has t hepo ten t i a l t o emp ow er l ocal peo p le t o con t ro l t he i r own f a t e and d i r ec t i on o f cu l tu ra lcha nge (cf . M acC ann el l , 1984 ; Na son , 198 4: Gra hn, 1991). To ur is t v i s i ta t ion a t cer ta int im e s a n d p l a c e s m a y d i s ru p t o r p r e v e n t t r ad i t io n a l r e s o u r c e u s e s b y in d i g e n o u s p e o p l e .b u t m a y n o t b e d i s r u p t iv e a t o t h e r t im e s a n d p l ac e s . T h e c o m m o d i f ic a t i o n o f s o m e c u l tu r a le v e n t s a n d p l a c e s m a y b e v i e w e d a s d e s i ra b l e b y i n d i g e n o u s p e o p l e , a n d o f o t h e r e v e n t sand p l aces a s undes i r ab l e .P a r t i c ipa t i on and con t ro l a t t he l oca l l eve l w i l l no t succeed wi thou t i nvo lvement f romhigher l eve ls . The pa r t i c ipa t i on and con t ro l by i nd igenou s peop le mus t be sanc t ioned bythe na t i ona l gov ernm ent i f i t i s t o be e f f ec t i ve . The de l ega t ion o f such au thor i t y do es no t


9/13

Protecting people and p laces 301come eas i l y fo r many na t i ona l admin i s t r a t i ons . I n mos t cases , however , i n i t i a t i on o fp r o t e c t e d s t a t u s d e s i g n a t i o n a n d e c o t o u r i s m d e v e l o p m e n t w i l l c o m e f r o m o u t s i d e t h eind igeno us com mu ni ty , spec i fi ca ll y f rom in t e rna t i ona l a nd na t i ona l o rgan i za t i ons w hohave po l i t ica l i n f l uence wi th na t i ona l gov ernm ent s , an d w ho can secure sanc t i ons fo r loca lau thor i t y . T h ese sanc t i ons i nc lude r ecog n i t i on , t h rough t he l ega l sys t em, o f t he use - r i gh t sh e l d b y i n d ig e n o u s p e o p l e .

N a t i o n a l c o n t r o l o f c ap i ta l i n v e s t m e n t i n e c o t o u r i s m d e v e l o p m e n t m a y b e n e c e s s a r y t oe n s u r e a p a c e a n d q u a l it y o f d e v e l o p m e n t t h a t w il l c o n t r i b u t e t o t h e g o a l o f p r o t e c t i o n w i t hmin im um nega t i ve soc i a l impac t s a t t he l oca l leve l. T h is con t ro l can b e exe rc i sed t h roug hind i r ec t mean s such as l and use con t ro l s , env i ronm enta l r egu l a t i on , and p rov i s ion o f pub l i ci n f ra s t ru c t u r e o r b y m o r e d i r e c t m e a n s s u c h a s st a t e p la n n in g , d e v e l o p m e n t a n do w n e r s h i p .

T e c h n i c a l m a n a g e m e n t o f p r o t e c t e d a r e a s w i ll n e e d t o b e d o n e b y n a ti o n a l o r g a n i z a ti o n su n t i l l o c a l i n d i v i d u a l s h a v e b e e n m o t i v a t e d a n d t r a i n e d t o p e r f o r m o n - t h e - g r o u n dm a n a g e m e n t f u n c ti o n s . T h e t e n d e n c y o f s u c h n a t i o n a l o r g a n iz a t io n s t o b e c o m e l a rg e ,i ne f f ec t ive , r eve nue -con sum ing b urea uc rac i e s is a danger t o loca l con t ro l and t o e f fec t i vep r o t e c t io n . M a n a g e m e n t b y l o c al in s t it u ti o n s c a n a v o i d t h is p r o b l e m , b u t i s d e p e n d e n t o nind igenous suppor t f o r p ro t ec t i on , pa r t i c i pa t i on i n bene f i t s , and educa t i on and t r a in ing .W i t h a l o n g - t e r m g o a l o f te c h n i c al m a n a g e m e n t b y i n d i g e n o u s p e o p l e , c o n fl ic t b e t w e e nn a t i o n a l c o n s e r v a t i o n a g e n c i e s a n d l o c a l c o m m u n i t i e s m a y b e r e d u c e d ( cf . R o w e l l , 19 89 ;Kiss, 1990).

