Ethnic Tourism: Impacts, Challenges and Opportunities [1 ed.] 103244794X, 9781032447940

Citation preview

ETHNIC TOURISM

The book explores emerging themes, concepts and issues in ethnic tourism, through examination of theoretical underpinnings and empirical research in various ethnic destinations worldwide. It encapsulates cultural, environmental and economic dimensions of ethnic tourism, which is a force of change in many ethnic communities and suggests means through which local benefits can be enhanced and costs reduced. This book presents a range of case studies from diverse well-known ethnic destinations which reveal the various outcomes and changes engendered by ethnic tourism, such as the commodification of ethnic culture, the exploitation of minority peoples by outsiders and the impact of wider forces of modernization and national integration policies. It summarizes what has been done so far and suggests initiatives to increase the contribution of tourism to the economic development and quality of life of ethnic communities. It brings together a diversity of perspectives that are not currently readily available in one location. The book will appeal to students, and scholars interested in social sciences, tourism studies, geography, anthropology, sociology and economics, as well as in applied disciplines such as planning. It addresses academic and professional audiences who are interested in tourism and its consequences, as well as those who are interested in ethnic, including indigenous peoples and their circumstances. Li Yang is Associate Professor, Department of Geography, Environment and Tourism, Western Michigan University, Kalamazoo, Michigan, USA. She has published extensively on aspects of tourism and heritage, particularly in Western China, from planning and development perspectives, including (with Geoffrey Wall) Planning for Ethnic Tourism (2014). She has been involved in many research projects and has obtained university and governmental grants and awards. Geoffrey Wall is Distinguished Professor Emeritus, Department of Geography and Environmental Management, University of Waterloo, Canada. He has explored aspects of tourism in many parts of the world, particularly Asia, has published widely on tourism for 50 years, and was awarded the Ulysses Prize for Excellence in the Creation and Dissemination of Knowledge in Tourism, by the United Nations World Tourism Organization (UNWTO).

ETHNIC TOURISM Impacts, Challenges and Opportunities

Li Yang and Geoffrey Wall

Designed cover image: Xinhua News Agency First published 2024 by Routledge 4 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN and by Routledge 605 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10158 Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business © 2024 Li Yang and Geoffrey Wall The right of Li Yang and Geoffrey Wall to be identified as authors of this work has been asserted in accordance with sections 77 and 78 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers. Trademark notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and are used only for identification and explanation without intent to infringe. British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Names: Yang, Li, 1972– author. | Wall, Geoffrey, author. Title: Ethnic tourism : impacts, challenges and opportunities / Li Yang and Geoffrey Wall. Description: Abingdon, Oxon ; New York, NY : Routledge, [2023] | Includes bibliographical references and index. Identifiers: LCCN 2023010888 (print) | LCCN 2023010889 (ebook) | ISBN 9781032447940 (hardback) | ISBN 9781032447971 (paperback) | ISBN 9781003373964 (ebook) Subjects: LCSH: Heritage tourism. | Heritage tourism—Case studies. | Ethnicity—Social aspects—Case studies. | Tourism—Management— Case studies. Classification: LCC G156.5.H47 Y37 2023 (print) | LCC G156.5.H47 (ebook) | DDC 910.68/4—dc23/eng/20230516 LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2023010888 LC ebook record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2023010889 ISBN: 9781032447940 (hbk) ISBN: 9781032447971 (pbk) ISBN: 9781003373964 (ebk) DOI: 10.4324/9781003373964 Typeset in Times New Roman by Apex CoVantage, LLC

CONTENTS

Introduction

1

Why Examine Ethnic Tourism? 2

Structure of the Book 4

References 6

1

Ethnic Tourism Development

7

1.1 The Nature of Ethnic Tourism 7

1.2 Ethnic Tourism Research: Overview 9

1.3 Tourism, Ethnicity and Ethnic Identity 14

1.4 Authenticity and Commodification 20

Authenticity 20

Commodification 28

1.5 Stakeholder Theory 31

1.6 Summary 39

2

Who Are Ethnic Tourists? 2.1 2.2

Building a Profile of Ethnic Tourists 59

Case Study: Ethnic Tourism in Lugu Lake, China 64

Introduction: Ethnic Tourism in China 64

Lugu Lake and Mosuo People 65

Local Community Involvement in Tourism 66

Tourism Marketing and Mosuo Identity 67

Tourists and Hosts Encounters 69

58

vi

Contents

Tourists’ Perceptions of Authenticity 70

Complexities of Tourism Development 72

Discussions and Conclusions 73

2.3 Case Study: Ethnic Tourism in Yiren Town,

Chuxiong Prefecture, China 74

Yiren Town 74

Tourism Real Estate Development in the Town 75

Tourist Activities and Motivations 76

Tourists’ Perceptions of Authenticity 77

Tourists’ Satisfaction 78

Discussion and Conclusions 79

2.4 Case Study: Maori Cultural Tourism in

New Zealand 80

Maori People and Tourism 80

Complexities of Tourism Development 82

Tourists’ Perceptions of Maori Culture 84

Authenticity in Tourists’ Interactions 85

Discussions and Conclusions 87

2.5 Case Study: Diasporas 88

Summary 89

3

Tourism and Ethnic Communities 3.1 Ethnic Tourism and Host Communities: Community

Benefits and Social Costs 97

3.2 Case Study: Poverty Alleviation Through Ethnic

Tourism in Nujiang, Yunnan, China 103

Introduction: Pro-poor Tourism 103

Poverty and Tourism Initiatives in Nujiang

Prefecture 105

A “Tourist Model Village” – Zhongding Village 106

Community and Government Perceptions of Tourism

Impacts 107

Discussion and Conclusion 108

3.3 Case Study: Tourism Impacts on Quality of Life in

Indigenous Communities in Fiji 110

Introduction: Tourism and Quality of Life in

Indigenous Ethnic Communities 110

Tourism in Fiji 111

Tourism Impacts on Quality of Life in Indigenous

Fijian Communities 112

Discussion and Conclusion 114

97

Contents

vii

3.4 Case Study: The Impact of Tourism on Indigenous

Communities in Québec, Canada 115

Indigenous People and Tourism in Québec, Canada 115

Perceptions of Indigenous Ethnic Communities 117

Discussion and Conclusion 119

3.5 Case Study: Tourism’s Impact on Native Americans in

the USA 120

Native Americans and Tourism on Reservations 120

The Impacts of Tourism on Native Americans 121

Discussion and Conclusions 125

3.6 Case Study: Ecotourism in Shanmei, Taiwan 126

Sustainable Livelihoods (SL) 126

Shanmei, Taiwan 127

Lessons 129

Summary 129

4

Tourism Entrepreneurship 4.1 Entrepreneurship and Tourism 144

4.2 Case Study: Managerial Perceptions of an Ethnic

Theme Park, Yunnan Ethnic Folk Villages,

China 153

Introduction: Ethnic Theme Parks 153

Managerial Perceptions of Yunnan Ethnic

Folk Villages 153

Discussion 155

4.3 Case Study: Gendered Practices of Akha Micro-

entrepreneurs in Urban Ethnic Tourism in

Thailand 156

Introduction: Akha Minority Group and Ethnic

Tourism in Thailand 156

Gendered Practices of Akha Ethnic

Micro-entrepreneurs 158

Discussion 159

4.4 Case Study: Ethnic Entrepreneurship in South

African Township Tourism 161

Township Tourism and Black Women in

South Africa 161

Ethnic Entrepreneurship and Social Capital 162

Discussion 163

4.5 Case Study: Marketing of Ethnic Tourism 164

Summary 165

143

viii Contents

5

Government Policy and Planning

178

5.1 Government Policy and Tourism Planning 179

5.2 Changes in the Involvement of Ethnic Peoples 183

5.3 Case Study: Chinese Government Policy and Impacts

on Ethnic Tourism Development 184

Introduction: Governments’ Involvements in Ethnic

Tourism in China 184

Government Roles and Impacts on Ethnic Tourism in

Xishuangbanna, China 184

Governments, Power and Tension in the Kanas

Scenic Area of Xinjiang, China 186

Discussion 189

5.4 Case Study: Ethnic Stakeholders’ Participation in

Tourism Planning in Sapa, Vietnam 190

Tourism Development in Sapa, Vietnam 190

Kinh and Ethnic Tourism Stakeholder Participation in

Tourism Planning 190

Discussion 192

5.5 Case Study: Tourism Development Policies and

Planning in Ghana, Africa 192

Overview of Tourism in Ghana 192

Evolution of Tourism Planning and Policy-Making

in Ghana 193

Discussion 196

5.6 Case Study: Co-management 197

Summary 199

5.7 Case Study: Engaging With Communities 200

Conceptualization and Activities 201

Accomplishments 203

Overview 205

Summary 207

6

The Future of Ethnic Tourism 6.1 6.2 6.3 6.4 6.5

Index

214

Experiences of Ethnic People With Tourism 214

Impacts, Potentials and Possibilities 217

Sustainable Models and Ethnic Tourism 219

Looking Ahead 223

Conclusion 225

229

INTRODUCTION

Ethnicity has been increasingly promoted as a tourist attraction and as a strategy to generate income and foreign exchange for ethnic communities in peripheral destinations. Many countries have taken advantage of their cultural diversity and employed ethnic tourism to stimulate local economic development. Tourism also assists ethnic minorities in showcasing their culture and reviving their traditions, languages and cultural pride. It is increasingly seen as a stimulus to the local tour­ ism economy, contributing to greater sustainability and resilience in the sector, which is particularly important in underdeveloped minority regions where devel­ opment options are limited. However, while ethnic tourism has the potential to bring economic and social benefits, it can also adversely impact the culture and sense of identity of ethnic groups. Especially, the commodification and marketing of ethnicity for tourism also create a variety of issues, from the undermining of ethnic communities to the reconstruction of ethnic identities and the changing of ethnic values. Benefits from tourism may be offset by resultant cultural changes, increased traffic and environmental pollution, sequestering of profits by outsiders, rising local prices, and greater income inequality in the ethnic communities. With the demand for ethnic tourism steadily increasing, the research on such tourism has grown substantially in recent years. Yet it remains a relatively obscure and sometimes misunderstood area of tourism research. While it remains a rela­ tively small body of work within the expanding field of knowledge on tourism, eth­ nic tourism is an important topic. Because the contrasts between visitors and those who are visited are often considerable, the outcomes of their interaction, for good and ill, are often magnified. Thus, the study of ethnic tourism may reveal insights that are less easily visible in many other forms of tourism. The aim of this book is to examine ethnic tourism scholarship critically and to explore emerging themes, concepts and issues within the ethnic tourism context. DOI: 10.4324/9781003373964-1

2

Introduction

The book couples detailed analysis of the theoretical underpinnings of ethnic tour­ ism and narrative depiction of empirical research in various ethnic destinations worldwide. It takes an analytical review approach that assesses the key themes and the evolution of published research on the related topics, connections with other disciplines, and the contribution of ethnic tourism to the wider field of tourism research. The book also presents a range of case studies from diverse well-known ethnic destinations which reveal the various outcomes and changes engendered by ethnic tourism, such as the commodification of ethnic culture, the exploitation of minority peoples by outsiders and the impact of wider forces of modernization and national integration policies. The book summarizes what has been done so far and what needs to be done in the ethnic tourism research field. Ethnic tourism, it is argued, is a catalyst for change for ethnic minority com­ munities and this book explores the issues resulting from tourism development, such as cultural representation, commodification and preservation, ethnic identity, gendered practices, tourism planning, social policy, tourism industry directions and the well-being of ethnic communities. These issues have informed important debates about tourism policies and practices that extend across both the developed and the developing countries of the world. In spite of the complexities of these issues, ethnic tourism has the potential to contribute to economic development, quality of life and subjective well-being of ethnic communities. This book high­ lights the complexity of using ethnic tourism as a tool for cultural conservation and socio-economic development and provides a means for the reader to evaluate how well ethnic tourism might live up to the expectations created for it. Case studies presented in the book cover a range of cultures, destinations, types of ethnic attrac­ tions, tourism enterprises and management options. While ethnic tourism practices have not always met expectations in terms of generating revenues for conserva­ tion or creating sustainable livelihoods for host communities, they at least begin to develop mechanisms that may become a potential avenue for enhancing cultural conservation and social inclusion. Why Examine Ethnic Tourism?

The international literature is not consistent in the use of terminology concern­ ing the peoples under consideration in this book. Although often using the terms “ethnicity” and “ethnic tourism”, the literature emphasizes traditional societies, native peoples and indigenous peoples (West & Brechin, 1991) but many other terms may be found such as aboriginal people, First Nations and minorities, both visible and less so. Many such people and their ancestors have experienced the dislocations of colonialism. To these may be added the residents of ethnic enclaves that have resulted from both forced and voluntary migration, some of whom may be citizens of their new country. Although, for example, the International Labour Organization, in its 1989 Indigenous and Trible Peoples Convention, provided a lengthy definition, for practical purposes it is often unclear whether the concern

Introduction

3

is with people who live in and/or adjacent to a specific area, who once lived in or adjacent to the area, or who ascribe special values to the area, regardless of the location of their residence. Not only are there great variations in minority cultures and the environments which they inhabit, and in their history of occupation and displacement, there are also substantial differences from place to place in the inter­ pretation of relevant peoples, encompassing both very narrow and extremely broad definitions of those with claims of special status and interests. For the purposes of this book, a broad perspective has been adopted. We use the term ethnic tourism to encompass tourism that engages with the cultures of minority peoples, whether or not that engagement is the main motivation of participants. We are aware that terms such as “indigenous” and “aboriginal” have precise legal definitions which vary among jurisdictions and which may have considerable implications for the status of individuals. At the same time, for example, when members of the conservation community use such terms, they often appear to wish to distinguish between those who live harmoniously with their immediate environ­ ment and those who do not. It is often presumed that such peoples lived in harmony with the environment, in contrast to modern societies, colonists and other nonindigenous peoples. However, such presumptions can be questioned: for example, many minority peoples had and still have low standards of living, short expectancy of life at birth and high infant death rates, when compared with the majorities with which they must engage. Furthermore, population size and distribution, and avail­ able technologies have changed greatly over time. Considerable research has been undertaken on indigenous peoples in remote and rural locations from a tourism perspective and there is a growing number of studies on ethnic tourism in urban areas, particularly the development of ethnic quarters of cities as tourist attractions (Aytar & Rath, 2012; Yang & Wall, 2014). Less attention has been paid to ethnic minority communities in tourism destinations, although tourism has become an increasingly popular component of development strate­ gies in many underdeveloped ethnic regions, with the potential to boost the local economy and alleviate poverty. Ethnic peoples are not homogenous groups and there are many subgroups with different cultural practices and ways of life. Many of them are poor minority groups living in areas of deprivation or in peripheral locations. They are often labelled as “socially undesirable” by the majority popula­ tion, and they are often socially, economically and politically disadvantaged, colo­ nized or marginalized). On the other hand, their heritage, arts and festivals are often valued by modern majority societies. Today, many ethnic communities are losing their traditional culture and young people as a result of increased globalization and migration for better lives. There is a great need for enhancement of the well-being of ethnic peoples through socio-economic development, but there is a challenge of doing this without losing community characters and strengths. Tourism is often cited as one of the limited number of options for the devel­ opment of ethnic minority regions, but it is not a panacea. Tourism when used as a strategy for economic development may become a double-edged sword for

4

Introduction

minority cultures. Although ethnic communities generally welcome economic opportunities brought by tourism, many people resent becoming part of a human zoo experience. As ethnic heritage, festivals and attractions are growing in popular­ ity, there are major concerns relating to commodification, objectification, appropri­ ation, invasion and displacement, among others. The tourism industry often makes extensive use of the land and cultural assets of ethnic peoples, but the adverse impact of tourism is usually borne by the community itself which is vulnerable to the deleterious environmental and sociocultural impacts. The tourism potential of destinations may be compromised by negative impacts upon cultural heritage and the quality of life of ethnic communities. However, currently, there is limited effort to protect minority groups, their land and environment from negative impacts of development changes. Therefore, it is important to examine the impacts, potentials and possibilities of ethnic tourism and its implications for ethnic minority peoples. This book provides theoretical and methodological understandings and reflections pertaining to ethnic tourism development. It also has practical implications for eth­ nic tourism destination marketing, planning and management. Structure of the Book

The book is comprised of six chapters that describe and analyze different aspects of ethnic tourism. Case studies in various destinations are presented to illustrate current practices of ethnic tourism and their implications. Chapter 1 provides the broad intellectual context and theoretical background for understanding ethnic tourism. It examines the nature of ethnic tourism and critically reviews research on ethnic tourism in general. It then discusses the relationships between tourism, ethnicity and ethnic identity, and reviews the concepts of authenticity and commodification in the context of tourism. Finally, it introduces stakeholder theory and discusses its applications in the field of tourism. Chapter 2 analyzes the market for ethnic tourism and examines tourism cli­ ents, such as who they are and what they want from ethnic tourism destinations. It explores the characteristics that differentiate ethnic tourists from other tourists through an analysis of tourist motivations, needs, attitudes and concerns, sociode­ mographic attributes, and the influence of social, cultural and natural environments, in order to create a profile of ethnic tourists. Two case studies are presented to examine tourists’ perceptions of ethnic tourism in well-known ethnic attractions – Lugu Lake and Yiren Town in China. Tourists’ interactions with Maori culture are also analyzed, drawing upon empirical research from New Zealand. Finally, a brief statement is provided on diasporas and their implications for travel through refer­ ence to Palestinian migrants in Toronto. Chapter 3 explores relationships between tourism and ethnic communities. Community benefits and social costs associated with tourism development are analyzed and summarized. Tourism is widely considered to be a powerful tool for commodifying the cultures and identities of ethnic communities, often motivated

Introduction

5

by economic gains and cultural desires. The tourism industry often makes exten­ sive use of the cultural assets of ethnic peoples, but the impact of tourism is usually borne by the community itself which is vulnerable to the deleterious sociocultural impacts. In many cases, tourism is promoted by government or industry in the absence of adequate planning, without consultation with or inclusion of local com­ munities, and without effective conservation plans. As a result, ethnic tourism has not lived up to the high expectations as the benefits are reduced by adverse impacts upon cultural heritage and local communities. Supportive host communities and their cultural assets are the important foundations of a successful ethnic tourism industry. Neglect of conservation and negative local attitudes can threaten the future of tourism. Two case studies in Nujiang, China and the Mekong in Northern Thailand explore the relationships between ethnic tourism and poverty alleviation. The impact of tourism development on residents’ quality of life is examined in a study of a rural ethnic village in Kunming, China. The impacts of tourism on eth­ nic identity and host communities are discussed in studies of indigenous tourism in Québec, Canada and Native Americans in the Pueblos of New Mexico. With a focus on sustainable livelihoods and ecotourism, a case from Taiwan illustrates the apparent success of local initiatives and the danger of putting too much emphasis on ecotourism to the exclusion of other options. Chapter 4 explores the role of tourism entrepreneurs and their perspectives on ethnic tourism. Tourism has long been seen as a fertile field for entrepreneurial initiatives due to the predominance of small- and medium-sized firms in tourism and relatively low entry barriers for local entrepreneurs. In recent years, entrepreneurship in tour­ ism has attracted greater attention and the literature underlines the important role of entrepreneurship in creating socio-economic value in the tourism sector. A case study is presented to reveal the perceptions of managers of an ethnic theme park in China. Another case study examines ethnic minorities as tourism entrepreneurs in Izmir, Turkey. Gendered practices are also explored in an empirical study of urban ethnic tourism in Thailand. Ethnic tourism, like other forms of tourism, must be marketed and an experimental study is introduced to illustrate this. Chapter 5 examines the role of government in ethnic tourism development. It ana­ lyzes why tourism is attractive for governments, particularly in its potential to pro­ vide an alternative to traditional industries such as agriculture, forestry and mining. Government policies and public tourism planning have significant consequences for the tourism industry and destination communities. In many societies, ethnic tourism can be a useful policy tool to help governments to achieve social inclu­ sion and cultural conservation. However, the global political agenda is increasingly dominated by economic principles which focus on the aggressive consumption of local resources. The main policy issues related to ethnic tourism are addressed in two case studies from China and institutional prerequisites for planning and managing ethnic tourism are discussed. Different planning approaches and imple­ mentation of plans are examined in case studies from China and Vietnam. Planning

6

Introduction

issues and challenges are also addressed. Positive outcomes will depend upon the involvement of ethnic people in meaningful ways and, accordingly, co-management and the successful engagement with ethnic communities are discussed. Chapter 6 first summarizes the experiences of ethnic people with tourism. It then discusses the potentials and possibilities of ethnic tourism and identifies direc­ tions for the future development of research in this field. It also addresses sustain­ able models of tourism development and operation. Ethnic tourism has become a global phenomenon that showcases ethnic distinctiveness and attracts tourists to explore ethnicity while on vacation, thereby allowing them to acquire crosscultural experiences in unfamiliar locations. Brief speculative comments are made concerning possible ethnic tourism futures. Although the outcomes of many tour­ ism projects have not met the expectations in terms of generating revenues for cul­ tural conservation or in creating alternative income sources for local communities, many destinations have begun to develop mechanisms that can become a potential avenue for sustainable development of ethnic regions. The effectiveness of ethnic tourism in the future will ultimately depend on the distribution of benefits and costs, which, in turn, will reflect how, when and where it is implemented. Ethnic tourism changes relationship between host communi­ ties and other tourism stakeholders, and even has ramifications for the interactions among those within a community. Even though community needs and concerns are not always heard or listened to, tourism can open up opportunities to establish partnerships between local people, the private sector and governments that allow many stakeholders to be involved in tourism planning and development. The chal­ lenge for tourism planners is to engage with minority people to create regulations and incentives so that socio-economic benefits are generated from tourist activities and programs, and distributed appropriately, thereby contributing to the economic, cultural and environmental sustainability of ethnic communities. References Aytar, V., & Rath, J. (Eds.). (2012). Selling Ethnic Neighborhoods: The Rise of Neighbor­ hoods as Places of Leisure and Consumption. Abingdon: Routledge. West, P.C., & Brechin, S.R. (1991). Resident Peoples and National Parks: Social Dilemmas and Strategies for International Conservation. Tucson, AZ: University of Arizona Press. Yang, L., & Wall, G. (2014). Planning for Ethnic Tourism. Aldershot: Ashgate.