Ach iev ing a mix o f na t i ona l and l oca l o r i nd igeno us con t ro l o f eco tour i sm tha t i se f f ec t i ve i n mo ving t ow ard t he p ro t e c t i on goa l , whi l e min imiz ing nega t i ve cu l t u r a l impac t s ,i s no t easy . T he fo l l owing example , however , demons t r a t e s t ha t t he re i s a bas i s fo ro p t i m i s m .

A n i l l u s t r a t iv e c a s eU l u r u N a t i o n a l P a r k , c o n t a i n in g A y e r ' s R o c k , in A u s t r a li a p r o v i d e s a n e x a m p l e o f t h ei n v o l v e m e n t o f lo c a l i n d i g e n o u s p e o p l e i n t h e p r o t e c t i o n o f a n a r e a . T h e P a r k c o n t a i n s a na b u n d a n c e o f r o c k a r t, p a in t in g s b y t h e a n c e s t o r s o f th e A u s t r a l ia n a b o r ig i n e s , b u t, w h e nthe Pa rk was fi rs t e s t ab l i shed , non- ind igenou s m anag er s w ere una b l e t o s a t is fy t he t our i s t s 'i n t e r es t i n abor ig ina l a r t and i n t e rp re t a t i on o f the l and .

T h e p a s s a g e o f t h e N o r t h e r n T e r r i t o r y L a n d s R i g h t s A c t in 1 97 6 p r o v i d e d a m e a n s o fsa t is fy ing t ha t i n t e r es t. T h e A c t ena b l ed l oca l abor ig ina l g rou ps t o r ega in r i gh t s t o por t i onso f p a r k s , b u t w i t h t h e s t i p u la t io n t h a t t h e y l e a se t h e l a n d b a c k t o t h e g o v e r n m e n t f o r 1 0 0years .

U n d e r t h e t er m s o f th e U l u r u l e a s e, th e U l u r u K a t a t ju t a B o a r d o f M a n a g e m e n t w a se s t a b l i s h e d w i t h a n a b o r i g i n a l m a j o r i t y m e m b e r s h i p t h a t p r o v i d e d t h e a b o r i g i n e s w i t hc o n s i d e r a b l e in f lu e n c e o v e r P a r k p l a n n in g a n d m a n a g e m e n t , a n d s o m e w e r e e m p l o y e d a si n t e r p r e t e r s a n d m a i n t e n a n c e w o r k e r s ( A l a n e n , 1 9 9 2 ) . A c c o r d i n g t o A l a n e n ( 1 9 9 2 ) ,r e l ia b l e i n f o r m a t i o n is n o w a v a i la b l e f r o m t h e a b o r i g in e s a b o u t t h e P a r k ' s r e s o u r c e s a n da b o u t t h e i r c u l t u r e , a n d t h e a b o r i g i n e s ' i n v o l v e m e n t h a s r e n e w e d t h e i r i n t e r e s t i n t h e i rcu l t u r e and s t r eng thened i t s i n t egr i t y .

T he abor ig ines ' i n f l uence , however , s t ops a t t he Pa rk boundar i e s . Dur ing t he 1970s ,v a r i o u s t o u r is t d e v e l o p m e n t e n c l a v e s w e r e r e m o v e d f r o m t h e P a r k a n d a n e w , c o m p a t i b l yd e s i g n e d d e v e l o p m e n t w a s b u i l t o u t s i d e t h e P a r k b o u n d a r i e s . P r e s s u r e s , h o w e v e r , a r e


10/13

3 02 King and Stewartb e i n g e x e r t e d t o l o c a t e i n c o m p a t i b l e l a n d u s e s , s u c h a s a g o l f c o u r s e , o n l a n d s n e a r t h e P a r ko v e r w h i c h t h e a b o r i g i n e s h a v e n o c o n t r o l .