1 ETHNIC TOURISM DEVELOPMENT

Ethnic tourism has experienced rapid growth internationally as a result of increased education, leisure time and discretionary income, technological improvements, the spread of the mass media, and the increasing tourist interest in destinations with exotic cultures and special environments. Realizing the economic potential of cul­ tural resources, many residents of actual and potential tourism destinations, as well as other stakeholders, have rallied to develop and support ethnic tourism as an important part of their service economies. The causal factors for the growing inter­ est in such tourism encompass both supply side (e.g., economic needs and cultural revival) and demand side (e.g., tourists’ desires for creative, cultural and authentic experiences or to discover the “other” and experience their social spaces) factors. Nostalgia, globalization and modernization have been seen as key factors contribut­ ing to the popularity of ethnic tourism (Oakes, 1998, 2016). With the emergence of numerous ethnic destinations competing to provide tourist experiences, traditional minority villages, cultural theme parks and urban ethnic enclaves are undergoing redefinition, recreation and representation of their culture, ethnicity and heritage in order to compete in the tourism market. This chapter first discusses the nature of ethnic tourism and then critically examines ethnic identity. The concepts of authenticity and commodification are reviewed in the context of tourism, for they have provided important, if contested, building blocks in analyses and understanding of cultural tourism. Finally, stake­ holder theory is introduced and its applications in the tourism field are discussed. 1.1

The Nature of Ethnic Tourism

Ethnic tourism, at root, involves the pursuit of the exotic “other”, cultural differ­ entness and authentic experiences, although not all participants are in search of DOI: 10.4324/9781003373964-2

8

Ethnic Tourism Development

such things to the same degree. Commonly regarded as a special type of cultural tourism, it is marketed to the public in terms of the “quaint” customs of indigenous and often exotic peoples with ethnic culture placed at the center of the attraction (Smith, 1977, 1989). Van den Berghe (1992) described it as the search for authen­ tic encounters with other ethnicities, involving complex relations and a division of labor among three groups: tourists, tourees (natives who modify their behavior to meet tourism demands) and middlemen (brokers who mediate tourist–touree encounters). This is exemplified by tourism in Panama as exemplified by the Kuna Indians of San Blas and their handwoven textiles (molas), as well as in India in vis­ its to observe the isolated hill tribes of Assam. Early studies generally highlighted the quest for cultural “otherness” as “cultural/ethnic exoticism” and emphasized direct experience with the host culture and environment, usually by visits to homes and villages to observe or participate in local customs, ceremonies, rituals, dances and other traditional activities (Harron & Weiler, 1992). “Exoticism” usually refers to pre-modern, technologically unsophisticated activities of rural societies who live in remote or isolated areas, and who behave in ways considered to be “exotic” by members of mainstream societies. Most studies on this subject concentrate on visits to exotic and often peripheral destinations, which involve performances, representations and attractions that por­ tray and represent selected aspects of small, often isolated, ethnic groups. With the rapid growth of ethnic tourism in recent decades, the profile of ethnic tourists to remote sites has expanded from a limited number of visitors motivated by curiosity and cultural exoticism to become a more complex form of tourism with a greater variety of participants. Ethnic tourists are no longer solely travelers who observe the exotic cultural expressions and lifestyles of ethnic peoples in remote villages, but now include those who consume ethnic products at cultural parks in cities as well as travelers motivated by reunion with their cultural roots or who explore eth­ nicity in other locations, as in diaspora tourism, or through experiencing the food and celebrations of immigrants in ethnic communities (Fourie & Santana-Gallego, 2013; King, 1994; Moufakkir, 2011; Pitchford, 1995). Travel for the purpose of ethnic reunion is a substantial activity in the countries of North America and Aus­ tralasia whose recent history has been built on migration, and it is also significant in many other parts of the world. Growth in urban ethnic tourism has been focused on urban neighborhoods and ethnic enclaves in large multicultural cities where distinctive cultures can be read­ ily accessed through ethnic restaurants and local festivals (Gilli & Ferrari, 2018; Kim, 2018; Maruyama & Woosnam, 2015; Maruyama et al., 2017; Santos & Yan, 2008; Woosnam et al., 2016). Deindustrialization and the spread of Western mul­ ticulturalism have contributed to the boom of ethnic neighborhood tourism (Drew, 2011). Tourism has been introduced to many ethnic neighborhoods as a strategy for socio-economic revitalization (Rath, 2007). Ethnic neighborhoods that offer food, entertainment and other products with a unique taste of the “other” have become an asset for many cities in attracting tourists during the revitalization process

Ethnic Tourism Development

9

(Maruyama & Woosnam, 2015). Many cities have invested in ethnic enclaves, have connected ethnicity to the tourism industry, and celebrate civic pride and cul­ tural diversity (Kim, 2018). These enclaves provide authentic ethnic experiences for tourists without them having to travel abroad to visit places where the cul­ ture originated (Loukaitou-Sideris & Soureli, 2011). Tourism in many enclaves of North American, Australian and European cities, such as New York, Chicago, Van­ couver, Toronto Sydney, London and Birmingham, has extended its scope beyond traditional activities like sightseeing, dining and visiting museums and art galler­ ies; ethnicity and cultural diversity now draw tourists who seek ethnic authenticity (Shaw, 2011). The terms “aboriginal tourism” (Lemelin et al., 2015) and “indigenous tour­ ism” (Tham et al., 2020) are sometimes employed interchangeably with “ethnic tourism” to refer to essentially the same phenomenon. However, aboriginal or indigenous tourism, by definition, must explicitly involve indigenous people, whereas ethnic tourism also includes visiting minority people and associated attractions that are not necessarily based on indigenous cultures or owned or managed by such people. Furthermore, in particular situation, especially in legal contexts, the terms may have different connotations, although that will not be explored further here. In summary, ethnic tourism is culturally specific but multifaceted in its pres­ entation. It is generally motivated, from a tourist’s perspective, by the search for exotic cultural experiences, including visiting ethnic villages, minority homes, eth­ nic theme parks, urban neighborhoods or ethnic enclaves, involvement in ethnic events and festivals, watching traditional dances, rituals or ceremonies, or merely shopping for ethnic handicrafts and souvenirs. In contrast, members of the visited ethnic communities, while often proud of the culture, usually wish to benefit eco­ nomically by sharing their culture. Exotic cultures and ethnic people have become tourist attractions and ethnic tourist experiences are facilitated by entrepreneurs who themselves may or may not be members of the visited ethnic communities. 1.2

Ethnic Tourism Research: Overview

Substantial literature has emerged to shed light on economic, social, cultural and environmental dimensions of ethnic tourism, including economies, impacts, authenticity, management, and community benefits and costs. These studies have raised a diversity of themes, issues and debates. Early studies generally considered conceptualization and consequences, with case studies revealing that such tourism involves direct experiences with exotic cultural practices and thus provides tourists with intimate, authentic, cultural exposure (Wood, 1997). As such, authenticity is often regarded as a key attribute of ethnic tourism. Various dimensions of ethnic tourism have garnered considerable academic attention since the late 1970s, including tourism–ethnicity relationships (Wood, 1998; Cohen, 1989), host–guest interactions (Gillespie, 2006; Smith, 1977, 1989,

10

Ethnic Tourism Development

2001; Zhang et al., 2017), tourism and economic growth (Tu & Zhang, 2020; Zhu & He, 2019; Zhuang et al., 2017), the sociocultural impact of tourism (Ryan & Aicken, 2005; Sun et al., 2018; Swain, 2014; Walsh & Swain, 2004; Yang et al., 2016; Yang & Wall, 2014), authenticity and commodification of cultural perfor­ mance (Cohen, 2002, Condevaux, 2009; Duan et al., 2019; Song & Yuan, 2021; Yang, 2011), ethnic minorities’ perceptions and attitudes toward tourism devel­ opment (Chen et al., 2016; Wang et al., 2020; Yang, 2013; Yun & Zhang, 2017), tourists’ motivations and experiences (McKercher & du Cros, 2002; Chang, 2006; Yang, 2019; Yang et al., 2013), and connections between tourism, society and state governance (Kim, 2014; Niskala & Ridanpää, 2016; Su, 2020; Yang et al., 2008). The complex nature of ethnic tourism provides a unique environment for examin­ ing it from the perspectives of diverse disciplines, such as anthropology, sociology, ethnic studies, geography and other social and political sciences. Extensive ethno­ graphic research has been applied to ethnic tourism studies, such as explorations of Balinese cultural identity (Verheijen & Putra, 2020) and the ethnic culture heritage of North Sumatra in Indonesia in a time of globalization (Matondang, 2016), the inequalities and power abuses in tribal tourism in Vietnam (Bott, 2018), language and commodification discourses among tourism workers in Nepal (Sharma, 2018), the landscape of ethnic tourism in Fiji (White, 2005), the challenges and opportuni­ ties of tourism development in the Northern Territory in Australia (Ryan & Huyton, 2000), the adaptation of ethnic performance to re-signify aesthetic forms and tradi­ tional meaning in Canada (Mason, 2004), and the contested interpretation of Maori identity in New Zealand (Taylor, 2001; McIntosh, 2004). Historically, ethnic tourism was seen as a “utopia of difference”, a by-product of imperialism or the new product of neocolonialism (Van den Berghe, 1994; Xie, 2011). Meeting minority people became a romanticized vision and the basis of oppression by colonizers or members of the majority group. Colorful depictions and exotic representations of ethnic people and their practices are commonly used in the mass media for tourism promotion. Thus, ethnic people become a “living spectacle” to be observed, photographed, interacted with and experienced (van den Berghe & Keyes, 1984). The most marketable forms of cultural exoticism are the more spectacular aspects of the lifestyles and artifacts of minority groups, which are often considered “backward” by the dominant majority society (Oakes, 2016). Rampant marketing emphasizes the “untouched”, “primitive”, “exotic”, “advertec­ ture” or the “savage” peoples living in pristine ecosystems and traditional environ­ ments. Indeed, the objects of ethnic tourism are often geographically and socially marginalized groups who remain in a position inferior to that of an overwhelm­ ingly dominant majority population. Ideally, the “primitive” or “exotic” imageries offer an opportunity for modern tourists to escape briefly from a modernized and globalized contemporary world. However, in reality, ethnic peoples are much like everyone else, living in an interconnected world with cultures that evolve over time with or without the influence of tourism (Smith & Ward, 2000). The tourism indus­ try is often implicated in the marketing of ethnic culture that is divorced from time,

Ethnic Tourism Development

11

space and history, but culture is not static nor fixed and is always dynamic and everevolving (Fan et al., 2020). Economic and technical transitions, the spread of the mass media, the globalization of knowledge, and cultural interactions also affect sociocultural change, although these are often hidden beneath romanticized visions of an unchanging culture. The commercialization of ethnic culture has become a contentious issue, with a prevailing assumption that tourism commodifies cul­ tural practices, eroding traditional ways of life and original values as a result. The growth of tourism leads to acculturation and value changes undermining the mean­ ing, and even existence, of ethnic traditions. In the last decade, a shift from a neocolonial view with a focus on rural develop­ ment to a postcolonial stance in ethnic tourism research (Phipps, 2016) has seen more scholars beginning to acknowledge the agency of ethnic hosts. According to Wijesinghe et al. (2019), neocolonialism is widely manifested in contemporary tourism as a means for emerging economies to evolve into societies based upon modern knowledge systems. The proponents of postcolonialism call for the fore­ grounding of tourism studies to emancipate the voices of ethnic communities and indigenous peoples from those of the colonizers (Kaomea, 2016). Scholars have documented how ethnic communities turn to local practices, values and social organizations to promote social justice, inclusion, insurgent activism and resistant politics, in attempts to address past mistreatment and current inequities (Qian & Wei, 2020). They can act strategically to tourism opportunities, continuously nego­ tiating between tourism benefits and cultural identity (Bruner, 2005; Salazar & Graburn, 2014), and the dilemmas that are embedded in these relationships. Eth­ nic people can become active agents of their own fate rather than passive recipi­ ents through the control or delivery of tourism services by outsiders in the form of cultural performances, festivals, homestays and guided tours to ethnic villages and community spaces. Ethnic tourism has been viewed often both as a source of cultural commodification and as an agent of modernization as minorities grapple with denying, selecting or succumbing to different value systems dominated by mainstream cultures (Yang et al., 2013). Driven by tourism and economic develop­ ment, ethnic culture in many destinations has been transformed into commodities of modernization that are symbolic of the Western pursuit of the exotic “other”. Various perspectives on ethnic tourism have been reported in empirical research based on examples from the United States, New Zealand, Australia, Asia and Fiji (e.g., White, 2005; Cohen, 2016). Many studies concentrate on describing and understanding the impacts of tourism on host communities and address the norma­ tive issue of whether tourism is detrimental or beneficial to its hosts (Bott, 2018; Wood, 1998; Telfer & Sharpley, 2008). They are primarily concerned with what constitutes ethnic authenticity and how the arrival of tourists changes this. How­ ever, these studies commonly overemphasize the positive or negative impacts of tourism on host communities and their cultures, while overlooking other factors that may also influence them and give rise to similar outcomes (Sun et al., 2018). Especially, in the epoch of modernization and globalization, many ethnic areas

12

Ethnic Tourism Development

have been affected by internal and external forces and, thus, ethnic identity and the traditional way of life are changing with or without tourism, especially in develop­ ing countries, where governments may have more power to intervene in the eco­ nomic development and social improvement of ethnic minority areas (Yang et al., 2008). Rapid tourism expansion in some of the world’s most peripheral and remote areas has ignited widespread academic concerns regarding the potentially negative implications of ethnic tourism. Early studies often portrayed tourism as a destruc­ tive force that undermines traditional cultures and causes problems for host com­ munities, such as increased social tension, sociocultural breakdown, and an erosion of identity and the sense of place (MacCannell, 1976; Smith, 1977). These occur as a result of the commodification of culture and the modification and destruction of the meanings of cultural expressions (Cohen, 1988). Such commercial exploitation of culture has been widely criticized as resulting in the “bastardization” and “pol­ lution” of previously authentic cultures for the purpose of touristic display (Wood, 1997). Tourism practices may destroy host cultures or “freeze” them in a caricature of a past state. Some tourist sites now possess “phony-folk-cultures” that cater to many tourists’ desires for and satisfaction with superficial and staged exposures to cultural “otherness” (Xie, 2011). Tourism may not serve as a catalyst for changing the relationships between minority and majority groups; rather, it may undermine ethnic places and identities (Oakes, 1997; Xie, 2011). Cultural influences occur on housing, language, writing, food, handicrafts, religion, lifestyle and almost all such manifestations of human behavior (Liu, 2014). Cultural assimilation, vulgariza­ tion and commercialization are seen as common phenomena in ethnic destinations (Zhang, 2007). Despite extensive debates on whether tourism accelerates the destruction of ethnic culture or promotes the preservation and revival of cultural expressions, recent studies have unveiled positive impacts. The impact of tourism on ethnic culture may be seen as negative or positive depending on the identity of the cul­ tural citizenship of the observer (Qu et al., 2019). Ethnic tourism appears to be a good option for economic development in ethnic areas where other development options are limited (Yang, 2011). It can lead to positive economic, cultural and political effects, especially desirable economic impacts, through creating employ­ ment opportunities and incomes, leading to more diverse livelihood options and an enhanced standard of living. Beneficial sociocultural impacts on host commu­ nities have also been widely reported, such as the restoration, preservation and revitalization of ethnic attributes and heritage that were dying out or formerly seen as symbols of backwardness, thereby stimulating growing self-confidence, and an improved community image held by both residents and the majority population in which it is embedded. Many communities take advantage of new market demands to showcase their culture and reaffirm identities, rejuvenate traditional customs and skills in handicraft-making and enactments of rituals and festivals. A positive political effect of tourism has been noted in some studies. For example, tourism

Ethnic Tourism Development

13

has helped aboriginal people to enter the mainstream of economic and political life (Ryan et al., 2007), by changing the ethnic group’s relationship to the state and to other ethnic groups. It can even change relationship within the group itself (Hitchcock, 2010). It is a paradox that tourism is both an activity that gives added value to expressions of ethnicity and, at the same time, may cause their modification and even undermine them: many ethnic people see tourism as a means of enhancing their lifestyles as well as commemorating their past. Research has revealed that eth­ nic communities are unlikely to express homogeneous reactions to tourism devel­ opment. Indeed, many communities face a development dilemma: although locals can be economic beneficiaries of tourism, they may also witness the destruction of their environment and heritage, the erosion of their social customs and traditions, and potential tension between hosts and guests. Some communities are pursuing short-term benefits and ignoring the sustainability of tourism (Su, 2019). As ethnic minorities tend to be marginalized and economically or politically disadvantaged (Wood, 1997), they usually have little control over tourism resources and activities. The roles of the government and entrepreneurs as well as tourists’ perceptions are often emphasized in the tourism planning and management process to the relative neglect of local voices (Yang, 2011). Tourism’s contribution to economic growth tends to decline along with increased tourism development and specialization. The weakness of local human capital often places ethnic community members in a dis­ advantaged position and even in a poverty trap. Thus, the success of ethnic tourism requires political and policy support, direct participation of minority residents and the cooperation of key stakeholders. While many studies highlight the impacts (both positive and negative) of eth­ nic tourism, studies have shed light on many other aspects of this form of tour­ ism, such as tourism planning (Henderson, 2003; Yang, 2011), ethnic community empowerment (Chen et al., 2016), spatial changes in ethnicity and local communi­ ties (Su & Sun, 2020; Yang et al., 2020), gendered practices (Trupp & Sunanta, 2017; Zapalska & Brozik, 2017), ethnic festivals and identity (Jackson, 2020; Tao et al., 2020), poverty alleviation (Lor et al., 2019; Yang, 2015), gentrification and tourism development processes (Gilli & Ferrari, 2018), and sustainable develop­ ment (Yun & Zhang, 2017; Zoomers, 2008), among other topics. The theories and concepts used to understand and explain the nature, patterns and outcomes of eth­ nic tourism are becoming more diverse and comprehensive. Multiple theories (e.g., social exchange theory, place attachment theory, attribution theory, dependency theory, social representation theory and emotional solidarity theory), as well as numerous concepts (e.g., delocalization, re-localization and alienation), have been applied to explore residents’ attitudes toward tourism (Wang et al., 2020) and social and cultural changes in ethnic tourism communities (Sun et al., 2018). Although a growing number of theoretical approaches and methodological tools have been applied to study ethnic tourism, the literature has tended to be dominated by three features. The first is that a significant proportion of research has been

14

Ethnic Tourism Development

conducted from an “etic” perspective and undertaken through the lens of Westerncentric paradigms with most studies concentrated in the developed world, such as Australia, Canada and New Zealand (Tham et al., 2020), but growing scholarly work on tourism experiences from and by ethnic communities has emerged in many less-developed countries such as China, Thailand, India and so on in recent years (Cohen, 2016; Yang & Wall, 2014; Thimm & Karlaganis, 2020). Second, many ethnic tourism researchers focus on practical issues of tourism development, rather than theoretical questions regarding tourism’s relationship to ethnicity, which might be due to the particular ethnic situation in the studied countries (Cohen, 2016). The dominant discourses on ethnic communities tend to be framed in a socio-economic narrative. Third, although the majority of research has focused on the viewpoints of local residents and business operators toward tourism development by using quali­ tative methods include fieldwork, interviews, informal conversations and observa­ tions, numerous studies have investigated ethnic tourism experiences, to a lesser extent, using quantitative methods such as questionnaire investigations of visitors and residents. The latter studies have largely focused on individual stakeholders’ perceptions of tourism impacts on ethnicity; a small number of studies have exam­ ined multiple stakeholders’ perspectives concurrently. Moreover, few studies have explored the process and patterns of the spatiotemporal transformation of ethnicity based on remote sensing images or through the application of other new technolo­ gies (Yang et al., 2020). Hence, new methodological approaches, particularly those situated in relatively new areas within tourism scholarship, such as the use of geo­ graphical information systems (GIS) and remote sensing, may be used to broaden and enhance the study and practice of ethnic tourism development. 1.3

Tourism, Ethnicity and Ethnic Identity

Ethnicity is an elusive social concept that is often defined according to membership attributes that include racial, territorial, economic, religious, cultural, aesthetic or linguistic distinctions (De Vos & Romanucci-Ross, 1995). The fluidity and com­ plexities of ethnicity have long been the focus of ongoing debates in the humanities and social sciences. Research on ethnicity has adopted primordial and situational or instrumental perspectives. The primordial view sees ethnicity as dependent on a series of givens, such as being born into a particular community, adopting its values and speaking its specific language, and following a set of cultural practices that are associated with that community (Geertz, 1963). Ethnicity is regarded as a natural, ascribed property containing certain unchanging characteristics that persist through history (Banks, 1996). Culture and ethnicity are then seen as static features that are immune to external influences (Aoki, 2002). From this perspective, an ethnic group is defined as a socially distinct group of people who share a common history, culture and religion (Sillitoe & White, 1992). Ethnic identity is based on a mix of shared values, memories, myths and traditions that allow the members of the group to distinguish themselves from others (Smith, 1991).