I n t h is c a s e, t h e 1 97 6 l a n d r i g h t s l e g i s la t i o n p r o v i d e d t h e a b o r i g i n e s w i t h t h e l e v e r t o g a i na c c e s s a n d i n p u t t o t h e p l a n n i n g p r o c e s s a n d , t h r o u g h t h e m , t o t h e m a n a g e m e n t o f l h p a r k . I n t h i s c a s e , de facto p r o p e r t y r ig h t s w e r e g i v e n l i m i te d de jure s ta t us . ( C o n s e q u e n lc o u r t d e c i s i o n s i n A u s t r a l i a h a v e p r o v i d e d e v e n g r e a t e r r e c o g n i t i o n o f t h e a b o r i g i n e s "p r o p e r t y r i g h ts t o l a n d ( c f P h i l li p s , 1 9 9 3 ) .) A l t h o u g h o f a l e s s e r d e g r e e , a p r e - e x i s t i n gp o w e r d i f f e re n t i a l w a s m a i n t a i n e d b y th e r e q u i r e m e n t t h a t la n d b e l e as e d b a c k t o l h cg o v e r n m e n t . T h e l e a s e - b a c k p r o v i s i o n s e r v e d t h e n a t i o n a l g o a ls o f p r o t e c t i o n a n d a c ce s sf o r t h e d o m i n a n t p o p u l a t i o n w h i l e p ro v i d i n g im m e d i a t e a n d c o n t in u i n g m o n e t a r y b e n e fi tst o t h e l o c al a b o r ig i n e s . F u r t h e r , t h e i n v o l v e m e n t o f lo c al i n d i g e n o u s p e o p l e in t h e p l a n n i n ga n d m a n a g e m e n t o f t h e p r o t e c t e d a r e a h a s h a d b e n e f i c i a l c u l t u r a l i m p a c t s in th a t itr e i n f o r c e d a p o s i t i v e c u l t u r a l i d e n t i t y .

A m o n g o t h e r t h i n g s , t h e e x a m p l e d e m o n s t r a t e s t h e n e e d t o c o n t r o l t o u r i s td e v e l o p m e n t . T h e p r o p o s e d d e v e l o p m e n t s o n n e a r b y l an d s d o n o t c o n t ri b u t e t o th ep r o t e c t i o n o f t h e P a r k ' s r e s o u r c e s a n d m a y i n f ac t h a v e n e g a t i v e e n v i r o n m e n t a l a n dc u l t u r a l i m p a c t s . C o n t r o l f r o m n a t i o n a l o r t e r r i t o r i a l g o v e r n m e n t s w i l l b e n e c e s s a r y t oe n s u r e c o m p a t i b l e l a n d u s e s n e a r t h e P a r k . I n v o l v e m e n t o f t h e a b o r i g i n e s in t h e p la n n i n go f e c o t o u r i s m f a ci li ti e s b e y o n d t h e P a r k b o u n d a r i e s c o u l d m o u l d t h e c h a r a c t e r o f th ef a c il it ie s to f i t t h e n a t u r a l e n v i r o n m e n t .

Conc l u s i o nE c o t o u r i s m is a p o t e n t i a l so u r c e o f r e v e n u e f o r th e f u n d i n g o f p a r k s a n d o t h e r p r o t e c t e da r ea s . I t b ri n g s w i t h i t. h o w e v e r , c o m m o d i f i c a t io n o f e l e m e n t s o f i n d i g e n o u s c u l t u r e s a n dt h e i r h a b i t a t s . T h i s c o m m o d i f i c a t i o n , i n t u r n , c a n h a v e s e r i o u s n e g a t i v e i m p a c t s u n l e s se f f ec t iv e c o n t r o l s c a n b e i m p o s e d u p o n t h e i n d u s tr y .