Ethnic Tourism Development

15

In contrast, the situational or instrumental approach offers a more dynamic view that places emphasis on ethnicity as a set of social relationships and processes by which cultural differences are communicated and maintained (Hitchcock, 1999, 2010). This approach emphasizes the importance of understanding the processes by which ethnic identities and boundaries are created, modified and maintained (Barth, 1969). Proponents do not see ethnicity as a stable entity or the property of cultural groups, but it is viewed as being more fluid, nested and changeable, and it is based on voluntary identification (Linnekin & Poyer, 1990). It is a multifac­ eted construct that changes over time and, thus, it is variable rather than a con­ stant (Hettne, 1996). The pursuit of cultural identity and social autonomy involves the manipulation of symbols as boundaries are defined and maintained (Hitch­ cock, 2010). Ethnicity acts as a powerful cohesive force that may help a group to maintain control over their resources by excluding outsiders (Hitchcock, 2010). It can be used as a tool to gain political power, recognition or even sovereignty (Cohen, 1996). These two approaches to ethnicity influence the study of relationships between tourism and ethnicity. From the primordial perspective, ethnicity is viewed as a series of “givens” such as religion, genetics, language, values and customs asso­ ciated with a particular community. Ethnicity in tourism is often viewed as “an elemental attachment, and as possessing firmness and immutability . . . social mobility does not change this sense of ethnicity” (Hitchcock, 1999, pp. 19–20). The primordial approach regards ethnicity as a force powerfully rooted in the past and experienced in the present as overpowering and ineffable (Wood, 1998). For instance, existing materials and culture constrain the options of tourism entre­ preneurs because ethnic cultures are not all equally marketable. Furthermore, the strength and content of shared myths, memories and symbols can affect the likeli­ hood of ethnicity being turned into tourism products (Wood, 1998). The instrumental or situational perspective regards ethnicity as a set of pro­ cesses and social relations that emerge and are shaped based on the social circum­ stances in which the individuals (or groups) are located (Hitchcock, 2010). Ethnic identity is seen as ambiguous, subjective and situational (Cohen, 1978), and that ethnicity is both mutable and negotiable through social interaction between tourists and local people (Hitchcock, 2010). This approach offers more dynamic views of ethnicity as it discards simplistic conceptions of culture as a bounded entity and stresses ethnicity as a set of social relationships and processes by which cultural differences are communicated (Hitchcock, 2010). Cultural identity is seen as an ongoing process, politically contested and always mixed, relational and inventive (Clifford, 1986). Ethnic identity is not fixed and inherited from the past, but rather is constantly reinvented, reimagined or symbolically constructed (Wood, 1997). Ethnic groups are fluid, emergent concepts, rather than permanent, objectively given categories; while ethnic boundaries are changing, contingent and influenced by the changing trends in interactions between majority and minority groups in the broader society (Wimmer, 2009). Ethnicity becomes a powerful asset that can be

16

Ethnic Tourism Development

invoked according to circumstances to develop, inform and expand tourism entre­ preneurial activities (Hitchcock, 2010). As ethnicity has been increasingly adopted as a strategy to promote tourism development in many destinations, it has become commodified, a product recre­ ated and marketed to tourists (Smith, 2001). In this product, tourism and ethnicity share a close relationship in which ethnic identities are represented or constructed through images, arts and crafts (Henderson, 2003). Ethnicity permeates many aspects of tourism (Hitchcock, 2010), while tourism impacts ethnicity in a vari­ ety of ways. Van den Berghe (1994) emphasized that tourism does not just affect ethnicity but often constitutes a form of ethnic relations, particularly in developing countries. Commonly, there are three economically unequal groups involved in these relationships: the tourist, the “touree” and the middleman. The “touree” is the native-turned-actor; in other words, a native who modifies his or her behavior to meet tourists’ demands. The middleman is the broker who manipulates ethnicity for gain and mediates the interaction of tourist and “touree” (van den Berghe & Keyes, 1984). Often, the economic benefits of tourism accrue disproportionately to the dominant group functioning as middlemen (Wood, 1997). The use of the term ethnicity varies greatly in the tourism literature. Various manifestations of ethnicity have been discussed in the context of ethnic tour­ ism, such as constructed ethnicity, reconstructed ethnicity and fluid ethnicity. Historically, tourism was seen as an external force, acting upon a preexisting ethnic culture. Constructed ethnicity assumes an original, static ethnic identity that is influenced by tourism exchanges. Tourees are performers who separate the authentic from the commercial, or entrepreneurs who modify their behaviors to engage in tourism trades (MacCannell, 1992; Urry, 1990). Ethnic identity is created for public display and marketed to tourists as a contrast to the dominant group. Commodification of ethnicity, that is, sale of access to ethnic experiences or products, is often decried in the literature as a form of cultural degradation. Tourism development may weaken ethnicity and destroy the authentic sense of place in an ethnic tourism destination (Oakes, 1997). Cultural modification may eventually destroy the original cultural identity (MacCannell, 1992). On the con­ trary, many case studies have found that tourism can strengthen ethnic identity through the promotion of local cultures, arts, performances and festivals (Abra­ hams, 2015). The revival of culture is sometimes stimulated by tourist interest and demand. Indeed, cultures, whether ethnic, national or regional, that are unable to transfer their qualities into spectacles or commodities often vanish and become museum items (Firat, 1995). The selling of ethnicity is likely to make ethnic peo­ ples more self-conscious and reflexive about the culture they may have previ­ ously taken for granted (Wood, 1997, 1998). Tourism can assist in enhancing awareness of ethnic groups that are being undermined by internal and external forces, protecting cultural heritage of marginalized minorities, and promoting the restoration, preservation and recreation of ethnic attributes that were seen as dying out or passé (Henderson, 2003).

Ethnic Tourism Development

17

In response to pressures from tourism, “reconstructed ethnicity” has emerged as the reintroduction, display, maintenance and preservation of ethnic forms of life for the entertainment of tourists, and it may be both a commodity to be bought and sold as well as a rhetorical weapon of inter-ethnic relations (MacCannell, 1984). It may be building on an ethnicity that is no longer practiced and is therefore frozen in time (MacCannell, 1992). Reconstructed ethnicity is often considered to be a prod­ uct of the postmodern, mass tourism industry. In such ethnicity, the copy becomes as real as the original item (AlSayyad, 2001). For example, the town of New Glarus in Wisconsin adopted an ethnic Swiss character that became “more Swiss than Switzerland”. The buildings follow a strict code of appearance, and the residents perform in Swiss national traditions, whether or not they are of ethnic Swiss herit­ age (Hoelscher, 1998). Fluid ethnicity assumes that ethnic display of tourism is authentic because authenticity is negotiable (Neilson, 2016). Ethnicity is fluid and dynamic, and there is no pure version of ethnicity (Hitchcock, 2010; Lackey, 2013; Santos & Yan, 2008). Ethnic displays for tourism are the current practice of ethnic groups, hence, they are deemed to be authentic (Foster, 2013; Zhu, 2012). Tourism not only impacts ethnic identities but ethnic markers are selected to symbolize group culture and to demarcate ethnic boundaries (Wood, 1998). Tour­ ism has the potential to stimulate the reproduction and reconstruction of ethnic relations, and to redefine ethnic boundaries (Cohen, 2016). Tourism is seen as being an integral part of the process by which ethnicity is represented and con­ structed, and as a key force in the processes of defining, maintaining and modify­ ing ethnic boundaries (Wood, 1998). For instance, tourism has become an integral part of Balinese culture and the interaction with tourists is an important component in the definition of ethnic identity in Bali, Indonesia (Picard, 1997; Verheijen & Putra, 2020). Local ethnicities and ethnic practices become a resource for tourism and are constructed through narrations of authenticity and difference (Schilar & Keskitalo, 2018). For local people, tourism brings both lucrative opportunities to sell their ethnic otherness, as well as new tensions as ethnicity becomes politicized and essentialized both internally and externally (Viken & Müller, 2017). On the one hand, it leads to a new reflection and renegotiation of what a given ethnicity is about. Local people may want to emphasize their own ethnic difference, often through their traditions. On the other hand, ethnic culture may become colonized, frozen in time or vulgarized. Celebrations of ethnic diversity or “local color” constitute an important aspect of global culture and of tourism as well in the modern world (Kahn, 1997), while tourism has become one structural component of the global phenomenon of ethnicity and ethnic stratification (Wood, 1998). With the broad integration of ethnicity into tourism worldwide, the representation, consumption and experience of ethnicity have become fashionable. “Ethnic” has become a popular tourist icon consumed and promoted locally and afar, from ethnic restaurants, neighborhoods and markets to ethnic museums, theme parks and tourist villages (Gladney, 1999). The commodification of ethnicity is intensified in the creation of ethnic theme

18

Ethnic Tourism Development

parks in some Asian countries in which ethnic diversity is both celebrated and interpreted within an official nationalist discourse of “unity in diversity” (Wood, 1998; Yang, 2011). Wood (1998) observed four tendencies in terms of the tour­ istic experience of ethnicity: (1) ethnicity has become an object of purposive, self-conscious consumption of commodities and experiences produced for sale in markets; (2) ethnic commodities have become increasingly manufactured through packaging, staged authenticity and recreations; (3) ethnicity has become the object of a socially structured “gaze”, constructed out of interactions between insiders and outsiders; and (4) touristic ethnic experience has become an important compo­ nent of social activities. It is not just the ethnicity of others that can be consumed by tourists; people increasingly consume their own ethnicity in touristic forms (Wood, 1998; Smith, 2001). Ethnic identity has become gradually more blurred in the contemporary tourism and cultural globalization process, and the boundaries between tourism and other social and cultural activities have also increasingly faded (Wood, 1998). The marketing of ethnicity embraces the role of the state and entrepreneurs in tourism development, the modification and recreation of ethnic attributes and con­ sciousness, and the formation of ethnic stereotypes in tourist–“touree” interactions (Van den Bergh & Keyes, 1984). Tourism tends to represent and reinforce dominant patterns of ethnic stratification at the beginning, but the dynamic nature of the tour­ ism industry also offers the potential for changing those patterns (Wood, 1998). In many developing countries, the state is the key player not only in developing tourism but also in defining, shaping and regulating ethnicity. During the process of promot­ ing tourism, states become planners of tourism development, marketers of cultural meanings and arbiters of cultural practices (Yang et al., 2008). The state determines the place of ethnic identities in tourism marketing and development, and decides what ethnic images are chosen and manipulated to enhance the destination’s appeal to tourists (Henderson, 2003). Many case studies in Asian and Pacific countries address the issues involved in the intersection of tourism, ethnic identity and state policies (Cohen, 2016; Picard, 1997; Tham et al., 2020). The commodification of ethnicity for tourism embraces a broad range of issues, from the preservation of ethnic com­ munities to the construction of ethnic identities to the development of ethnic values. The studies also reveal that the state’s roles in facilitating tourism and shaping ethnic­ ity can both reinforce and conflict with each other. The relationships between tour­ ism, states and ethnicity are dynamic. Involvement in tourism may change an ethnic group’s relationship to the state and to other ethnic groups, and even change relation­ ships within the group as well (Hitchcock, 2010). Ethnic differentiation has been seen as a problem for many countries because groups compete for scarce resources and make demands on governments, and their loyalties may threaten territorial or cul­ tural unity (Leong, 1997). In multiethnic communities, tourism may not only support ethnic cohesion and provide opportunities for ethnic boundary fusion but it can also stimulate both inter-ethnic competition and cooperation (Miral et al., 2013).

Ethnic Tourism Development

19

Cohen (2016) argued that ethnic tourism has had an ambiguous effect on eth­ nic boundaries in destination countries. On the one hand, tourism has built upon the official ideology (i.e., the minorities are inferior to the majority) and, hence, minorities constitute a legitimate object of the tourist gaze (Urry, 1990). Tour­ ism can help to maintain or reinforce the majority–minority boundary and hence may become an obstacle to the integrative policies of some states, by stress­ ing and exaggerating the minorities’ otherness or exoticism, and by turning eth­ nic markers (e.g., clothing, handicrafts and rituals) selected by the regime into tourist attractions. On the other hand, tourism may weaken ethnic boundaries in that it brings modern infrastructure and outsider entrepreneurs into often remote isolated regions, transforming the local economy and exposing ethnic people to modernization and outside influences, thus gradually destroying cultural integrity and facilitating local emigration. Thus, tourism may unintentionally contribute to the incorporation of the marginalized minorities into the majority society. Cohen further pointed out the existence of tourism-induced separation of ethnic people from their culture. Contemporary ethnic people are undergoing two contrary pro­ cesses: de-ethnization and re-ethnization. The de-ethnization process is caused by national integration policies, outsider economic penetration and the forces of modernization, which tend to reduce their otherness that was once attractive to tourists. The re-ethnization process is due to the efforts of tourism authori­ ties, entrepreneurs and in some cases community leaders, to present visitors with their allegedly distinct traditions, but now transformed and adapted culture and customs, which reinforces their apparent otherness and, hence, attractiveness to tourists. Cohen was concerned that ethnic people and their cultures become increasingly dissociated in many ethnic attractions, which are often located out­ side the ethnic groups’ habitats, such as in urban ethnic theme parks, museums and hotels, indicating a trend toward the emergence of “ethnicity without groups” (Brubaker, 2009). In their study of ethnic tourism in China, Yang and Wall (2014) integrated pri­ mordial and instrumental approaches and regarded ethnicity as both a cultural heritage shared by a group and a form of social organization or relations, which changes over time according to political and socio-economic circumstances. They emphasized that ethnicity is not an absolute, static concept but fluid, flexible, dynamic and changeable depending upon different social settings and the per­ spectives of different individual stakeholders. Hitchcock (2010) suggested that it would be more helpful to consider the primordial and situational perspectives as part of a continuum rather than mutually exclusive explanatory frameworks. As Cohen (2016) argued, ethnic tourism research has fallen short of examining the role of tourism in the processes of formation, perseverance and dissolution of eth­ nic boundaries; thus, future research is needed to examine the role of tourism in the production and dynamics of their boundedness instead of focusing on the impact of tourism on bounded ethnic groups.

20

1.4

Ethnic Tourism Development

Authenticity and Commodification

Authenticity

Since MacCannell (1973) introduced the concept of authenticity into tourism stud­ ies, it has received considerable attention and debate in the literature regarding what it is, who possesses it and where it can be found (Brown, 2013; Wang, 1999, 2000; Xie, 2011). Authenticity is often conceptualized as an attribute that describes a product, service or experience as genuine, real or true to the original (Brown, 2013; Taylor, 2001). It has been addressed extensively in the literature from a variety of perspectives including its objective (real), constructive (social-political) and per­ sonal (phenomenological) forms (Wang, 1999). There is a growing consensus (e.g., Cohen, 1988; Taylor, 2001) that authenticity is a negotiable concept depending on the perspectives of tourists, hosts, governments and businesses. Each stakeholder can create their own subjective framework of what constitutes the authentic aspects of ethnic tourism (Chhabra, 2012). Thus, authenticity is a slippery and contested term rather than a fixed property of an object or a situation (Xie, 2011). It is linked to different sociopolitical settings and local cultural characteristics. Authenticity is conceived as a value (Olsen, 2002), a motivational force (Cohen, 1988), a “claim” (Peterson, 2005), a perception (Zhou et al., 2015) and the choice people make (Reisinger & Steiner, 2006). Authenticity is always an evolutionary and ongoing perspective, as tourists’ expectations change and as culture evolves (Wood, 1998). There are three main approaches to authenticity in tourism experiences: objec­ tivism, constructivism and postmodernism (Wang, 1999). The objective approach concerns the extent to which toured objects are original, unmodified and in their appropriate place (Brown, 2013). Authenticity is seen as an agreed-upon and objec­ tively defined entity (MacCannell, 1992). It is an objective attribute of tourism objects (Chhabra, 2012), referring to the genuineness, accuracy or truth of physical objects, which can include life processes, activities, artifacts and so on (Lau, 2010). It comes from the originality of the tourism object (Belhassen et al., 2008) or the historical accuracy of the event and original location where certain events occurred (Chronis & Hampton, 2008). Staged attractions that contain elements of an original tradition (Chhabra et al., 2003) or are authoritatively certified, or are imitations (Robinson & Clifford, 2012), may even be considered by some to have objective authenticity. There are “objective” criteria that are used to evaluate authenticity. The judgment of authenticity is therefore based upon the traditional or custom­ ary ways of production or usage that are enacted by local people or authorita­ tive certifications (Mkono, 2013). Since most tourists lack the expertise to identify authenticity, objective authenticity is usually judged by experts rather than tour­ ists (Rickly-Boyd, 2012). Thus, even if tourists think that they have experienced authentic tourism objects, the objects still may be fake or staged (Wang, 1999). Selwyn (1996) suggested that there are two kinds of authenticity that tourists seek: knowledge – arguably of the physical environment; and social atmosphere – the

Ethnic Tourism Development

21

pursuit of “authentic social relations and sociability” (pp. 7–8). Products of tour­ ism such as festivals, rituals, artifacts, cuisine, housing and costumes are usually described as authentic or inauthentic depending upon whether they are made or enacted by local people according to traditions (MacCannell, 1976). In this sense, authenticity implies a traditional culture and origin, and a sense of the genuine, the real or unique (Sharpley, 1994). The quest for the authentic is seen as a feature of modernity and a motif of modern tourism (MacCannell, 1973, 1976). Modernity can be understood as (1) the overall process of social change that accompanies economic development and (2) westernization (Larkin & Peters, 1983). Authen­ ticity is a fundamental component of the experiences sought by modern tourists (MacCannell, 1976). A major trend in tourism is the replacement of real authentic­ ity with “staged” authenticity, in which cultures and traditions are commodified and manufactured for tourists’ consumption (MacCannell, 1976). Adopting Goffman’s (1959) distinction between front and back regions, MacCannell (1973, 1976) identified six different stages from overtly front stage (a place built for tourists, representing inauthentic, contrived experience) to explic­ itly back stage (where locals live their true lives away from the gaze of tourists and that represents authentic, intimate experience). Thus, the quest for authenticity is a movement from the front to the back stage. Anything marked and coded for tourist consumption is “staged” (MacCannell, 1976; Urry, 1990). Once tourists consume the marked sites – front stage – they may conclude that there must be some “real” or “truly authentic” sites behind the facades and, thus, a quest for the unmarked “authentic” begins. However, many are satisfied with staged authentic­ ity. When tourists turn to search for the real or original, they become victims of staged authenticity. However, objective authenticity may not be the primary pursuit of tourists (Mkono, 2013) and cannot fully explain tourist motivations and experi­ ences (Zhang & Yin, 2020). The concept of objective authenticity is also vague, ranging from the original to the genuinely fake, to the realistic replica (Cohen, 1988). The objective approach has long faced serious challenges and criticism as it devalues the veracity and importance of the tourist’s experience from their own perspective. While objective authenticity refers to the genuineness of objects visited by tour­ ists, constructive authenticity considers authenticity as a social construction and, thus, it is dynamic, subjective and negotiated (Cohen, 1988), multiple (Robinson & Clifford, 2012), compromised (Fawcett & Cormack, 2001), time-based (Kim & Jamal, 2007), explanatory (Bruner, 1994), imagined (Steiner & Reisinger, 2006) and/or contextual (Robinson & Clifford, 2012). It is the result of a joint interpreta­ tion and construction by various tourism stakeholders (Robinson & Clifford, 2012). The constructivist approach revolves around a few common assumptions (Le et al., 2019). First, there is no absolute and static original on which the authenticity of the originals can rely (Bruner, 1994). Second, authenticity is an output of how one sees things through personal perspectives and interpretations (Wang, 1999, 2000). Third, authenticity is constructed through stereotyped images, expectations and

22

Ethnic Tourism Development

consciousness onto the toured other, which are subjected to the influence of mass media, movies and word of mouth (Xie, 2011). Bruner (1994) demonstrated the multiple uses of constructive authenticity by using four meanings of authenticity based on verisimilitude, genuineness, originality and authority. Authenticity is not a primitive given but results from a negotiation process with a judgment or value imposed on the setting or product by consumers (Moscardo & Pearce, 1999; Xie & Wall, 2002). It is not absolute or static but will change over time and when different cultures interact. The degree of authenticity sought depends on the tourist and is relative to an individual’s definition, expectation, experience, behavior and inter­ pretation of authenticity (Cohen, 1988; Littrell et al., 1993). Therefore, authenticity is an injection of tourists’ and/or tourism producers’ imaginations, expectations, preferences, beliefs and powers onto toured objects and experiences (Wang, 1999). This projection is a reflection of a cultural value that is constantly being created and transformed in the social process (Olsen, 2002). Even though something initially may be “inauthentic” or “artificial”, it may subsequently become “emergent authenticity” over time (Cohen, 1988). Edelheim (2005) claimed that neither the back stage nor the front stage icons are authentic: each is as authentic as the other. According to Edelheim, tourists can make their experiences authentic because they are the persons who experience the phenomena and if they were not there, those experiences would not happen. Originals or tradi­ tions can be invented and constructed according to the context and people’s needs (Bruner, 1994). Zeppel (1995, 1997) identified authenticity as situational authentic­ ity (tourists’ responses to the physical setting) and behavioral authenticity (related to tourists’ personal needs) in a study of tourists’ experiences at Iban longhouses in Sarawak. For constructivists, tourists are in search of “symbolic” authenticity that is a result of social construction rather than objective authenticity (i.e., authentic­ ity as originals) (Wang, 1999). The toured objects are experienced as authentic not because they are originals but because they are perceived as the signs or symbols of authenticity (Culler, 1981). Constructivists believe that authenticity is the result of the mutual construction of tourists and hosts through their interactive activities (Steiner & Reisinger, 2006). Tourists are also active creators of authenticity and the authenticity is marketed according to tourists’ demands (Chhabra, 2005). The evaluation of constructive authenticity is thus based not only on the attributes of tourism objects but also on the subjective experience and individual differences of tourism subjects (Belhassen et al., 2008; Wang, 1999). Constructive authenticity no longer completely negates the impact of commodification, which becomes a key factor in the negotiation of authenticity, and tourism commodities sold at the des­ tinations can also be used as markers for an authentication process (Halewood & Hannam, 2001). Unlike objective and constructive views, postmodernist approaches to authentic­ ity in tourism have argued for the deconstruction of the concept (Steiner & Reisinger, 2006; Wang, 1999). Indeed, postmodernist scholars do not consider inauthentic­ ity as a problem; instead, they deconstruct the conception of authenticity through

Ethnic Tourism Development

23

deconstructing the boundaries between the copy and the original, or between the sign and reality (Brown, 1996; Ritzer & Liska, 1997). In this approach, the main concern is the illusion of authenticity rather than a definitive reality. Hyperreality has been used to represent such illusions. Most postmodernists cite Disneyland as a typical model of hyperreality. Eco (1985) indicated that replicas are so well made that they become better than the original, not just real, but “hyperreal”. From a postmodern perspective, the world is filled with simulations and not originals (Baudrillard, 1983). Tradition is changing and being reinvented and, thus, authen­ ticity is redefined. Postmodern authenticity is an illusion of authenticity rather than a certain reality (Waitt, 2000). Even the so-called “back regions” may be imaginary settings (MacCannell, 2008). Hyperreality has become an element of modern tourism. For instance, cultural parks present staged authenticities to tourists in a convenient setting, which is bet­ ter than the real from a postmodern perspective (Edelheim, 2005). In response to this postmodern trend, Cohen (1988, 2015) stated that postmodern tourists are less concerned with the authenticity of the original because they are in a playful search for enjoyment and they are more concerned with the impact of tourism on frag­ ile host communities. Furthermore, “staged authenticity” as a “substitute” for the “original” can help to protect a fragile toured culture from being disturbed. Modern technology can make the inauthentic look more authentic (Fjellman, 1992). Thus, in this postmodern world, many tourists are in search of “genuine fakes” (Brown, 1996) or inauthenticity (Ritzer & Liska, 1997). They are happy to accept the con­ venience and easy access provided by modernization, even though this moderniza­ tion violates historical or cultural accuracy (Rickly-Boyd, 2012). Postmodernists argue that the boundary between the real and the fake is so blurred that the argu­ ment about what is authentic or inauthentic is theoretically pointless (Steiner & Reisinger, 2006). The key to the evaluation of authenticity is the tourists (Cohen, 2015), and depends on whether their travel experiences meet or exceed their pre­ tour expectations (Martin, 2010). Nevertheless, the calls to abandon authenticity have received substantial critiques as premature or oversimplification (Mkono, 2013). Wang (1999) proposed the concept of existential authenticity that consists of a state of being activated by tourism activities. He divided existential authenticity into intrapersonal and interpersonal authenticity: intrapersonal authenticity assumes that people can physically and spiritually escape from their daily life and routine work through tourism, which enhances their self-identity, self-realization and self-expression, while interpersonal authenticity suggests that people can not only enjoy a pleasant experience from tourism but can also strengthen emotional bonds, authenticity and intimacy in family relationships and social equality in interper­ sonal relationships. He also related his existential authenticity to Selwyn’s (1996) division between “hot authenticity” and “cool authenticity”. “Cool authenticity” connects the experience of a “real” world to authenticity as knowledge, while “hot authenticity” links the experience of a “real” self to authenticity as feeling. This

24

Ethnic Tourism Development

“hot authenticity”, in relation with the authentic self, is a reflection of existential authenticity (Wang, 1999). Existential authenticity is both activity- and experiencerelated (Alraouf, 2010). Object-related authenticity is concerned with whether toured objects are “authentic”, or perceived as such, while existential authenticity relates to a personal experience of being “true to oneself”, being happy and free from pretensions and socially defined roles (Mkono, 2013). It is a personal feel­ ing that is constructed in a social process and activated when tourists are actively involved in the tourism experience and “having a good time” (Steiner & Reisinger, 2006; Wang, 2000). It relates to a choice people make; thus, it is conceived as a behavioral construct (Steiner & Reisinger, 2006). It is the result of desire, empathy and experience (Gnoth & Wang, 2015), and is short-lived and uncertain (Steiner & Reisinger, 2006). It is a mental state (Di Betta, 2014) or fantasy (Knudsen et al., 2016) that can only be obtained during liminal moments in tourist experiences (Kim & Jamal, 2007; Knudsen et al., 2016). Tourism acts as a catalyst for existen­ tial authenticity (Brown, 2013). Existential authenticity, thus, is the subjective feel­ ings formed by tourists in the tourism process, and it emphasizes the participation, subjectivity and freedom of tourists (Zhang & Yin, 2020). However, Wang defined authenticity only from tourists’ perspectives and did not consider suppliers’ views. His existential authenticity is a form of experiential authenticity. Taylor (2001) argued that sincerity, as the outcome of a moment of interaction between locals and the tourists, is a more appropriate term for present applications. He saw tourism as a set of communicative events and emphasized local involve­ ment as the main determinant of authenticity. A number of scholars support this “supply-driven authenticity” and argue that authenticity should be defined by the hosts themselves according to their unique cultural traditions and values (Chhabra, 2005; Cole, 2007; Steiner & Reisinger, 2006). Host perception of authenticity means hosts as subjects perceiving the authenticity of their own culture rather than as objects being gazed upon by visitors (Zhou et al., 2015). Chhabra (2005) found that the notion of authenticity flows from the creators and vendors to receivers (tourists); authenticity is supply-driven and vendors play a significant role in the transmission of the idea of authenticity. A “sincere” interaction between hosts and guests can create an authentic experience based on values that are acceptable to the hosts and, hence, instances of cultural offence can be prevented or lessened in an exchange of cultural experiences (McIntosh & Johnson, 2005). This interac­ tion involves a cultural conflict, an identity quest and various tensions which exist between tradition and change, history and modernity, reality and fiction, and cul­ ture and individuality (Costa & Bamossy, 2001). Authenticity exists in the extent of host control over the cultural displays and experiences presented to tourists (Walsh, 1996). It relates to the perceptions, feelings and emotions of both hosts and site visitors, such as a sense of cultural identity, the uniqueness of the emotional experi­ ence and a feeling of connectedness to human history and civilization (Zhou et al., 2015; Mkono, 2012). Thus, it is subject to the interpretation of both tourism pro­ viders and tourists visiting destinations.

Ethnic Tourism Development

25

Mkono (2013) argued that the predominant conception of authenticity in tour­ ism has remained a Western-centric, modern man-in-general approach which views tourists as searching for an “authentic other”. In recent years, domestic tour­ ists’ views of authenticity in many developing destinations have received growing academic attention (Mkono, 2013; Park et al., 2019; Tiberghien et al., 2017, 2020; Yang, 2011, 2019). Moreover, there has been increasing discussion about the poli­ tics of representation in authenticity, particularly in cultural and heritage attractions (Cohen & Cohen, 2012; Xie, 2011; Yang, 2011). Authenticity is seen as a social structure which is connected to power relations and socio-economic interests (Zhou et al., 2015). The representation of the “authentic” culture cannot be divorced from particular beliefs and sociocultural systems (Waitt, 2000). Authenticity is shaped by bureaucratic mandates, entrepreneurial interests/economic necessities and personal commitments (Fawcett & Cormack, 2001). The politics of authenticity are also the politics of space, identity and ethnicity (lived heritage) (Jamal & Hill, 2004). Ryan and Huyton (2000) suggested using “authorization” to replace authenticity as it redirects the questions to “Who authorizes?” and “What is authorized?” instead of trying to define a fluid and complex concept. Xie (2011) also suggested that it is more helpful to evaluate who authenticates and their interests in authentication rather than to focus on the identification of authenticity. Cohen and Cohen (2012) explored the politics of authorization or “authentication” and proposed “cool” authentication (declarative acts which authenticate objects) and “hot” authentica­ tion (immanent, reiterative, informal performative processes of creating, preserv­ ing and reinforcing an object’s, site’s or event’s authenticity). A large number of empirical studies have explored the authenticity of visi­ tors’ experiences in a variety of settings, including souvenir and handicraft shops (Chang et al., 2008; Xie et al., 2012), restored or reproduced heritage sites (Andriotis, 2011; Gao et al., 2020; Paraskevaidis & Weidenfeld, 2021; RicklyBoyd, 2012; Wang, 2000), ethnic, cultural and traditional folk villages (Cho, 2012; Metro-Roland, 2009; Yang, 2011, 2012; Yang & Wall, 2009), restaurant dining and food festivals (Jang et al., 2012; Le et al., 2019, 2021; Mkono, 2012; Robinson & Clifford, 2012), guided tours (Overend, 2012), theme parks (Duan et al., 2019; Okumus et al., 2013; Tan & Huang, 2020), museums, art galleries, castles, zoos and seasonal fairs (Bobot, 2012; Jin et al., 2020; Maruyama et al., 2008; Werdler, 2011), farming and residential tourism (Di Domenico & Miller, 2012; Mantecon & Huete, 2008), homestays (Mura, 2015; Wang, 2007), and festivals and events (Carnegie & McCabe, 2008; Chhabra et al., 2003; Kim & Jamal, 2007; Matheson, 2008; Virloget & Kavrečič, 2019). They suggest that contemporary tourists seek both objective and existential authenticity on their trips (Cohen, 2002). Existential authenticity outweighs objective authenticity experienced at historical cultural sites (Bryce et al., 2015). While some tourists travel farther to experience encounters with “untouched” environments and cultures, others prefer to relax and experience existential authenticity that comes from simply “being themselves” (Yang, 2011). Many tourists perceive commercial presentations of history, heritage and cultures

26

Ethnic Tourism Development

as existentially authentic (Kim & Jamal, 2007; Tan & Huang, 2020). Many tour­ ists may obtain authentic experiences through staged authenticity and they may be content with overtly constructed offerings (Edelheim, 2005; Yang, 2011). In fact, not all tourists seek authenticity; many enjoy their experiences, even though they know that they may not be authentic (Xie, 2011). Authenticity is thus a dynamic process in which tourists actively negotiate and, frequently, (re)construct mean­ ings of places, others and themselves, rather than passively gazing upon the toured objects (Cohen, 2002; Mura, 2015). In addition, as found in various studies, authenticity remarkably influences tourists’ perception of destination properties and visiting experiences, such as perceived image (Lu et al., 2015; Ramkissoon & Uysal, 2011), perceived value (Chen & Chen, 2010; Kim et al., 2018), sense of place (Ramkissoon, 2015), tour­ ist satisfaction (Gao et al., 2020; Dai et al., 2021; Hede et al., 2014; Park et al., 2019), behavioral intention (Li et al., 2016; Lin & Liu, 2018), and loyalty (Bryce et al., 2015; Fu, 2019; Yi et al., 2017, 2018). Authenticity has been recognized as a crucial driver that motivates tourists to visit specific places (Robinson & Clifford, 2012). It is an antecedent of behavioral intention (Meng & Choi, 2016). The qual­ ity of tourism is improved by authenticity as it can positively affect tourists’ sat­ isfaction (Park et al., 2019), decision-making process (Lee et al., 2020), loyalty (Bryce et al., 2015; Kolar & Zabkar, 2010), future visit intention (Tan & Huang, 2020), and place attachment toward the destination (Ram et al., 2016). Tourism products and services imbued with sincerity, friendliness and genuineness tend to be perceived as high in authenticity (Debenedetti et al., 2014). A primary goal of ethnic dining is to explore an authentic cultural experience filled with exotic fla­ vors (Wang & Mattila, 2015). Tourists perceive a commercial place as authentic when they experience increased social interactions with service providers (Shuqair et al., 2019). For instance, tourists are likely to consider commercial homes as more authentic when they perceive host families are sincere, friendly and trustworthy in service delivery (Ye et al., 2018). Similarly, visitors tend to see a tourism des­ tination as authentic and show high revisit intention when they find that the local residents are genuine and friendly (Ross, 1993). A high perception of authenticity can be achieved even when an event is staged in a place far away from the original source of the cultural tradition (Chhabra et al., 2003). Existential authenticity may be seen when visitors immerse themselves in staged entertainment structures (e.g., theme parks) that recreate the architecture, culture, environment and atmosphere of a foreign location (Tan & Huang, 2020). Despite the number of studies researching the concept of authenticity in the tourism experience, there is a relative lack of research looking at both the supply and demand side perceptions of authenticity (Tiberghien et al., 2020). A few recent studies have examined the concept of authenticity in tourism from the perspec­ tives of various stakeholders such as policymakers and tourism providers (Kolar & Zabkar, 2010; Tiberghien, 2019; Xu et al., 2014). Kolar and Zabkar (2010) sug­ gested that authenticity is a key mediating construct between cultural motivation

Ethnic Tourism Development

27

and loyalty, and management can positively impact tourists’ existential experi­ ences via the authenticity of objects and tourism offerings. They concluded that the dynamic nature of authenticity, along with the process of its fabrication and verification (i.e., authentication), is very important from the managerial standpoint. Business interests and perceptions of authenticity can be mutually beneficial: each reinforcing the other (Naoi, 2004). Commercial presentation can keep traditional cultures and customs alive that would otherwise be “modernized” and lost (Cohen, 1988). Several scholars have observed that the power to authenticate tourism sites and experiences lies not only in the front stage and back stage dichotomy but in negotiated power between various stakeholders (e.g., government, ethnic commu­ nities, tourism businesses and tourists) involved in the development of ethnic tour­ ism (Ateljevic & Doorne, 2005; Xie, 2011; Xie & Lane, 2006). Tourist experiences of disorientation can be encouraged by tourism suppliers and influence visitors’ perception of authenticity (Tiberghien et al., 2020). More recently, some studies have explored the relationships between differ­ ent types of authenticity in tourism and have suggested that they are significantly related (Bryce et al., 2015; Domínguez-Quintero et al., 2018; Kolar & Zabkar, 2010; Lin & Liu, 2018; Park et al., 2019; Yi et al., 2018). Thus, the multiple approaches to authenticity are in fact relational in tourism experiences (RicklyBoyd, 2013, Salet, 2021). Zhang and Yin (2020) examined the structural relation­ ships of authenticities in cultural heritage tourism from the tourists’ perspective and found that objective authenticity positively affects constructive and existential authenticity, constructive authenticity positively influences existential authentic­ ity, and postmodern authenticity negatively moderates the relationships between objective and constructive authenticity, and between constructive and existential authenticity. They suggested the value of a combined application of the different types of authenticity due to the limited explanatory power of each type of authen­ ticity alone. Similarly, Canavan and McCamley (2021) recommended combining three modern approaches to authenticity in a discussion of recent developments within authenticity discourse. They identified three approaches including mod­ ern, postmodern and post-postmodern authenticity; post-postmodernism implies reconstructive, performative views of authenticity, while modernism involves constructive, objective and verisimilitude stances for the negotiation of authentic­ ity; whereas postmodernism takes more deconstructive, subjective and hyperreal stances. These three “modernities” together provide a contextualized, extended and holistic conceptualization of the complexities of authenticity. Despite a plethora of studies, the concept of authenticity remains complicated, unclear and polemical, and subject to various interpretations and usages (Tan & Huang, 2020). The difficulty with the concept of authenticity is that it is more than a simple idea associated with original objects, but involves various perspectives, value statements, judgments, stereotypes, and spatial and sociopolitical influences. Fun­ damental to the concept of authenticity is the dialectic between object and subject, there and here, past and present, and modern and traditional, or even “primitive”

28

Ethnic Tourism Development

(Taylor, 2001). It is a multifaceted concept involving the relationality of objective, constructive and existential perspectives in tourists’ experiences of authenticity (Rickly-Boyd, 2012). Perceived authenticity is the result of the interactions among tourism objects, destination environments, tourism providers, host people and tour­ ists’ experiences (Rickly-Boyd, 2013; Yi et al., 2018). What is regarded as authen­ tic is shaped by local values, stereotypes, personal feelings, concerns, experiences and commitments, the interaction between consumers and suppliers, and the social atmosphere. The perception of authenticity is a dynamic, fluid, negotiated and crea­ tive process, and it constantly changes with the context and in response to individual perspectives. Therefore, authenticity is a relative, flexible and jointly constructed concept that involves a negotiated and creative process with stereotypes, judgments and local values imposed on the setting or offerings by a variety of stakeholders, including tourists, hosts and suppliers (Yang & Wall, 2014). It follows that it is important to understand different stakeholders’ perceptions of authenticity in the construction of visitor experiences and activities so that both tourism suppliers and visitors are satisfied and understand each other (Tiberghien et al., 2020). Commodification

Commodification is often an issue that is tied to authenticity. Commodification, as defined by Cohen (1988), refers to a process through which objects and activi­ ties are evaluated based on their exchange values and categorized as services and goods in the context of trade. Tourism commodification, whereby “local customs, rituals, festivals and ethnic arts become tourist attractions, performed for tourist consumption and produced for market-based instrumental activities” (Gotham, 2002, p. 1737), is seen as an ongoing, albeit uneven, process between the global tourism industry and local contexts (Su, 2011). Commodification indeed is a key factor in the negotiation of authenticity because tourist products are often the mark­ ers of an authentic experience (Cole, 2007; Halewood & Hannam, 2001). While commodification often has a negative connotation, tourism is fundamentally about commodification for it usually involves the sale or sharing of products and experi­ ences in exchange for a fee. Many scholars have discussed the implications of commodification of cultures and spaces (Keul, 2014; Mokgachane et al., 2021; Pradana, 2018; Sharma, 2018; Su, 2011; Suryanarayan, 2017; Young & Markham, 2020), and have highlighted that commodification occurs due to the demand for tourism activities, stemming from tourists who seek unique and different cultural experience (Bui & Lee, 2015; Su, 2011; Suryanarayan, 2017). Although early studies are largely critical of the commodification of manifestations of culture (MacCannell, 1973, 1999; Green­ wood, 1989; Wood, 1997; Taylor, 2001; Kirtsoglou & Theodossopoulos, 2004), some recent literature has become more neutral, acknowledging both positive and negative impacts of commodification for local cultural expressions (Xie & Wall, 2002; Mbaiwa, 2011; Salim et al., 2021; Su, 2011).