C o n t r o l o f e c o t o u r i s m a n d a c c e s s t o its d e c is i o n - m a k i n g f o r u m s s h o u l d b e d e s i g n e d f r o mm u l t ip l e l e v e l s. P a r t i c i p a t i o n , e i t h e r d i r e c t o r i n d i r e c t , b y l o c a l i n d i g e n o u s c o m m u n i t i e s i na ll p h a s e s o f p l a n n i n g a n d i m p l e m e n t a t i o n , a r e i m p o r t a n t f a c t o r s in m i n i m i z in g t h en e g a t iv e i m p a c t s o f e c o t o u r i s m o n i n d i g e n o u s p e o p l e . I n d e e d , s u ch p a r t i c i p a t io n h a s t h ep o t e n t i a l f o r c r e a ti n g p o s i t iv e c u l t u r al a n d e n v i r o n m e n t a l i m p a c ts .

I n d i g e n o u s p e o p l e a l s o n e e d t o p a r t ic i p a t e i n th e b e n e f it s o f e c o t o u r i s m . I n a d d it i o n l oe q u i t y c o n s i d e r a ti o n s , sh a r i n g r e v e n u e s w i t h in d i g e n o u s p e o p l e r e d u c e s t h e i r d e p e n d e n c eo n t h e p r o t e c t e d a r e a f o r su b s i s te n c e , a n d t h u s c o u l d e n h a n c e p r o t e c t i o n . S o m e c r it ic sw o u l d a r g u e t h a t s u c h a r e d u c t i o n i s i n f ac t a n e g a t i v e c u l t u r a l i m p a c t . H o w e v e r , if t h ei n d i g e n o u s p e o p l e a r e i n v o l v e d in d e c is i o n s a n d p a r t i c i p a t e in m a n a g e m e n t o f p r o t e c t e da r e a s , t h e y m a i n t a i n a s e n s e o f c o n t r o l o v e r th e i r o w n r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h t h e i r h a b i t a t : s u c h as e n s e o f c o n t r o l o v e r t h e i r o w n f a t e m a y s t r e n g t h e n t h e i r c u lt u r a l id e n t i ty .

N a t i o n a l l e v el c o n t r o l s ar e n e c e s s a r y t o c o o r d i n a t e i n f r a s t r u c t u r e d e v e l o p m e n t w i t hl o ca l p l a n n i n g , a n d t o p r o v i d e c h e c k s o n t h e s p e e d a n d q u a l i t y o f e c o t o u r i s m d e v e l o p m e n t .T o l e g it im i z e th e r ig h t s o f i n d i g e n o u s p e o p l e , t h e n a t i o n a l g o v e r n m e n t a l so m u s t d e l e g a t ea u t h o r i t y b y s a n c t i o n i n g l o c a l c o n t r o l s .

E c o t o u r i s m i s n o t a p a n a c e a - s i m p l y o n e w a y t o fi n a n c e p r o t e c t e d a r e as . A t a m i n i m u m .e c o t o u r i s m r e q u i r e s t h a t t e c h n ic a l m a n a g e r s b e c o m e i n v o l v e d in u n d e r s t a n d i n g t h ec u l t u r a l i ss u e s t h a t a r i se f r o m e s t a b l i s h i n g p r o t e c t e d a r e a s . I n it s i d e a l s en s e , e c o t o u r i s m


11/13

Protecting peop le and places 30 3r e q u i r e s f u l l - fl e d g e d c o o p e r a t i o n a n d a sp i r it o f p a r t n e r s h i p b e t w e e n v a r i o u s l e v e ls o fg o v e r n m e n t a n d i n d i g e n o u s p e o p le .

A c k n o w l e d g e m e n tT h e a u t h o r s ap p r e c ia t e t h e h e l p f u l c o m m e n t s o f K e i t h H o l l in s h e a d a n d P a u l E a g l e s .T h e a u t h o r s s h a r e d e q u a l l y i n t h e w r i ti n g o f t h i s p a p e r a n d a r e l i s t ed a l p h a b e t ic a l ly .R e f e r e n c e sAlanen, A . (1992) Kakadu and Uluru : Abor ig ina l l ands in Aus t ra l i a ' s na t iona l pa rks . Landscape

31-2 , 28-38 .Al len , T . and T . Ho eks t ra . (1992) Toward a Unified Ecology. N e w Y or k : C o l um bi a U n i ve rs i ty .Boege r , E . (1991) Ecotour i sm and the envi ronment . Travel Tourism Assoc. Newsl. M a y 2 ~ .Bonnicksen , T . (1989) N a ture vs . M an(agem ent ) : ~Fire' i s no t a m ana gem ent va lue . J. Forestry 87 ,41-3.Boo, E. (1992) The Ecotourism Boom: Planning for Development and Management. Wildland andHu m an N eeds Technica l Pap e r Se r ie s , No. 2. W ashington , DC : Wor ld W i ld li fe Fund.Boors t in, D. (1987) The Image: a Guide to Pseudo-Events in America. N e w Y o r k : A t h e n e u m .