Ethnic Tourism Development

29

Cultural commodification often produces a social situation in which local peo­ ple alter their behaviors and even their lives to suit the demands of tourists, which raises many debates about authenticity and commodification. On the one hand, the commodification of culture and cultural activities led by tourism is often seen as a primary factor in the destruction of authenticity (Greenwood, 1977, 1989; Kirtsoglou & Theodossopoulos, 2004; Wood, 1997). Many critiques regard culture on stage as culture out of context and, thus, as a violation of authenticity (Taylor, 2001). Commodification results in the transformation of value from sacred to pro­ fane and from real to the inauthentic (Shepherd, 2002). It changes the meaning of cultural products and human relations, making them eventually meaningless (Cohen, 1988). Commodification can lead to standardization in culture and prod­ ucts, reduction in cultural originality, diminished local identity and internationali­ zation of local events (Salim et al., 2021; Xie & Lane, 2006). It also entails a tension between cultural function for the community and economic purpose through sale to tourists (Bianchini & Parkinson, 1993). Authenticity seemingly disappears in the face of commodification and such a perspective is difficult to refute (Clifford, 1986). Commodification destroys the authenticity of local cultural products and human relations and substitutes it with staged authenticity, which thwarts the tour­ ists’ genuine desire for authentic experiences (MacCannell, 1973). It has been criti­ cized as the “bastardization” and “pollution” of authentic ethnic cultures (Wood, 1997). Excessive commodification is bound to negatively affect the authenticity of culture and lead to the loss of inherent cultural value and significance for the locals (Greenwood, 1989; Ryan, 1991; Browne & Nolan, 1993). Cultural performance for tourists in some cases is deprived of any cultural meaning (Tilley, 1997). Commodification simply values “culture by the pound” where culture is “packaged, priced, and sold like building lots, rights-of-way, fast food, and room service, as the tourism industry inexorably extends its grasp” (Greenwood, 1977, p. 136). It places tradition and authenticity in jeopardy as tourism tends to reproduce aspects of cul­ ture in staged settings (Taylor, 2001). In addition, the commodification of culture creates tensions and conflicts between local people (who may not be prepared to sell their sacred culture to the tourist market) and tourism operators (who wish to trade culture for tourist consumption). For instance, Steiner and Reisinger (2006) observed that tensions arise in the destination area between the use of culture for community expression and for economic generation. Mbaiwa (2011) found that younger local people embraced the commodification of their culture into a tourism product for potential socio-economic benefits, whereas village elders resisted it and perceived tourism as a destructive threat to local culture. On the other hand, some scholars argue that the commodification brings eco­ nomic and sociocultural benefits, such as improving local livelihoods and employ­ ment, keeping folk traditions alive and affirming local identity, and enhancing cultural pride, as shown in the cases of Cuban music (Finn, 2009), Balinese shadow puppet performances in Ubud, Bali (Pradana, 2018), traditional iKalanga music in Botswana (Mokgachane et al., 2021), bamboo dance performance in Hainan Island

30

Ethnic Tourism Development

(Xie, 2011), an ethnic theme park in Kunming (Yang, 2011), and ethnic music in Lijiang (Su, 2011) and Guizhou (Song & Yuan, 2021). Commodification does not necessarily destroy the meaning of cultural products; instead, it may preserve traditions by generating demand for or attributing value to them (Cohen, 1988). Certain aspects of traditional culture may be enhanced in tourism commodifica­ tion, such as creativity, spontaneity and artistic freedom (Daniel, 1996), cultural uniqueness (Su, 2019), and skills and equipment (Cohen, 1988). Commodification can give a culture new strength and legitimacy (MacDonald, 1997), and become a means of revitalizing traditions and creating new cultural forms (Craik, 2001). It offers opportunities to develop new products and services to meet the increasing demands of the tourists and their changing needs, which in turn benefit local busi­ nesses (Salim et al., 2021). It helps to keep ethnic music alive by providing suf­ ficient music-related work opportunities to local musicians (Mason, 2004; Song & Yuan, 2021). It contributes to cultural promotion and the preservation of cultural identity of particular ethnic groups (Pradana, 2018). Tourism commodification can link ethnic identities to a broad network of capital accumulation and cultural pro­ duction, and potentially empower the locals to “effectively maintain a sense of autonomy” (Oakes, 1993, pp. 58–59). Commodification is experienced by des­ tination residents in at least three ways: (1) culture may be destroyed in order to yield entertainment for a consumer society (Arendt, 1993); (2) culture obtains new strength to survive in an increasingly commercialized world and (3) new meanings are infused into local culture to generate hybridized cultural forms (Su, 2011). In fact, commodification is omnipresent in today’s world, and especially in tourism, penetrating into many aspects of modern life (Song & Yuan, 2021; Thrift, 2000). Commodification can sometimes be a positive mechanism in the pursuit of authenticity (Xie, 2011). For instance, touristic cultural performances, festivals and ceremonies commonly incorporate the staging of authenticity, as ethnic peo­ ples strive to produce authentic encounters. Such instances are a mixture of tradi­ tions and innovations, which is often criticized as the cause of the loss of cultural authenticity (Greenwood, 1989; Oakes, 1998). However, some studies show that for some tourists, the commercial reproduction of the past or the “otherness” may suffice as an authentic product (Halewood & Hannam, 2001; Lewis, 2002; Yang, 2019). Xie and Wall (2002) found that the commodified ethnic dance performance has become an “authentic” indigenous cultural expression and many tourists are satisfied with staged performances and believe that they have obtained an authentic experience. Edelheim (2005) argued that it is not possible for the average tourist to experience the “real”, “authentic” life and that is why staged authenticity becomes better than the real thing. Some studies suggest that many ethnic communities are willing to trade their cultural expressions for economic benefits and to satisfy tour­ ists’ quest for authenticity, but only when ethnic groups take control over their cultural displays and performances can their cultures and identities be sustained in the process of commodification (Swain, 1990; Kirtsoglou & Theodossopoulos, 2004; Su, 2011).

Ethnic Tourism Development

31

Mokgachane et al. (2021) asserted that the commodification of culture may pro­ duce positive results, but it can affect authenticity and has the potential to upset sustainability, leading to the demise of local culture. Thus, the hosts need to be cautious in their endeavor to commodify traditional culture to avoid loss of authen­ ticity. Managing the balance between commodification and authenticity is a major challenge in many destinations (Song & Yuan, 2021). Su (2011) observed that while commodification varies over time and across space, it sustains discourses of identity building and cultural revival that, in turn, support business profitability. He argued that an essentialist notion of commodification oversimplifies the dynamic relation between the capitalist logic of profit making and the local agency of place making (Picard, 1997; Aoyama, 2009), since commodification is both structural (commercial forces and state policies constitute structural power relations that are organized to sell culture for economic returns) and relational (the processes and outcomes of commodification are spatially and temporally constituted by the inter­ actions of social agents with varying degrees of power). Thus, commodification is “embedded in a temporal process in which culture, economy, and politics syn­ thesize to shape place making and identity building” (Su, 2011, p. 496). Similarly, Su (2019) suggested that commodification should be seen as an ongoing temporal process in tourism rather than static results that are either good or bad. In summary, the concepts of authenticity and commodification have been well discussed in the tourism literature and contribute substantially to ethnic tourism studies. However, the literature focuses more on the question “What is authentic­ ity?” rather than “How has authenticity been used?” and “How has authenticity driven the ethnic tourist market?” Most empirical research has addressed the issue of authenticity from the tourists’ perspective, but much less research examines this issue from the perspectives of other stakeholders. As the perception of authen­ ticity is not only shaped by tourists’ feelings, experiences and stereotyping but also by local values, bureaucratic mandates and entrepreneurial interests/economic necessities (Fawcett & Cormack, 2001), it is important to understand the issue of authenticity from multiple perspectives and understand how it has been shaped by and used in ethnic tourism. 1.5

Stakeholder Theory

Stakeholder theory originates from explorations of the relationships between an organization’s stakeholders, and developed from political science and business management research (Brugha & Varvasovszky, 2000). Stakeholder theory can be seen as both a moral (Freeman et al., 2020) and management theory (Vitolla et al., 2019). In addition, it has foundations in systems theory that attempts to under­ stand the interdependence and interconnectedness of actors within a system, for “each stakeholder must be a means and an end” (Freeman et al., 2020, p. 5). The modern conception of a stakeholder is based on Freeman’s (1984) definition of a stakeholder as “any group or individual who can affect or is affected by the

32

Ethnic Tourism Development

achievement of an organization’s objectives” (p. 46). Generally, stakeholders are identified by their interests in the organization and they have either the power to affect the organization’s performance or have a stake in it. Typical stakeholders are considered to be stockholders, employees, customers, suppliers, governments and local communities (Carroll, 1996). Pelle Culpin, in 1998, identified stakeholders as institutional stakeholders (those involved in laws, regulations, interorganizational entities, plus professional organizations that may be specific to a given industry); economic stakeholders (actors operating in the markets of the company in ques­ tion); and “ethical” stakeholders emanating from ethical and political pressure groups (cited in Pesqueux & Damak-Ayadi, 2005). Stakeholder classification often takes a dual approach (Poplawska et al., 2015) underpinned by stakeholders’ sociopolitical differences. Winch (2004) divided stakeholders into two groups: internal actors, that is, those directly involved in decision-making, and secondary actors, that is, those who can affect or can be affected by an organization’s activities. Some authors have made a distinction between primary stakeholders who have a direct and contractually determined relationship with the organization, and second­ ary stakeholders who can influence or be impacted by organizational actions, but without having any contractual connection to it (Pesqueux & Damak-Ayadi, 2005; Roscoe et al., 2020). The literature on stakeholder theory has addressed several themes across mul­ tiple research fields, including stakeholder definition and salience, stakeholder actions and responses, firm actions and responses, and firm performance and theory debates (Laplume et al., 2008). Three approaches to stakeholder theory: descriptive/empirical, instrumental and normative are commonly adopted in research (Donaldson & Preston, 1995). This distinction is rooted in a centuries-old philosophy of science, in which description presents the way that the world actu­ ally is, normative theory prescribes how the world should be, and instrumental theory links means and ends (Freeman, 1999) – in other words, how to achieve a desired end. Descriptive studies document how organizations manage or inter­ act with stakeholders, normative stakeholder theory prescribes how organizations ought to treat their stakeholders, and instrumental stakeholder theory focuses on how organizations pursue their interests through managing relationships with stakeholders (Freeman, 1999; Butterfield et al., 2004). These three approaches are not totally distinct, but overlapping and mutually supportive (Jones & Wicks, 1999). The descriptive approach explores whether and how stakeholders are appraised by the organization; the instrumental approach considers stakeholders’ contribution to the survival of the organization; and the normative approach fol­ lows ethical-moral principles, regardless of the organization’s higher-order (eco­ nomic) objectives (Vitolla et al., 2019). Descriptive papers first tried to identify and classify the main stakeholders and, subsequently, normative and instrumen­ tal articles have attempted to provide guidance and directions for the actions of organizations in order to meet the particular requirements of specific stakeholders (Antonacopoulou & Méric, 2005).

Ethnic Tourism Development

33

The descriptive approach often starts from simple descriptions and expands to generate explanatory and predictive propositions (Donaldson & Preston, 1995). The descriptive research addresses basic questions (e.g., what, when, how and why) regarding stakeholder and organization behavior (Butterfield et al., 2004). The instrumental theory attempts to link stakeholder approaches to commonly desired objectives of organizations, such as profitability, stability and growth (Don­ aldson & Preston, 1995; Jones et al., 2018). It examines the connections between stakeholder management and the achievement of organizational objectives. The instrumentalists tend to employ means-ends reasoning and focus on the impact of stakeholders on the organizations and how relationships with stakeholder groups can be managed (Donaldson & Preston, 1995; Harrison & St. John, 1996; Rowley, 1997; Jones & Wicks, 1999). An assumption of an instrumental approach is that managing stakeholder interests is in the best interest of the organization and can improve organizational performance (Berman et al., 1999; Butterfield et al., 2004). Much of the stakeholder literature has been built on a normative view that organizations have a social responsibility to attend to their stakeholder groups (Donaldson & Preston, 1995; Friedman & Miles, 2004). Normative theory involves ethical concerns and normative philosophy. It focuses on the moral obligations of managers with regard to their stakeholders (Butterfield et al., 2004) and tries to identify and interpret the philosophical guidelines and moral foundations for the operation of organizations (Donaldson & Preston, 1995; Jones & Wicks, 1999). The underlying assumptions of the normative approach are that stakeholders are persons or groups with legitimate interests in the procedural or substantive aspects of an organization’s activities, and the interests of all stakeholders are of intrinsic value (Donaldson & Preston, 1995). Normative theorists declare that organiza­ tions should consider stakeholder interests not only for instrumental or strategic purposes or because of stakeholders’ power, legitimacy or claims (Mitchell et al., 1997) but also out of moral obligation (Butterfield et al., 2004). Although norma­ tive theory is often used to guide the operation of organizations regarding when and why managers should pay attention to stakeholder interests, empirical work has usually failed to support the notion that firms work with stakeholders for normative reasons (Agle et al., 1999; Berman et al., 1999, Butterfield et al., 2004). Since the late 1980s, the stakeholder concept has been increasingly applied in tourism research and practice, and stakeholder involvement in tourism planning, development and management has been much discussed (Araujo & Bramwell, 2000; Banki & Ismail, 2014; Byrd et al., 2009a, 2009b; Li et al., 2020; Murphy, 1988, 2013; Tosun, 1999, 2000; Ozdemir et al., 2015; Pomeranz et al., 2013; Son­ jai et al., 2018; Timothy & Tosun, 2003). Stakeholder theory has been applied to map key tourism stakeholder groups (Roxas et al., 2020), and to investigate stakeholder salience (Lin, 2021). Stakeholders have been studied empirically in destination marketing, branding and management (Beritelli & Laesser, 2011; Born­ horst et al., 2010; García et al., 2012; Perkins et al., 2021; Pike, 2009), events and festivals (Hede, 2007; Todd et al., 2017), heritage and visitor attractions (Aas et al.,

34

Ethnic Tourism Development

2005; Garrod et al., 2012; Su et al., 2019), and protected areas and national parks (Chen et al., 2018; Imran et al., 2014; Randle & Hoye, 2016; Waligo et al., 2013). Common themes in the literature are partnership types and structures, power rela­ tions, participation in decision-making and challenges in stakeholder management (Minnaert, 2020). Current stakeholder concepts employed in the tourism litera­ ture are built on concepts from management science. Tourism stakeholders usu­ ally include the private and public sectors that provide, deliver or manage tourism opportunities, such as government agencies, business associations, developers, tour operators, non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and those parties directly and indirectly affected by tourism, such as destination communities and tourists. The complex network of tourism stakeholders can be divided into five main cat­ egories: governments, tourists, host communities, tourism businesses and other sectors (Swarbrooke, 2001). A few empirical studies have reported that tourism-related residents or entrepre­ neurs tend to be more positive than non-tourism-related residents or entrepreneurs in their perceptions of tourism’s impacts in Zambia (Husbands, 1989), Kampong Pelegong, Malaysia (Kayat, 2008), Nicaragua (Hunt & Strongza, 2014), and the Appalachian Forest Heritage Area in West Virginia and Maryland (Deng et al., 2016). Residents seem to be less positive than governmental officials in their per­ ceptions of tourism as empirically examined in a number of studies of tourism in the United States (Byrd et al., 2009b), China (Li, 2013) and India (Bansal & Kumar, 2011) in Asia, and Nigeria in Africa (Banki & Ismail, 2014). Residents were found to be more likely than governmental officials to perceive negative impacts of tourism (e.g., increased crimes, property taxes, and negative effects on the environment) in rural communities in North Carolina and they were more strongly against tourism development within their community (Byrd et al., 2009a). Tourism managers were also found to be less likely than residents to perceive tour­ ism’s environmental and social impacts in Belek, Antalya, Turkey (Kuvan & Akan, 2012). In addition, interaction effects exist between tourism status or stake (tour­ ism versus non-tourism respondents) and social status or power (officials versus residents) in responses to socio-economic and environmental benefits and costs, and tourism-related residents are usually the most positive among the four stake­ holder groups (Deng et al., 2016). Tourists showed the strongest inclination toward sustainable operations in Arctic destinations when compared to other stakeholders (residents and tourism operators) (Chen, 2015). The impact of tourism develop­ ment was perceived differently in line with stakeholders’ sociopolitical positions in the southwest of Spain (Domínguez-Gomez & Gonzalez-Gomez, 2017). Visitors, residents and business operators shared similar cognitive images of a historical street, but there were distinct differences between the actual visit motivations held by tourists and the motivations perceived by residents and business operators (Su et al., 2019). Tourism researchers and practitioners have become increasingly aware of the importance of stakeholders in the planning and management processes, and the

Ethnic Tourism Development

35

need to assess their levels of interest and power for these can influence particular projects or organizational objectives. Many scholars have advocated the inclusion of stakeholders in the tourism planning process (Gunn, 2002; Markwick, 2000; Sonjai et al., 2018) and have suggested that tourism planners should consider the interests of all stakeholders before projects are implemented (Sautter & Leisen, 1999; Hardy & Beeton, 2001; Vincent & Thompson, 2002) because plans can be difficult to implement if stakeholders do not cooperate. Gunn (2002) emphasized that the successful implementation of tourism development plans is often based on the support of stakeholders such as residents, entrepreneurs and community leaders. Because the knowledge of planners concerning specific circumstances is inevitably partial, consensus building with stakeholders can help them to under­ stand organizational interests and the public interest, thereby making planning more inclusive (Innes, 1996). It is increasingly seen as being important to examine attitudes held by multiple stakeholders in tourism development (Deng et al., 2016) and to involve all stake­ holders affected by tourism in tourism planning, including environmental groups, business interests, public authorities and local community groups (Araujo & Bramwell, 2000; Sonjai et al., 2018). It can be difficult, time-consuming and expensive to involve a wide range of stakeholders in the planning and manage­ ment processes, but the inclusion of the views of the various stakeholders in plan­ ning and implementation has the capacity to reduce the potential for conflicts and power imbalances, and ultimately contribute to more sustainable forms of tour­ ism (Domínguez-Gomez & Gonzalez-Gomez, 2017; Hardy & Pearson, 2018). It has the potential to facilitate more equitable trade-offs between stakeholders with conflicting interests and to promote decisions that enjoy a greater degree of accept­ ance and shared ownership (Warner, 1997). Stakeholder support and participation is vital for democratic empowerment which is necessary for sustainable tourism operation (Byrd, 2007; Byrd et al., 2008, 2009a; Graci, 2013; Murphy, 2013). Much of the tourism literature presents a normative view and argues that all stakeholders should be involved in community tourism planning and development at the grassroots level (Lin, 2021; Markwick, 2000; Murphy, 1988, 2013; Sonjai et al., 2018; Tosun, 1999, 2000). Participation of the local community and other stakeholders in the development of tourism is deemed to be desirable, since it is then more likely that the destination image matches the local vision and it assists the implementation of tourism projects, ultimately leading to a sustainable destination (Okazaki, 2008). Effective management of tourism events and festivals (Todd et al., 2017), ecotourism (Wondirad et al., 2020), religious tourism (Lin, 2021), heritage sites (Li et al., 2020), and tourist destinations (Beritelli & Laesser, 2011) depends on the engagement and commitment of key stakeholders. Stakeholder involvement and collaboration is regarded as a fundamental ingredient for sustainable tourism (Mason, 2016; Minnaert, 2020; Roxas et al., 2020; Waligo et al., 2013; Wondirad et al., 2020). It is an effective approach to tourism planning and management for addressing, and hopefully resolving, conflicts between the different objectives of