Botkin, D. (1990) Discordant Harmonies: a New Ecology for the Twenty-first Century. N e w Y o r k :Oxford Unive r s i ty Pre s s .Br i t ton , S . (1982) Th e pol i t i ca l econo m y of tour i sm in the Thi rd W or ld . Ann. Tourism Res. 9, 331-58.Chase , A. (1986) Playing God in Yellowstone: the Destruction of America's First National Park.Bos ton: A t lan t ic Month ly Pre s s .Cohen, E . (1988) Authent ic i ty and commodi t i za t ion in tour i sm. Ann. Tourism Res. 15, 371-86.

Crono n, W. (1984) Changes in the Land." Indians, Colonists and the Ecology of New England. N e wYork: H i l l and Wang.de K adt , E . (1979) Tourism: Passport to Development? New York: Oxford Unive r s i ty Pre s s .Durning , A .T . (1992) Guardians of the land: Indigenous peoples and the Health o f the Earth.W orldwa tch Pa pe r 112 . W ashington: The W or ldwa tch Ins t i tu te .Eading ton , W . and Sm i th , V . (1992) The em ergence o f a l t e rna t ive forms of tour i sm. In TourismAlternatives: Potentials and Problems in the Development of Tourism (V. Smith andW. Eading ton , eds ) pp . 1-12 . Phi lade lphia : U nive r s i ty of Pennsylvania .Eh rent rau t , A . (1993) He r i t age au thent ic i ty and dome s t ic tour i sm in Japan , Ann. Tourism Res. 20,262-78.Fa r re l l , B . (1992) Tour i sm as an e lement in sus ta inable deve lopment . In Tourism Alternatives:Potentials and Problems in the Development of Tourism (V . Smi th and W . Eadington , ed s ) pp .115-32 . Phi lade lphia : Unive r s i ty o f Pennsylvania .Fa r re l l, B . and Run yan, D . (1991) Ecology and tour i sm. Ann. Tourism Res. 18, 26-40.Fenne l l , D . and Eagle s , P . (1990) Ecotour i sm in Cos ta Rica : a conceptua l f r amework . J. ParkRecreation Admin. 8, 23-34.

F le tche r , J . and L a tham, J . (1995) D a taban k: the g loba l p ic ture . Tourism Economics 1, 95-101.Gof fman, E . (1959) The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. G a r d e n C i ty , N Y : D oub l e da y ,Grah n, P . (1991) U s ing tour i sm to pro tec t ex i s ting cu l ture : a pro jec t in Swedish Lapland . LeisureStud. 10, 33-47.Grenie r , D , , Kaae , B . , Mi l le r , M. and Mobley , R , (1993) Ecotour i sm, l andscape a rch i tec ture andurban p lanning . Landsc. Urban Plan, 25, 1-16.Gree nw ood , D . (1977) Cu l ture by the pou nd: an an thropo logica l pe r spec t ive on tour i sm as cu l tura lc om m od i t i z a t i on . I n Tourism Alternatives: Potential and Problems in the Development of

Tourism (V . Smi th and W . Eadington , eds ) pp . 129-38. Phi lade lphia : Un ive r s i ty ofPennsylvania .


12/13

3 0 4 K i n g a n d S t e w a r tH a r r i s o n , D . ( 1 9 9 2 a) I n t e r n a t i o n a l t o u r i s m a n d t h e l e ss d e v e l o p e d c o u n t r i e s: t h e b a c k g r o u n d . I n

T o u r i s m a n d t h e L e s s D e v e l o p e d C o u n t r i e s ( D . H a r r i s o n , e d . ) p p . 1 - 18 . L o n d o n : B e l h a v e n .H a r r i s o n , D . ( 1 9 9 2 b ) T o u r i s m t o l e s s d e v e l o p e d c o u n t r i e s : t h e s o c i a l c o n s e q u e n c e s . I n T~mrism and

t h e L e s s D e v e l o p e d C o u n t r i e s ( D . H a r r i s o n , e d . ) L o n d o n : B e l h a v e n . p p . 1 9 - 3 4 .H a y l e s , N . (1 9 9 5 ) S e a r c h i n g fo r c o m m o n g r o u n d . I n R e i n v e n t i n g N a t u r e : R e s p o n s e s t o P o s t m o d e r n

D e c o n s t r u c t i o n ( M , S o u l e a n d G . L e a s e , e d s ) p p . 4 7 - 6 4 . W a s h i n g t o n , D C : I s l a n d P r e s s .H u m m o n , D . ( 1 98 8 ) T o u r i s t w o r l d s : T o u r i s t a d v e r t i si n g , ri t u a l a n d A m e r i c a n c u l t u r e . Sociol . Quart .

10, 179-202.H ut h , H . ( 1957) Nature and t he A m e r i c ans : Thre e c e n tur i e s q l ( ' hanq in ,~ A t t i t ude s . B e r k e l e y :

U n i v e r s i t y o f C a l i f o r n i a .J o h n s t o n , B . a n d E d w a r d s , T. ( 19 9 4) T h e c o m m o d i f i c a t io n o f m o u n t a i n e e r i n g . A n n . T o u r i s m R e s . 21,

4 5 9 - 7 8 .K a u f m a n , W . ( 1 9 9 4 ) N~J T u r n i n g B a c k : D i s m a n t l i n g t h e F a n ta s ie s o f E n v i r o n m e n t a l T h i n k i n g . N e ~

Y o r k : B a s i c B o o k s .K i s s , A g n e s ( e d . ) ( 1 9 9 0 ) Liv ing w i th Wildl i] e: Wi ld l i l e R e so urc e Ma nag e m e nt w i th Loc a l

Part ic ipat ion in A]r ica. A f r i c a n T e c h n i c a l S e r ie s . T e c h n i c a l P a p e r N o . 1 3 0 . W a s h i n g t o n : T h eW o r l d B a n k .K u t a y , K . ( 1 9 8 9 ) T h e n e w e t h i c i n a d v e n t u r e t r a v e l . B u z z w o r m : E n v i r o n . , l . 1 , 30--6.L e a , J . ( 1988) l ' o u r i s m a t t d D e v e l o p m e n t i n t h e T h i r d W o r l d . N e w Y o r k : R o u t l e d g e .L e e , D . a n d S n e p e n g e r , D . ( 19 9 1 ) A n e c o t o u r i s m a s s e s s m e n t o f T o r t u g u e r o , C o s t a R i ca . A n n

T o u r i s m R e s . 19 , 367- 70 ,M a c C a n n e l l , D . ( 19 7 3 ) S t a g e d a u t h e n t i c i t y : a r r a n g e m e n t s o f s o c ia l s p a c e i n t o u r i s t s e t ti n g s . A m . , l

Sociol . 79 , 589- 603 .M a c C a n n e l l , D . (1 9 8 4 ) R e c o n s t r u c t e d e t h n i c i t y : t o u r i s m a n d c u l t u r a l i d e n t i t y i n t h e t h i r d w o r l d .

A n n . T o u r i s m R es . 1 1 , 3 7 5 - 9 1 .M c K i b b e n . W . ( 1 9 89 ) T h e E n d o f N a t u re . N e w Y o r k : R a n d o m H o u s e .M e y e r , W . ( 1 9 8 8 ) B e y o n d t h e M a s k . F o r t L a u d e r d a l e , F L : V e r l a g B r c i t en b a c h .Mi l l e r , G . ( 1994) L i v i n g i n t h e E n v i r o n m e n t . B e l m o n t , C A : W a d s w o r t h P u b l i s h i n g .N a s h , D . ( 1 9 8 1) T o u r i s m a s a n a n t h r o p o l o g i c a l s u b j e c t. Curr . A n thropo l . 22 , 461- 81 .N a sh , R . ( 1982) W i l d e r n e s s a n d t h e A m e r i c a n M i n d . N e w H a v e n : Y a l e U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s.N a s h , D . ( 1 9 8 9 ) T o u r i s m a s a f o r m o f i m p e r i a l i s m . I n H o s t s a n d G u e s ts : t h e A n t h r o p o l o g y o f T o u r i s m