36

Ethnic Tourism Development

various stakeholders and to advance shared visions (Bramwell & Lane, 1999; Li et al., 2020; Margerum, 1999). Collaboration and partnerships are fundamental to the development of bonds and networks among diverse stakeholders for their mutual benefits (Briassoulis, 2002; Cehan et al., 2021). Collaboration is a dynamic, process-based mechanism for resolving planning issues and coordinating tourism development (Jamal & Getz, 1995). Consideration should be given to each stake­ holder group equally, without giving any one priority over the others (Sautter & Leisen, 1999), and the holistic interests of stakeholders must be addressed rather than only a portion of them (Farmaki et al., 2019). All stakeholders need to be engaged effectively, and the objectives, circumstances and resource limitations of each stakeholder group need to be taken into account (Minnaert, 2020). Some authors argue that stakeholders do not have to be involved equally in the decisionmaking process, but it does require that all interests are identified and understood (Byrd, 2007; Donaldson & Preston 1995). However, despite the rising interest in stakeholder collaboration, empirical research has revealed several obstacles to realizing collaboration, including the hierarchical political culture (Su, 2011), centralism and the top-down approach in planning (Yang & Wall, 2014), and imbalance of power among stakeholders (Byrd, 2007). Effective stakeholder involvement is complex and problematic and the chal­ lenges are often underestimated (Friedman & Miles, 2006; Jamal & Getz, 1999). Although stakeholder groups may reach consensus on objectives, there may be diffi­ culty in implementing this consensus due to lack of a strategic direction, insufficient community involvement, low stakeholder commitment, lack of responsibility, and conflicting values (Margerum, 1999). Even when a tourism project is beneficial to all stakeholders, it is often fraught with challenges and difficulties because of loose collaboration and deficiencies in communication and coordination (Longart et al., 2017). Collaboration is complicated due to the interdependence of multiple stake­ holders with complex relationships (Jamal & Stronza, 2009) and fragmented control over the destination’s resources (Jamal & Getz, 1995). The destination’s institutional and political context, as well as the power relations within and between the commu­ nities, influence local participation in tourism development at destinations (Hatipo­ glu et al., 2016). In reality, collaborative planning approaches are often infused with conflicts and power struggles that detract from the attention given to important issues (Dredge, 2006). Serious conflicts of interest may be found among government, resi­ dents and tourists (Li et al., 2020). Local stakeholders are not always recognized and their perspectives may not be taken into account by managers or governmental authorities (Byrd et al., 2009b). Some tourism projects may be more concerned with short-term economic profitability and long-term survival of the industry than with the achievement of social justice within the community (Blackstock, 2005). Clifton and Amran (2011) argued that in the ambit of sustainability, a stakeholder approach in its present form is ill-equipped to assist tourism managers in the execution of their obligations. However, this is a warning that it is not an easy approach to do well, rather than a directive that the views of stakeholders can be ignored.

Ethnic Tourism Development

37

A number of studies have highlighted the power gap between destination com­ munities (and other actors) with little influence on tourism projects and powerful actors who can influence projects or actually carry them out (Altinay et al., 2016; Randle & Hoye, 2016). Saito and Ruhanen (2017) identified four different types of power (coercive, legitimate, induced and competent power) in stakeholder collabo­ rations. They found that coercive power is mainly held by government and public sector agencies while Destination Management Organizations and large private organizations have strong legitimate power. Induced power is exerted by federal, state and local governments. Educational institutions and consulting firms possess competent power. The power of the policy advocated by external stakeholders and their active participation are key factors in developing and operating communitybased tourism, as local people may have limited business knowledge and compe­ tency (Sonjai et al., 2018). Barriers to the participation of local stakeholders in the tourism planning process often include lack of a shared common vision, absence of strong leadership and a long-term strategy, and lack of institutional structures for effective collaboration, which hinder stakeholders’ participation in the decisionmaking process (Hatipoglu et al., 2016; Ladkin & Martinez Bertramini, 2002; Lon­ gart et al., 2017). National policy and external stakeholders are often influential in developing regions; thus, it is important to examine the power structure within the local community and between local people and external stakeholders, in order to understand how power is exercised for effective collaboration and achievement of sustainable tourism (Sonjai et al., 2018). It is essential to identify stakehold­ ers’ power and influence, decipher their needs, foster knowledge acquisition and encourage learning among stakeholders during the planning process in order to create effective leadership and participatory models (Wray, 2011). Empowerment of local stakeholders is seen as a key factor in enabling local stakeholders to positively influence sustainable tourism development (Saito & Ruhanen, 2017; Suarthana & Hardini, 2015). Several empowerment approaches, such as delegation of authority and power to local stakeholders, educating and informing stakeholders on the benefits and costs of tourism development, foster­ ing local knowledge and skills so that job opportunities can be filled locally, and facilitating access to financial and nonfinancial resources are suggested in the lit­ erature (Joo et al., 2020; Shafieisabet & Haratifard, 2020). More transparent and inclusive processes are needed to ensure that traditionally excluded stakeholders are involved in meaningful ways (Wesley & Pforr, 2010). Institutional support in stimulating networking, transfer of knowledge and best practice is required (Carlisle et al., 2013). Mechanisms need to be established that link local participation in the planning process to sustainable tourism practices (Hatipoglu et al., 2016). Policies need to be made to support an inclusive and effective tourism management system that will enhance collaboration vertically (among governmental bodies) and horizontally (among different destination areas) (Li et al., 2020). Multi-stakeholder engagement and cross-sectoral dialogue are needed in the management of tour­ ism destinations (Dimitrovski et al., 2021). A business cluster could be used as

38

Ethnic Tourism Development

a formalized collaboration model to address the challenges facing tourism busi­ nesses (Perkins et al., 2021). Nyanjom et al. (2018) proposed an inclusive tour­ ism stakeholder collaboration framework comprised of four interrelated phases (coordination and control, communication, clarity of roles and responsibilities, and collaboration and integration) to increase stakeholder participation in accessible tourism development. Although stakeholder theory and its practical application in management is now a widely accepted approach for managing tourism projects and destination development, issues of who chooses stakeholder groups and who is responsible for reaching agreements are still under-researched. The literature emphasizes the importance of collaboration for effective tourism planning, yet there is still a frag­ mented understanding of how collaboration is constructed and how collaborative challenges can be overcome (Perkins et al., 2021). The prevailing tourism studies focus on one or two stakeholders at a time, while only a few studies examine the perspectives of multiple stakeholder groups simultaneously (Byrd et al., 2009a; Stylidis et al., 2014; Xie, 2011; Yang & Wall, 2014). One of the most serious short­ comings within stakeholder theory is that the concept is business or organizationcentered and thus the identification of stakeholders is usually from the perspective of a business organization (Robson & Robson, 1996). Applications of stakeholder engagement in tourism have remained predominantly business-oriented, with lim­ ited focus on the different roles of stakeholders (Rahman, 2013), although more inclusive procedures have been advocated and adopted by some western park and protected area systems. In addition, the determination of values for each stakeholder and the representation of area stakeholders are often limited to certain groups such as government officials and development interests (Burby, 2003). When there is a power differential among different stakeholders, equal representation becomes problematic (Timothy & Tosun, 2003). True stakeholder-based collaborative plan­ ning can be best achieved when power is more evenly spread among stakeholders (Parker, 1999). However, this may be difficult to achieve because those who make financial investments and thus carry real financial risks usually have more power than those who are not similarly invested in the project. Moreover, identification of tourism stakeholders is very complicated because they are numerous in most tourism initiatives. With diverse stakeholder groups, the balance of power and leadership role among stakeholders is problematic. Owing to deficiencies in the institutional and legal framework and the specificity of local cultural and political contexts, it is difficult to establish such a collaborative platform in many destina­ tions (Hatipoglu et al., 2016; Yang & Wall, 2014). There is a need to understand the barriers and opportunities to stakeholder involvement (Woodland & Acott, 2007). Nevertheless, the stakeholder approach is a commendable endeavor for tourism planners and managers to follow. In spite of its complexities and weaknesses, stakeholder theory implies the beginning of a new ethical paradigm, particularly for the tourism industry (Robson & Robson, 1996). This is needed in ethnic tourism where tensions and power discrepancies among

Ethnic Tourism Development

39

stakeholders need greater attention. Ethnic tourism involves the participation of numerous stakeholders and many of the tensions in such tourism arise from differ­ ences in their desires, perceptions, access to decision-making, and shares of benefits and costs. However, current tourism studies usually focus on only one or two stake­ holders at a time, while limited studies examine the perspectives of multiple stake­ holder groups simultaneously. This book adopts a stakeholder approach and analyzes different aspects of ethnic tourism from multiple stakeholders’ perspectives. 1.6

Summary

In this chapter, the broad intellectual context and theoretical background have been presented that underpins this book. It is based upon a systemic review of predomi­ nantly tourism literature, that is relevant to ethnic tourism, but that does not always examine ethnic tourism directly. The review leads to the conclusion that the com­ plex nature of ethnic tourism is amenable to examination from diverse disciplinary perspectives, including but not limited to anthropology, sociology, ethnic studies, geography, and the social and political sciences. Multiple theories (e.g., social exchange theory, place attachment theory, attribution theory, dependency theory, social representation theory, emotional solidarity theory and stakeholder theory), as well as numerous concepts (e.g., authenticity, commodification, delocalization, re-localization and alienation), have been applied to explore tourists’ and residents’ attitudes toward tourism and social and cultural changes in ethnic tourism commu­ nities. A variety of perspectives on ethnic tourism have been reported in empirical research based on examples from many destinations worldwide. A large body of the literature concentrates on individual stakeholder’s perceptions of the impacts of tourism on ethnicity and destination communities, addressing the normative issue of whether tourism has been detrimental or beneficial to its hosts. Of course, it has been both, with outcomes being contingent, varying from place to place, reflecting the magnitude and type of tourism, and the nature and degree of involvement of ethnic people, among many other factors. Few studies have examined the perspectives of multiple stakeholders concurrently. The dominant discourses on ethnic tourism tend to be framed within a socio-economic narrative and focus on practical issues of tour­ ism development, rather than theoretical questions regarding tourism’s relationship to ethnicity and cultural continuity. Moreover, little research has explored the process and patterns of the spatiotemporal transformation of ethnicity based on new technologies, such as the use of geographical information system (GIS) and remote sensing. References Aas, C., Ladkin, A., & Fletcher, J. (2005). Stakeholder collaboration and heritage manage­ ment. Annals of Tourism Research, 32(1), 28–48. Abrahams, R. (2015). Tourism and the refiguration of host group identities: A case study of ethnic tourism in rural Guangxi, China. Journal of Tourism and Cultural Change, 13(1), 39–55.

40

Ethnic Tourism Development

Agle, B.R., Mitchell, R.K., & Sonnenfeld, J.A. (1999). Who matters to CEOs? An inves­ tigation of stakeholder attributes and salience, corporate performance and CEO values. Academy of Management Journal, 42, 507–525. Alraouf, A. (2010). Regenerating urban traditions in Bahrain. Learning from Bab-AlBahrain: The authentic fake. Journal of Tourism and Cultural Change, 8(1–2), 50–68. AlSayyad, N. (Ed.) (2001). Consuming Tradition, Manufacturing Heritage: Global Norms and Urban Forms in the Age of Tourism. London: Routledge. Altinay, L., Sigala, M., & Waligo, V. (2016). Social value creation through tourism enter­ prise. Tourism Management, 54, 404–417. Andriotis, K. (2011). Genres of heritage authenticity. Annals of Tourism Research, 38(4), 1613–1633. Antonacopoulou, E.P., & Méric, J. (2005). A critique of stake-holder theory: Management science or a sophisticated ideology of control. Corporate Governance, 5(2), 22–33. Aoki, T. (2002). The Role of Cultural Tourism for Sustainable Development: The Case of Music in Cuba. PhD Dissertation, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS. Aoyama, Y. (2009). Artists, tourists, and the state: Cultural tourism and the Flamenco indus­ try in Andalusia, Spain. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 33, 80–104. Araujo, L., & Bramwell, B. (2000). Stakeholder assessment and collaborative tourism plan­ ning: The case of Brazil’s Costa Dourada project. In Bramwell, B., & Lane, B. (Eds.). Collaboration and Partnerships: Politics, Practice and Sustainability (pp. 272–294). Clevedon: Channel View Publications. Arendt, H. (1993). Between Past and Future: Eight Exercises in Political Thought. New York: Penguin. Ateljevic, I., & Doorne, S. (2005). Dialectics of authentication: Performing ‘exotic other­ ness’ in a backpacker enclave of Dali, China. Journal of Tourism and Cultural Change, 3(1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/14766820508669093 Banki, M.B., & Ismail, H.N. (2014). Multi-stakeholder perception of tourism impacts and ways tourism should be sustainably developed in Obudu Mountain Resort. Developing Country Studies, 4(3), 37–48. Bansal, S.P., & Kumar, J. (2011). Ecotourism for community development: A stakeholder’s perspective in Great Himalayan National Park. International Journal of Social Ecology and Sustainable Development, 2(2), 31–40. Barth, F. (1969). Ethnic Groups and Boundaries. Oslo: Norwegian University Press. Baudrillard, J. (1983). Simulations. New York: Semiotext(e). Belhassen, Y., Caton, K., & Stewart, W.P. (2008). The search for authenticity in the pilgrim experience. Annals of Tourism Research, 35(3), 668–689. Beritelli, P., & Laesser, C. (2011). Power dimensions and influence reputation in tourist destinations: Empirical evidence from a network of actors and stakeholders. Tourism Management, 32(6), 1299–1309. Berman, S.L., Wicks, A.C., Kotha, S., & Jones, T.M. (1999). Does stakeholder orientation matter? The relationship between stakeholder management models and firm financial performance. Academy of Management Journal, 42, 488–506. Bianchini, F., & Parkinson, M. (Eds.). (1993). Cultural Policy and Urban Regeneration: The West European Experience. Manchester: Manchester University Press. Blackstock, K. (2005). A critical look at community based tourism. Community Develop­ ment Journal, 40 (1), 39–49. Bobot, L. (2012). Negotiating authenticity: Cathar heritage tourism. Journal of Heritage Tourism, 7(2), 163–177.

Ethnic Tourism Development

41

Bornhorst, T., Ritchie, J.B., & Sheehan, L. (2010). Determinants of tourism success for DMOs & destinations: An empirical examination of stakeholders’ perspectives. Tourism Management, 31(5), 572–589. Bott, E. (2018). Among the piranhas: The troubling lifespan of ethnic tropes in “tribal” tour­ ism to Vietnam. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 26(8), 1291–1307. Bramwell, B., & Lane, B. (1999). Collaboration and partnerships for sustainable tourism. Jour­ nal of Sustainable Tourism, 7(3–4), 179–181. https://doi.org/10.1080/09669589908667335 Briassoulis, H. (2002). Sustainable tourism and the question of the commons. Annals of Tourism Research, 29 (4), 1065–1085. Brown, D. (1996). Genuine fakes. In Selwyn, T. (Ed.). The Tourist Image: Myths and Myth Making in Tourism (pp. 33–47). Chichester: Wiley. Brown, L. (2013). Tourism: A catalyst for existential authenticity. Annals of Tourism Research, 40, 176–190. Browne, R.J., & Nolan, M.L. (1993). Western Indian reservation tourism development. Annals of Tourism Research, 16(3), 360–376. Brubaker, R. (2009). Ethnicity, race and nationalism. Annual Review of Sociology, 35, 21–42. Brugha, R., & Varvasovszky, Z. (2000). Stakeholder Analysis: A Review. Health Policy and Planning, 15(3), 239–246. Bruner, E.M. (1994). Abraham Lincoln as authentic reproduction: A critique of postmodernism. American Anthropologist, 96(2), 397–415. Bruner, E.M. (2005). Culture on Tour: Ethnographies of Travel. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Bryce, D., Curran, R., O’Gorman, K., & Taheri, B. (2015). Visitors’ engagement and authen­ ticity: Japanese heritage consumption. Tourism Management, 46, 571–581. Bui, H.T., & Lee, T.J. (2015). Commodification and politicization of heritage: Impli­ cations for heritage tourism at the Imperial Citadel of Thang long, Hanoi (Vietnam). ASEAS – Austrian Journal of South-East Asian Studies, 8(2), 187–202. https://doi. org/10.14764/10.ASEAS-2015.2-5 Burby, R.J. (2003). Making plans that matter: Citizen involvement and government action. Journal of the American Planning Association, 69(1), 33–49. Butterfield, K.D., Reed, R., & Lemak, D.J. (2004). An inductive model of collaboration from the stakeholder’s perspective. Business and Society, 43(2), 162–195. Byrd, E.T. (2007). Stakeholders in sustainable tourism development and their roles: Apply­ ing stakeholder theory to sustainable tourism development. Tourism Review, 62(2), 6–13. Byrd, E.T., Bosley, H.E., & Dronberger, M.G. (2009a). Comparisons of stakeholder percep­ tions of tourism impacts in rural eastern North Carolina. Tourism Management, 30(5), 693–703. Byrd, E.T., Cardenas, D.A., & Dregalla, S. (2009b). Stakeholders’ perceptions of tourism and the natural environment. eTourism Review, 7(2), 39–51. Byrd, E.T., Cárdenas, D.A., & Greenwood, J.B. (2008). Factors of stakeholder understand­ ing of tourism: The case of eastern North Carolina. Tourism and Hospitality Research, 8(3), 192–204. https://doi.org/10.1057/thr.2008.21 Canavan, B., & McCamley, C. (2021). Negotiating authenticity: Three modernities. Annals of Tourism Research, 88, 103185. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2021.103185 Carlisle, S., Kunc, M., Jones, E., & Tiffin, S. (2013). Supporting innovation for tourism development through multi-stakeholder approaches: Experiences from Africa. Tourism Management, 35, 59–69. Carnegie, E., & McCabe, S. (2008). Re-enactment events and tourism: Meaning, authentic­ ity and identity. Current Issues in Tourism, 11(4), 349–368.

42

Ethnic Tourism Development

Carroll, A.B. (1996). Business and Society: Ethics and Stakeholder Management. Cincin­ nati, OH: South-Western Publishing Co. Cehan, A., Eva, M., & Iaţu, C. (2021). A multilayer network approach to tourism collabora­ tion. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, 46, 316–326. Chang, J.C. (2006). Customer satisfaction with tour leaders’ performance: A study of Tai­ wan’s package tours. Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, 11(1), 97–116. Chang, J.C., Wall, G., & Chang, C.L. (2008). Perception of the authenticity of Atayal woven handicrafts in Wulai, Taiwan. Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management, 16(4), 385–409. Chen, C.F., & Chen, F.S. (2010). Experience quality, perceived value, satisfaction and behavioral intentions for heritage tourists. Tourism Management, 31(1), 29–35. Chen, H., He, L., Li, P., Zeng, X., & You, C. (2018). Relationship of stakeholders in protected areas and tourism ecological compensation: A case study of Sanya coral reef national nature reserve in China. Journal of Resources and Ecology, 9(2), 164–173. https://doi. org/10.5814/j.issn.1674-764x.2018.02.006. Chen, J.S. (2015). Tourism stakeholders’ attitudes toward sustainable development: A case in the Arctic. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 22, 225–230. Chen, Z., Li, L., & Li, T. (2016). The organizational evolution, systematic construction and empowerment of Langde Miao’s community tourism. Tourism Management, 58(6), 75–86. Chhabra, D. (2005). Defining authenticity and its determinants: Towards an authenticity flow model. Journal of Travel Research, 44(1), 64–73. Chhabra, D. (2012). Authenticating ethnic tourism. Tourism Management, 33(4), 1005–1006. Chhabra, D., Healy, R., & Sills, E. (2003). Staged authenticity and heritage tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 30(3), 702–719. Cho, M.H. (2012). A study of authenticity in traditional Korean folk villages. International Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Administration, 13(2), 145–171. Chronis, A., & Hampton, R.D. (2008). Consuming the authentic Gettysburg: How a tour­ ist landscape becomes an authentic experience. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 7(2), 111–126. Clifford, J. (1986). Introduction: Partial truths. In Clifford, J., & Marcus, G. (Eds.). Writing Culture: The Poetics and Politics of Ethnography. Berkeley, CA and Los Angeles, CA: University of California Press. Clifton, D., & Amran, A. (2011). The stakeholder approach: A sustainability perspective. Journal of Business Ethics, 98(1), 121–136. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-010-0538-6 Cohen, A. (1996). Ethnicity and politics. In Hutchinson, J., & Smith, A.D. (Eds.). Ethnicity. Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press. Cohen, E. (1988). Authenticity and commoditization in tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 15(3), 371–386. Cohen, E. (1989). Primitive and remote: Hill tribe trekking in Thailand. Annals of Tourism Research, 16, 30–61. Cohen, E. (2002). Authenticity, equity and sustainability in tourism. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 10(4), 267–276. Cohen, E. (2015). ‘Authenticity’ in tourism studies: Apr´es la Lutte. Tourism Recreation Research, 32(2), 75–82. Cohen, E. (2016). Ethnic tourism in mainland Southeast Asia: The state of the art. Tourism Recreation Research 41(3), 232–245. Cohen, E., & Cohen, S.A. (2012). Authentication: Hot and cool. Annals of Tourism Research, 39(3), 1295–1314. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2012.03.004

Ethnic Tourism Development

43

Cohen, R. (1978). Ethnicity: Problem and focus in anthropology. Annual Review of Anthro­ pology, 7, 379–403. Cole, S. (2007). Beyond authenticity and commodification. Annals of Tourism Research, 34(4), 943–960. Condevaux, A. (2009). Maori culture on stage: Authenticity and identity in tourist interac­ tions. Anthropological Forum, 19(2), 143–161. Costa, J.A., & Bamossy, G.J. (2001). Le Parc Disney: Creating an “Authentic” American experience. Advances in Consumer Research, 28, 398–402. Craik, J. (2001). Cultural tourism. In Douglas, N., Douglas, N., & Derrett, R. (Eds.). Special Interest Tourism: Context and Cases (pp. 113–139). Brisbane: John Wiley & Sons. Culler, J. (1981). Semiotics of tourism. American Journal of Semiotics, 1, 127–140. Dai, T., Zheng, X., & Yan, J. (2021). Contradictory or aligned? The nexus between authen­ ticity in heritage conservation and heritage tourism, and its impact on satisfaction. Habi­ tat International, 107, 102307. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2020.102307 Daniel, Y.P. (1996). Tourism dance performances authenticity and creativity. Annals of Tour­ ism Research, 23(4), 780–797. Debenedetti, A., Oppewal, H., & Arsel, Z. (2014). Place attachment in commercial settings: A gift economy perspective. Journal of Consumer Research, 40(5), 904–923. Deng, J., McGill, D., Arbogast, D., & Maum, K. (2016). Stakeholders’ perceptions of tour­ ism development in Appalachian Forest Heritage Area. Tourism Review International, 20, 235–253. De Vos, G., & Romanucci-Ross, L. (1995). Ethnic identity: A psychocultural perspective. In Romanucci-Ross, L., & De Vos, G. (Eds.). Ethnic Identity: Creation, Conflict and Accommodation (pp. 15–47). Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira Press. Di Betta, P. (2014). Authenticity as a mental state: A primer. Annals of Tourism Research, 47, 86–88. Di Domenico, M.L., & Miller, G. (2012). Farming and tourism enterprise: Experiential authenticity in the diversification of independent small-scale family farming. Tourism Management, 33(2), 285–294. Dimitrovski, D., Lemmetyinen, A., Nieminen, L., & Pohjola, T. (2021). Understand­ ing coastal and marine tourism sustainability – a multi-stakeholder analysis. Jour­ nal of Destination Marketing & Management, 19, 100554. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. jdmm.2021.100554. Domínguez-Gomez, J.A., & Gonzalez-Gomez, T. (2017). Analysing stakeholders’ percep­ tions of golf-course-based tourism: A proposal for developing sustainable tourism pro­ jects. Tourism Management, 63, 135–143. Domínguez-Quintero, A.M., Gonzalez-Rodríguez, M.R., & Paddison, B. (2018). The mediating role of experience quality on authenticity and satisfaction in the context of cultural-heritage tourism. Current Issues in Tourism, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 13683500.2018.1502261. Donaldson, T., & Preston, L.E. (1995). The stakeholder theory of the corporation: Concepts, evidence, and implications. Academy of Management Review, 20, 65–91. Dredge, D. (2006). Policy networks and the local organisation of tourism. Tourism Manage­ ment, 27, 269–280. Drew, E.M. (2011). Strategies for antiracist representation: Ethnic tourism guides in Chi­ cago. Journal of Tourism and Cultural Change, 9(2), 55–69. Duan, X., Chan, C.S., & Marafa, L.M. (2019). Does authenticity exist in cultural theme parks? A case study of Millennium City Park in Henan, China. Journal of Tourism and Cultural Change, 17(3), 321–338.

44

Ethnic Tourism Development

Eco, U. (1985). Travels in Hyperreality. London: Picador. Edelheim, J.R. (2005). To experience the “real” Australia – A liminal authentic cultural experience. In Ryan, C., & Aicken, M. (Eds.). Indigenous Tourism: The Commodifica­ tion and Management of Culture (pp. 247–259). Oxford: Elsevier Ltd. Fan, K., Chang, T.C., & Ng, S. (2020). The Batek’s dilemma on indigenous tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 83, 102948. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2020.102948 Farmaki, A., Christou, P., Saveriades, A., & Spanou-Tripinioti, E. (2019). Perceptions of Pafos as European capital of culture: Tourism stakeholder and resident perspectives. International Journal of Tourism Research, 21(2), 234–244. Fawcett, C., & Cormack, P. (2001). Guarding authenticity at literary tourism sites. Annals of Tourism Research, 28(3), 686–704. Finn, J. (2009). Contesting culture: A case study of commodification in Cuban music. GeoJournal, 74, 191–200. Firat, A. (1995). Consumer culture or culture consumed? In Costa, J., & Bamossy, G. (Eds.). Marketing in a Multicultural World: Ethnicity, Nationalism and Cultural Identity (pp. 105–125). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Fjellman, S.M. (1992). Vinyl Leaves and Walt Disney World America. Boulder, CO: Westview Press. Foster, M.D. (2013). Inviting the uninvited guest: Ritual, festival, tourism and the Nama­ hage of Japan. Journal of American Folklore, 38(501), 302–334. Fourie, J., & Santana-Gallego, M. (2013). Ethnic reunion and cultural affinity. Tourism Management, 36, 411–420. Freeman, R.E. (1984). Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach. Boston, MA: Pitman. Freeman, R.E. (1999). Divergent stakeholder theory. Academy of Management Review, 24(2), 233–236. Freeman, R.E., Phillips, R., & Sisodia, R. (2020). Tensions in stakeholder theory. Busi­ ness & Society, 59(2), 213–231. Friedman, A.L., & Miles, S. (2004). Debate Papers: Stakeholder theory and communication practice. Journal of Communication Management, 9(1), 95–97. Friedman, A.L., & Miles, S. (2006). Stakeholders: Theory and Practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Fu, X. (2019). Existential authenticity and destination loyalty: Evidence from heritage tour­ ists. Journal of Destination Marketing & Management, 12, 84–94. Gao, J., Lin, S., & Zhang, C. (2020). Authenticity, involvement, and nostalgia: Under­ standing visitor satisfaction with an adaptive reuse heritage site in urban China. Jour­ nal of Destination Marketing & Management, 15, 100404. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. jdmm.2019.100404. García, J., Gomez, M., & Molina, A. (2012). A destination-branding model: An empirical analysis based on stakeholders. Tourism Management, 33(3), 646–661. Garrod, B., Fyall, A., Leask, A., & Reid, E. (2012). Engaging residents as stakeholders of the visitor attraction. Tourism Management, 33(5), 1159–1173. Geertz, C. (1963). The integrative revolution: Primordial sentiments and civil politics in the new states. In Geertz, C. (Ed.). Old Societies and New States: The Quest for Modernity in Asia (pp. 105–157). London: Free Press of Glencoe. Gillespie, A. (2006). Becoming Other: From Social Interaction to Self-Reflection. Green­ wich, CT: Information Age. Gilli, M., & Ferrari, S. (2018). Tourism in multi-ethnic districts: The case of Porta Palazzo market in Torino. Leisure Studies, 37(2), 146–157.

Ethnic Tourism Development

45

Gladney, D.C. (1999). Representing nationality in China: Refiguring majority/minority identities. In Yoshino, K. (Ed.). Consuming Ethnicity and Nationalism: Asian Experi­ ences (pp. 89–110). Honolulu, HI: University of Hawaii Press. Gnoth, J., & Wang, N. (2015). Authentic knowledge and empathy in tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 50, 170–172. Goffman, E. (1959). The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. Harmondsworth: Penguin. Gotham, K.F. (2002). Marketing Mardi Gras: Commodification, spectacle and the political economy of tourism in New Orleans. Urban Studies, 39, 1735–1756. Graci, S. (2013). Collaboration and partnership development for sustainable tourism. Tour­ ism Geographies, 15(1), 25–42. https://doi.org/10.1080/14616688.2012.675513 Greenwood, D.J. (1977). Culture by the pound: An anthropological perspective on tourism as cultural commoditization. In Smith, V. (Ed.). Host and Guests: The Anthropology of Tourism (pp. 129–138). Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press. Greenwood, D.J. (1989). Culture by the pound: An anthropological perspective on tourism as cultural commoditization. In Smith, V. (Ed.). Host and Guests: The Anthropology of Tourism (2nd ed.) (pp. 171–185). Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press. Gunn, C.A. (2002). Tourism Planning: Basics, Concepts, Cases. New York: Routledge. Halewood, C., & Hannam, K. (2001). Viking heritage tourism: Authenticity and commodi­ fication. Annals of Tourism Research, 28(3), 565–580. Hardy, A.L., & Beeton, R.J.S. (2001). Sustainable tourism or maintainable tourism: Manag­ ing resources for more than average outcomes. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 9(3), 168–192. Hardy, A.L., & Pearson, L.J. (2018). Examining stakeholder group specificity: An innova­ tive sustainable tourism approach. Journal of Destination Marketing & Management, 8, 247–258. Harrison, J.S., & St John, C.H. (1996). Managing and partnering with external stakeholders. Academy of Management Executive, 10(2), 46–60. Harron, S., & Weiler, B. (1992). Review: Ethnic tourism. In Weiler, B., & Hall, C.M. (Eds.). Special Interest Tourism (pp. 83–92). London: Belhaven. Hatipoglu, B., Alvarez, M.D., & Ertuna, B. (2016). Barriers to stakeholder involvement in the planning of sustainable tourism: The case of the Thrace region in Turkey. Journal of Cleaner Production, 111, 306–317. Hede, A.M. (2007). Managing special events in the new era of the triple bottom line. Event Management, 11(1–2), 13–22. Hede, A.M., Garma, R., Josiassen, A., & Thyne, M. (2014). Perceived authenticity of the visitor experience in museums. European Journal of Marketing, 48(7/8), 1395–1412. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJM-12-2011-0771 Henderson, J. (2003). Ethnic heritage as a tourist attraction: The Peranakans of Singapore. International Journal of Heritage Studies, 9(1), 27–44. Hettne, B. (1996). Ethnicity and development: An elusive relationship. In Dwyer, D., & Drakakis-Smith, D. (Eds.). Ethnicity and Development: Geographical Perspectives (pp. 15–44). New York: John Wiley & Sons. Hitchcock, M. (1999). Tourism and ethnicity: Situational perspectives. International Jour­ nal of Tourism Research, 1, 17–32. Hitchcock, M. (2010). Ethnicity and tourism entrepreneurship in Java and Bali. Current Issues in Tourism, 3(3), 204–225. Hoelscher, S.D. (1998). Tourism, ethnic memory and the other-directed place. Cultural Geographies, 5, 369. https://doi.org/10.1177/096746089800500401.

46

Ethnic Tourism Development

Hunt, C., & Strongza, A. (2014). Stage-based tourism models and resident attitudes towards tourism in an emerging destination in the developing world. Journal of Sustainable Tour­ ism, 22(2), 279–298. Husbands, W. (1989). Social status and perception of tourism in Zambia. Annals of Tourism Research, 16, 237–253. Imran, S., Alam, K., & Beaumont, N. (2014). Environmental orientations and environmental behaviour: Perceptions of protected area tourism stakeholders. Tourism Management, 40, 290–299. Innes, J.E. (1996). Planning through consensus building. Journal of the American Planning Association, 62(4), 460–472. Jackson, D.J. (2020). Polish American festivals and ethnic identity. Journal of Heritage Tourism, 15(6), 648–665 Jamal, T.B., & Getz, D. (1995). Collaboration theory and community tourism planning. Annals of Tourism Research, 22(1), 186–204. Jamal, T.B., & Getz, D. (1999). Community roundtables for tourism related conflicts: The dialects of consensus and process structures. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 7(3–4), 290–213. Jamal, T.B., & Hill, S. (2004). Developing a framework for indicators of authenticity: The place and space of cultural and heritage tourism. Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, 9(4), 353–371. Jamal, T.B., & Stronza, A. (2009). Collaboration theory and tourism practice in protected areas: Stakeholders, structuring and sustainability. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 17(2), 169–189. Jang, S., Ha, J., & Park, K. (2012). Effects of ethnic authenticity: Investigating Korean res­ taurant customers in the U.S. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 31(3), 990–1003. Jin, L., Xiao, H., & Shen, H. (2020). Experiential authenticity in heritage museums. Jour­ nal of Destination Marketing & Management, 18, 100493. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. jdmm.2020.100493 Jones, T.M., Harrison, J.S., & Felps, W. (2018). How applying instrumental stakeholder theory can provide sustainable competitive advantage. Academy of Management Review, 43(3), 371–391. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2016.0111 Jones, T.M., & Wicks, A.C. (1999). Convergent stakeholder theory. Academy of Manage­ ment Review, 24(2), 206–221. Joo, D., Woosnam, K.M., Strzelecka, M., & Boley, B.B. (2020). Knowledge, empowerment, and action: Testing the empowerment theory in a tourism context. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 28(1), 69–85. Kahn, J. (1997). Culturalizing Malaysia: Globalism, tourism, heritage and the city in Georgetown. In Picard, M., & Wood, R. (Eds.). Tourism, Ethnicity and the State in Asian and Pacific Societies (pp. 99–127). Honolulu, HI: University of Hawaii Press. Kaomea, J. (2016). Qualitative analysis as Ho‘oku‘iku‘I or bricolage: Teaching emancipa­ tory Indigenous research in postcolonial Hawaii. Qualitative Inquiry, 22(2), 99–106. Kayat, K. (2008). Stakeholders’ perspectives toward a community-based rural tourism development. European Journal of Tourism Research, 1(2), 94–111. Keul, A. (2014). Reliving off the swamp: A cajun tourism Commodity. Geographical Review, 104 (4), 506–522. Kim, H., & Jamal, T. (2007). Touristic quest for existential authenticity. Annals of Tourism Research, 34(1), 181–201.

Ethnic Tourism Development

47

Kim, H., Oh, C.O., Lee, S., & Lee, S. (2018). Assessing the economic values of World Herit­ age Sites and the effects of perceived authenticity on their values. International Journal of Tourism Research, 20(1), 126–136. https://doi.org/10.1002/jtr.2169 Kim, J.H. (2014). The antecedents of memorable tourism experiences: The development of a scale to measure the destination attributes associated with memorable experiences. Tourism Management, 44, 34–45. Kim, J.H. (2018). Manhattan’s Koreatown as a transclave: The emergence of a new ethnic enclave in a global city. City & Community, 17(1), 276–295. King, B. (1994). What is ethnic tourism? An Australian perspective. Tourism Management, 15, 173–176. Kirtsoglou, E., & Theodossopoulos, D. (2004). ‘They are taking our culture away’: Tourism and culture commodification in the Garifuna community of Roatan. Critique of Anthro­ pology, 24(2), 135–157. Knudsen, D.C., Rickly, J.M., & Vidon, E.S. (2016). The fantasy of authenticity: Touring with Lacan. Annals of Tourism Research, 58, 33–45. Kolar, T., & Zabkar, V. (2010). A consumer-based model of authenticity: An oxymoron or the foundation of cultural heritage marketing? Tourism Management, 31, 652–664. Kuvan, Y., & Akan, P. (2012). Conflict and agreement in stakeholder attitudes: Residents’ and hotel managers’ views of tourism impacts and forest-related tourism development. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 20(4), 571–584. Lackey, J.F. (2013). American Ethnic Practices in the Twenty-First Century: The Milwaukee Study. New York: Lexington Books. Ladkin, A., & Martinez Bertramini, A. (2002). Collaborative tourism planning: A case study of Cusco, Peru. Current Issues in Tourism, 5(2), 71–93. Laplume, A.O., Sonpar, K., & Litz, R.A. (2008). Stakeholder theory: Reviewing a theory that moves us. Journal of Management, 34(6), 1152–1189. Larkin, R., & Peters, G. (1983). Dictionary of Concepts in Human Geography. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press. Lau, R.W.K. (2010). Revisiting authenticity: A social realist approach. Annals of Tourism Research, 37(2), 478–498. Le, T., Arcodiaa, C., Novaisa, M., & Kraljb, A. (2019). What we know and do not know about authenticity in dining experiences: A systematic literature review. Tourism Man­ agement, 74, 258–275. Le, T., Arcodia, C., Novais, M., Kralj, A., & Phan, T. (2021). Exploring the multi­ dimensionality of authenticity in dining experiences using online reviews. Tourism Man­ agement, 85, 104292. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2021.104292 Lee, C., Ahmad, M., Petrick, J., Park, Y., Park, E., & Kang, C. (2020). The roles of cultural worldview and authenticity in tourists’ decision-making process in a heritage tourism destination using a model of goal-directed behavior. Journal of Destination Marketing & Management, 18, 100500. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdmm.2020.100500 Lemelin, R.H., Koster, R., & Youroukos, N. (2015). Tangible and intangible indicators of successful aboriginal tourism initiatives: A case study of two successful aboriginal tour­ ism lodges in Northern Canada. Tourism Management, 47, 318–328. Leong, L. (1997). Commodifying ethnicity: State and ethnic tourism in Singapore. In Picard, M., & Wood, R. (Eds.) Tourism, Ethnicity, and the State in Asian and Pacific Societies (pp. 71–98). Honolulu, HI: University of Hawaii Press. Lewis, J. (2002). Cultural Studies – The Basics. London: Sage.

48

Ethnic Tourism Development

Li, P. (2013). Comparisons of Stakeholders’ Perceptions and Attitudes of Tourism Impact in Mt Qiyun, Anhui Province, China. Doctoral Dissertation, The University of Waikato, Hamilton, New Zealand. http://researchcommons.waikato.ac.nz/handle/10289/8116 Li, X., Shen, H., & Wen, H. (2016). A study on tourists perceived authenticity towards expe­ rience quality and behavior intention of cultural heritage in Macao. International Journal of Marketing Studies, 8(4), 117–123. https://doi.org/10.5539/ijms.v8n4p117 Li, Y., Lau, C., & Su, P. (2020). Heritage tourism stakeholder conflict: A case of a World Heritage Site in China. Journal of Tourism and Cultural Change, 18(3), 267–287. https:// doi.org/10.1080/14766825.2020.1722141 Lin, C. (2021). The salience of stakeholders in religious tourism: A case study of the Dajia Mazu pilgrimage. Annals of Tourism Research, 86, 103091.ttps://doi.org/10.1016/j. annals.2020.103091 Lin, Y.C., & Liu, Y.C. (2018). Deconstructing the internal structure of perceived authenticity for heritage tourism. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 26(12), 2134–2152. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/09669582.2018.1545022. Linnekin, J., & Poyer, L. (1990). Cultural Identity and Ethnicity in the Pacific. Honolulu, HI: University of Hawaii Press. Littrell, M., Anderson, L., & Brown, P. (1993). What makes a craft souvenir authentic? Annals of Tourism Research, 20, 197–215. Liu, X.Y. (2014). Analysis of the impact on the national culture of ethnic tourism – taking Sunan Yugur as an example. Economic Research Guide, 34, 221–222. Longart, P., Wickens, E., Ocaña, W., & Llugshaa, V. (2017). A stakeholder analysis of a service learning project for tourism development in An Ecuadorian Rural Community. Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport & Tourism Education, 20, 87–100. Lor, J., Kwa, S., & Donaldson, J. (2019). Making ethnic tourism good for the poor. Annals of Tourism Research, 76, 140–152. Loukaitou-Sideris, A., & Soureli, K. (2011). Cultural tourism as an economic development

strategy for ethnic neighborhoods. Economic Development Quarterly, 26(1), 50–72.