2 n d e d n ( V . S m i t h , e d ) p p . 3 3 -- 48 . P h i l a d e l p h i a : U n i v e r s i t y o f P e n n s y l v a n i a .N a s o n , J . ( 1 9 8 4 ) T o u r i s m , h a n d i c r a f t s , a n d e t h n i c i d e n t i t y i n M i c r o n e s i a . Ann. T~mrism Res . 11.

4 2 1 - 4 9 .P h i l l ip s , S . ( 1 9 93 ) A n o t e : E d d i e M a b o v . t h e S t a t e o f Q u e e n s l a n d . S v d n e v L a w R e v . 15, 120-41.P l a c e , S . ( 1 9 9 1 ) N a t u r e t o u r i s m a n d r u r a l d e v e l o p m e n t i n T o r t u g u e r o . A n n . 7 ~ m r i sm R e v 18,

186-201.R e y n o s o y V a l l e , A . a n d d e R e g t , J . ( 1 9 7 9 ) G r o w i n g p a i n s : p l a n n e d t o u r i s m d e v e l o p m e n t ml x t a p a - Z i h u a t a n e j o . I n T o u r i s m : P a s s p o r t t o D e v e l o p m e n t ? ( E . de K a d t , e d . ) pp . I 1 I 134 , N e wY o r k : O x f o r d U n i v e r s i t y P r es s .

R o w c l k G . ( 1 9 8 9) A n n a p u r n a : s a n c t u a r y f o r t h e H i m a l a y a . Nat . ( ;eogr . 176. 391-404.S h e p a r d , P . (1 9 9 5 ) V i r t u a l l y h u n t i n g r e a l i t y in t h e f o r e s t s o f s i m u l a c r a . I n R e m v e n t i n g N a t u r e :

R e s p o n s e s t o P o s t m o d e r n D e c o n s t r u c t i o n ( M . S o u l e a n d G . L e a s e . e d s ) p p . 1 7 -3 0 . W a s h i n g t o n ,D C : I s l a n d P r e s s .

S i m m e l , G . ( 1 9 50 ) T h e S o ci o h )g y o J G e o r g S i m m e l . N e w Y o r k : T h e F r e e P r e ss .S o u l e , M . ( 19 9 5 ) T h e s o c i a l s i e g e o f n a t u r e . I n M . S o u l e a n d G . L e a s e ( E d s . ) R e i n v e n t i n g N a t u r e :

R e s p o n s e s t o P o s t m o d e r n D e c o n s t r u c t i o n ( M . S o u l e a n d G . L e a s e , e d s ) p p . 1 3 7 - 7 0 . W a s h i n g t o n ,D . C . : I s l a n d P r e s s.S w e e t , J . ( 1 9 8 9 ) B u r l e s q u i n g " t h e o t h e r " i n P u e b l o p e r f o r m a n c e . A n n . T o u r i s m R e s . 16, 62-7 5.


13/13

P r o t e c t in g p e o p l e a n d p l a c e s 305Tu rne r , L. and A sh, J. (1975) The G olden Hordes: International Tou rism an d the Pleasure Periphery.

London : Cons t ab le .Wal lace, D. (1992) Is 'eco ' tour ism for real? Landsc. Architect. 82, 34--6.Wa tson, G. and K opaeh evsky, J . (1994) In terpre ta t ions of tour i sm as com mo di ty .Ann . Tour i sm Res.

21 , 643 ~0 .W hi tehead, A. (1931) Science and the Mo de m World. New York: MacMil lan.W or ld Tour i sm Organ iza t ion (1991) Yearbook of Tourism Statistics, 1990. M adr id : W TO .

comodificationnaure ecoturism

Documents