Lu, L., Chi, C.G., & Liu, Y. (2015). Authenticity, involvement, and image: Evaluating tourist

experiences at historic districts. Tourism Management, 50, 85–96. MacCannell, D. (1973). Staged authenticity: Arrangements of social space tourist settings. American Journal of Sociology, 79(3), 589–603. MacCannell, D. (1976). The Tourist: A New Theory of the Leisure Class. New York: Schocken Books. MacCannell, D. (1984). Reconstructed ethnicity tourism and cultural identity in third world communities. Annals of Tourism Research, 11(3), 375–391. MacCannell, D. (1992). Empty Meeting Grounds: The Tourist Images. London: Routledge. MacCannell, D. (1999). The Tourist: A New Theory of the Leisure Class (2nd ed.). Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. MacCannell, D. (2008). Why it never really was about authenticity. Society, 45(4), 334–337. MacDonald, S. (1997). A people’s story: Heritage, identity and authenticity. In Rojek, C., & Urry, J. (Eds.). Touring Cultures (pp. 155–176). London: Routledge. Mantecon, A., & Huete, R. (2008). The value of authenticity in residential tourism: The decisionmaker’s point of view. Tourist Studies, 8(3), 359–376. Margerum, R.D. (1999). Getting past yes: From capital creation to action. Journal of the American Planning Association, 65(2), 181–192. Markwick, M.C. (2000). Golf tourism development, stakeholders, differing discourses, and alternative agendas: The case of Malta. Tourism Management, 21, 515–524.

Ethnic Tourism Development

49

Martin, K. (2010). Living pasts: Contested tourism authenticities. Annals of Tourism Research, 37(2), 537–554. Maruyama, N.U., & Woosnam, K. (2015). Residents’ ethnic attitudes and support for ethnic neighborhood tourism: The case of a Brazilian town in Japan. Tourism Management, 50, 225–237. Maruyama, N.U., Woosnam, K.M., &. Boley, B.B. (2017). Residents’ attitudes toward eth­ nic neighborhood tourism (ENT): Perspectives of ethnicity and empowerment. Tourism Geographies, 19(2), 265–286. Maruyama, N.U., Yen, T.H., & Stronza, A. (2008). Perception of authenticity of tourist art among native American artists in Santa Fe, New Mexico. International Journal of Tour­ ism Research, 10(5), 453–466. Mason, K. (2004). Sound and meaning in aboriginal tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 31, 837–854. Mason, P. (2016). Tourism Impacts, Planning and Management. New York: Routledge. Matheson, C. (2008). Music, emotion and authenticity: A study of Celtic music festival consumers. Journal of Tourism and Cultural Change, 6(1), 57–74. Matondang, S.A. (2016). The potential ethnic culture heritage of North Sumatra in globali­ zation. International Humanities Studies, 3(3), 30–38. Mbaiwa, J. (2011). Cultural commodification and tourism: The Goo-moremi community, central Botswana. Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie/Royal Dutch Geo­ graphical Society, 102(3), 290–301. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467–9663.2011.00664.x. McIntosh, A.I. (2004). Tourists’ appreciation of Maori culture in New Zealand. Tourism Management, 25(1), 1–15. McIntosh, A.J., & Johnson, H. (2005). Understanding the nature of the Marae experience: Views from hosts and visitors at the Nga Hau E Wha National Marae, Christchurch, New Zealand. In Ryan, C., & Aicken, M. (Eds.). Indigenous Tourism: The Commodification and Management of Culture (pp. 35–50). Oxford: Elsevier Ltd. McKercher, B., & Du Cros, H. (2002). Cultural Tourism: The Partnership Between Tour­ ism and Cultural Heritage Management. New York: Haworth Hospitality Press. Meng, B., & Choi, K. (2016). The role of authenticity in forming slow tourists’ intentions: Developing an extended model of goal-directed behavior. Tourism Management, 57, 397–410. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2016.07.003 Metro-Roland, M.M. (2009). A needle in a hay stack: Finding authenticity in local provenance at the John Hay Center, Salem, Indiana. Journal of Heritage Tourism, 4(2), 145–156. Minnaert, L. (2020). Stakeholder stories: Exploring social tourism networks. Annals of Tourism Research, 83, 102979. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2020.102979 Miral, C., Kaygalak, S., & Ersoy, R. (2013). A case study of ethnic minorities as tourism entre­ preneurs: Their involvement in sustainable tourism development. TURIZAM, 17(3), 13. Mitchell, R.K., Agle, B.R., & Wood, D.J. (1997). Toward a theory of stakeholder identifi­ cation and salience: Defining the principle of who and what really counts. Academy of Management Review, 22(4), 853–886. Mkono, M. (2012). Authenticity does matter. Annals of Tourism Research, 39(1), 480–483. Mkono, M. (2013). African and Western tourists: Object authenticity quest? Annals of Tour­ ism Research, 41, 195–214. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2013.01.002. Mokgachane, T., Basupi, B., & Lenao, M. (2021). Implications of cultural commodification on the authenticity of iKalanga music: A case of Domboshaba traditional music festival in Botswana. Journal of Tourism and Cultural Change, 19(2), 153–165. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/14766825.2019.1700989

50

Ethnic Tourism Development

Moscardo, G., & Pearce, P. (1999). Understanding ethnic tourists. Annals of Tourism Research, 26(2), 416–434. Moufakkir, O. (2011). Diaspora tourism: Using a mixed-mode survey design to document tourism behavior and constraints of people of Turkish extraction resident in Germany. Journal of Vacation Marketing, 17(3) 209–223. Mura, P. (2015). Perceptions of authenticity in a Malaysian homestay – a narrative analysis. Tourism Management, 51, 225–233. Murphy, P.E. (1988). Community driven tourism planning. Tourism Management, 9(2), 96–104. Murphy, P.E. (2013). Tourism: A Community Approach (2nd ed.). London: Routledge. Naoi, T. (2004). Visitors’ evaluation of a historical district: The roles of authenticity and manipulation. Tourism and Hospitality Research, 5(1), 45–63. Neilson, J. (2016). Urban Ethnic Tourism: An Overview of Current Research and Frame­ work for Application. e.polis, 8, 43–63. Niskala, M., & Ridanpää, J. (2016). Ethnic representations and social exclusion: Sáminess in Finnish Lapland tourism promotion. Scandinavian Journal of Hospitality and Tour­ ism, 16(4), 375–394. Nyanjom, J., Boxall, K., & Slaven, J. (2018). Towards inclusive tourism? Stakeholder collaboration in the development of accessible tourism. Tourism Geographies, 20(4), 675–697. https://doi.org/10.1080/14616688.2018.1477828 Oakes, T. (1993). The cultural space of modernity: Ethnic tourism and place identity in China tourism. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 11, 47–66. Oakes, T. (1997). Ethnic tourism in rural Guizhou. In Picard, M., & Wood, R. (Eds.). Tour­ ism, Ethnicity, and the State in Asian and Pacific Societies. Honolulu, HI: University of Hawaii Press. Oakes, T. (1998). Tourism and Modernity in China. London: Routledge. Oakes, T. (2016). Villagizing the city: Turning rural ethnic heritage into urban modernity in southwest China. International Journal of Heritage Studies, 22(10), 751–765. Okazaki, E. (2008). A community-based tourism model: Its conception and use. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 16(5), 511–529. Okumus, F., Croes, R., Hutchinson, J., & Milman, A. (2013). Guests’ perception of staged authenticity in a theme park: An example from Disney’s Epcot’s World Showcase. Tour­ ism review, 68 (4), 71–89. Olsen, K.H. (2002). Authenticity as a concept in tourism research: The social organization of the experience of authenticity. Tourist Studies, 2(2), 159. Overend, D. (2012). Performing sites: Illusion and authenticity in the spatial stories of the guided tour. Scandinavian Journal of Hospitality and Tourism, 12(1), 44–54. Ozdemir, G., Yilmaz, M., Yalcin, M., & Alvarez, M.D. (2015). Stakeholders’ perception of Istanbul’s historical peninsula as a sustainable destination. Tourism Planning & Develop­ ment, 12(1), 87–98. Paraskevaidis, P., & Weidenfeld, A. (2021). Perceived and projected authenticity of visitor attractions as signs: A Peircean semiotic analysis. Journal of Destination Marketing & Management, 19, 100515. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdmm.2020.100515 Park, E., Choi, B.K., & Lee, T.J. (2019). The role and dimensions of authenticity in heritage tour­ ism. Tourism Management, 74, 99–109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. tourman.2019.03.001. Parker, S. (1999). Collaboration on tourism policy-making: Environment and commercial sustainability on Bonaire, NA. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 7(3/4), 240–259. Perkins, R., Khoo-Lattimore, C., & Arcodia, C. (2021). Collaboration in marketing regional tourism destinations: Constructing a business cluster formation framework through

Ethnic Tourism Development

51

participatory action research. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, 46, 347–359. Pesqueux, Y., & Damak-Ayadi, S.D. (2005). Stakeholder theory in perspective. Corporate Governance, 5(2), 5–21. Peterson, R.A. (2005). Search of authenticity. Journal of Management Studies, 42(5), 1083–1098. Phipps, P. (2016). Indigenous festivals in Australia: Performing the postcolonial. Ethnos, 81(4), 683–696. https://doi.org/10.1080/00141844.2014.989876 Picard, M. (1997). Cultural tourism, nation-building, and regional culture: The making of a Balinese identity. In Picard, M., & Wood, R.E. (Eds.). Tourism, Ethnicity, and the State in Asian and Pacific Societies (pp. 181–214). Honolulu, HI: University of Hawai’i Press. Pike, S. (2009). Destination brand positions of a competitive set of near-home destinations. Tourism Management, 30(6), 857–866. Pitchford, S. (1995). Ethnic tourism and nationalism in Wales. Annals of Tourism Research, 22(1), 35–52. Pomeranz, E.F., Needham, M.D., & Kruger, L.E. (2013). Stakeholder perceptions of indica­ tors of tourism use and codes of conduct in a coastal protected area in Alaska. Tourism in Marine Environments, 9(1–2), 95–115. Poplawska, J., Labib, A., Reed, D., & Ishizaka, A. (2015). Stakeholder profile definition and salience measurement with fuzzy logic and visual analytics applied to corporate social responsibility case study. Journal of Cleaner Production, 105, 103–115. Pradana, G. (2018). Implications of commodified Parwa shadow puppet performance for tourism in Ubud, Bali. JBHOST, 4(1), 70–79. Qian, J., & Wei, L. (2020). Development at the edge of difference: Rethinking capital and market relations from Lugu Lake, Southwest China. Antipode, 52(1), 246–269. Qu, C., Timothy, D.J., & Zhang, C.Z. (2019). Does tourism erode or prosper culture? Evi­ dence from the Tibetan ethnic area of Sichuan Province, China. Journal of Tourism and Cultural Change, 17(4), 526–543. Rahman, S. (2013). Heritage management challenges in historic town of Ludlow, England. World Applied Sciences Journal, 24(12), 1589–1596. Ram, Y., Björk, P., & Weidenfeld, A. (2016). Authenticity and place attachment of major visitor attractions. Tourism Management, 52, 110–122. Ramkissoon, H. (2015). Authenticity, satisfaction, and place attachment: A conceptual framework for cultural tourism in African island economies. Development Southern Africa, 32(3), 292–302. https://doi.org/10.1080/0376835X.2015.1010711 Ramkissoon, H., & Uysal, M.S. (2011). The effects of perceived authenticity, information search behaviour, motivation and destination imagery on cultural behavioural intentions of tourists. Current Issues in Tourism, 14(6), 537–562. https://doi.org/10.1080/1368350 0.2010.493607 Randle, E.J., & Hoye, R. (2016). Stakeholder perception of regulating commercial tourism in Victorian National Parks, Australia. Tourism Management, 54, 138–149. Rath, J. (2007). Tourism, Ethnic Diversity and the City. New York: Routledge. Reisinger, Y., & Steiner, C.J. (2006). Reconceptualizing object authenticity. Annals of Tour­ ism Research, 33(1), 65–86. Rickly-Boyd, J.M. (2012). Authenticity and aura: A Benjaminian approach to tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 39(1), 269–289. Rickly-Boyd, J.M. (2013). Existential authenticity: Place matters. Tourism Geographies, 15(4), 680–686.

52

Ethnic Tourism Development

Ritzer, G., & Liska, A. (1997). “McDisneyization” and “post-tourism”: Complementary perspectives on contemporary tourism. In Rojek, C., & Urry, J. (Eds.). Touring Culture (pp. 96–109). London: Routledge. Robinson, R.N., & Clifford, C. (2012). Authenticity and festival foodservice experiences. Annals of Tourism Research, 39(2), 571–600. Robson, J., & Robson, I. (1996). From shareholders to stakeholders: Critical issues for tour­ ism marketers. Tourism Management, 17(7), 533–540. Roscoe, S., Subramanian, N., Prifti, R., & Wu, L. (2020). Stakeholder engagement in a sus­ tainable sales and operations planning process. Business Strategy and the Environment, 29(8), 3526–3541. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2594 Ross, G.F. (1993). Ideal and actual images of backpacker visitors to Northern Australia. Journal of Travel Research, 32(2), 54–57. Rowley, T.J. (1997). Moving beyond dyadic ties: A network theory of stakeholder influence. Academy of Management Review, 22, 887–910. Roxas, F.M.Y., Rivera, J.P.R., & Gutierrez, E.L.M. (2020). Mapping stakeholders’ roles in governing sustainable tourism destinations. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Manage­ ment, 45, 387–398. Ryan, C. (1991). Tourism and marketing: A symbiotic relationship? Tourism Management, 12(2), 101–111. Ryan, C., & Aicken, M. (Eds.). (2005). Indigenous Tourism: The Commodification and Management of Culture. Oxford: Elsevier Ltd. Ryan, C., Chang, J., & Huan, T.C. (2007). The Aboriginal people of Taiwan: Discourse and silence. In Butler, R., & Hinch, T. (Eds.). Tourism and Indigenous Peoples (pp. 188–204). London, Routledge. Ryan, C., & Huyton, J. (2000). Who is interested in Aboriginal tourism in the Northern Ter­ ritory, Australia? A cluster analysis. Journal of sustainable tourism, 8(1), 53–88. Saito, H., & Ruhanen, L. (2017). Power in tourism stakeholder collaborations: Power types and power holders. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, 31, 189–196. Salazar, N.B., & Graburn, N.H. (2014). Tourism Imaginaries: Anthropological Approaches. New York: Berghahn. Salet, X. (2021). The search for the truest of authenticities: Online travel stories and their depiction of the authentic in the platform economy. Annals of Tourism Research, 88, 103175. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2021.103175 Salim, N., Mohamed, B., & Marzuki, A. (2021). Commodification stage of George Town historic waterfront: An assessment. Journal of Tourism and Cultural Change, 19(1), 38–58. https://doi.org/10.1080/14766825.2020.1849243 Santos, C., & Yan, G. (2008). Representational politics in Chinatown: The ethnic other. Annals of Tourism Research, 35(4), 879–899. Sautter, E.T., & Leisen, B. (1999). Managing stakeholders: A tourism planning model. Annals of Tourism Research, 269(2), 312–328. Schilar, H., & Keskitalo, E. (2018). Ethnic boundaries and boundary-making in handicrafts:

Examples from northern Norway, Sweden and Finland. Acta Borealia, 35(1), 29–48.

Selwyn, T. (1996). The Tourist Image: Myths and Myth Making in Tourism. Chichester:

Wiley. Shafieisabet, N., & Haratifard, S. (2020). The empowerment of local tourism stakeholders and their perceived environmental effects for participation in sustainable development of tourism. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, 45, 486–498. Sharma, B. (2018). English and discourses of commodification among tourism workers in the Himalayas. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 22(1), 77–99.

Ethnic Tourism Development

53

Sharpley, R. (1994). Tourism, Tourists and Society. Huntingdon, Cambridgeshire: ELM. Shaw, S. (2011). Marketing Ethnoscapes as Spaces of Consumption: ‘Banglatown – London’s Curry Capital’. Journal of Town and City Management, 1(4), 381–395. Shepherd, R. (2002). Commodification, culture and tourism. Tourist Studies, 2(2), 183–201. Shuqair, S., Pinto, D.C., & Mattila, A.S. (2019). Benefits of authenticity: Post-failure loyalty in the sharing economy. Annals of Tourism Research, 78, Article 102741. Sillitoe, K., & White, P. (1992). Ethnic group and the British census: The search for a ques­ tion. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society A 155, 141–163. Smith, A.D. (1991). National Identity. London: Penguin. Smith, C., & Ward, G. (2000). Indigenous Cultures in an Interconnected World. Vancouver, BC: University of British Columbia Press. Smith, V. (1977). Hosts and Guests: The Anthropology of Tourism. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press. Smith, V. (1989). Hosts and Guests: The Anthropology of Tourism (2nd ed.). Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press. Smith, V. (2001). Power and ethnicity in “Paradise”: Boracay, Philippines. In Smith, V., & Brent, M. (Eds.). Hosts and Guests Revisited: Tourism Issues of the 21st Century. New York: Cognizant Communication Corp. Song, Y., & Yuan, M. (2021). Tourism and its impact on Dong traditional music and life in Xiaohuang. Journal of Tourism and Cultural Change, 19(2), 200–215. https://doi.org/10 .1080/14766825.2019.1707839 Sonjai, N.P., Bushell, R., Hawkins., M., & Staiff, R. (2018). Community-based ecotourism: Beyond authenticity and the commodification of local people. Journal of Ecotourism, 17(3), 252–267. https://doi.org/10.1080/14724049.2018.1503502 Steiner, C.J., & Reisinger, Y. (2006). Understanding existential authenticity. Annals of Tour­ ism Research, 33(2), 299–318. Stylidis, D., Belhassen, Y., & Shani, A. (2014). Three tales of a city: Stakeholders’ images of Eliat as a tourism destination. Journal of Travel Research, 54(6), 702–716. Su, J. (2019). Understanding the changing Intangible Cultural Heritage in tourism commodification: The music players’ perspective from Lijiang, China. Journal of Tourism and Cultural Change, 17(3), 247–268. https://doi.org/10.1080/14766825.2018.1427102 Su, J. (2020). Managing intangible cultural heritage in the context of tourism: Chinese offi­ cials’ perspectives. Journal of Tourism and Cultural Change, 18(2), 164–186 Su, J., & Sun, J. (2020). Spatial changes of ethnic communities during tourism develop­ ment: A case study of Basha Miao minority community. Journal of Tourism and Cultural Change, 18(3), 333–350. Su, M.M., Wall, G., & Ma, Z. (2019). A multi-stakeholder examination of destination image: Nanluoguxiang heritage street, Beijing, China. Tourism Geographies, 21(1), 2–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/14616688.2017.1385031. Su, X. (2011). Commodification and the selling of ethnic music to tourist. Geoforum, 42, 496–505. Suarthana, I.K.P., & Hardini, W. (2015). The impact of social, economic and environment in local community participation of archeological tourism village Bedulu Gianyar, Bali. Journal of Business on Hospitality and Tourism, 1(1), 1–12. http://dx.doi.org/10.22334/ jbhost.v1i1.27 Sun, J.X., Wang, X.R., & Ma, T. (2018). De-localization and re-localization of ethnic cul­ tures: What is the role of tourism? Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, 23(11), 1034–1046.

54 Ethnic Tourism Development

Suryanarayan, N. (2017). From Yashwant place to Yashka: A case study of commodifica­ tion of Russian in India. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 20(4), 428–442. https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2015.1115003 Swain, M.B. (1990). Commoditizing ethnicity in southwest China. Cultural Survival Quar­ terly, 14(1), 26–29. Swain, M.B. (2014). Developing ethnic tourism in Yunnan, China: Shilin Sani. Tourism Recreation Research, 14(1), 33–39. Swarbrooke, J. (2001). Key challenges for visitor attraction managers in the UK. Journal of Leisure Property, 1(4), 318–336. Tan, W., & Huang, S. (2020). Why visit theme parks? A leisure constraints and perceived authenticity perspective. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 57, 102194. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2020.102194 Tao, C., Huang, S., & Brown, G. (2020). The impact of festival participation on ethnic iden­ tity: The case of Yi torch festival. Event Management, 24, 527–536. Taylor, J.P. (2001). Authenticity and sincerity in tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 28(1), 7–26. Telfer, D., & Sharpley, R. (2008). Tourism and Development in the Developing World. Abingdon: Routledge. Tham, A., Ruhanen, L., & Raciti, M. (2020). Tourism with and by Indigenous and ethnic communities in the Asia Pacific region: A bricolage of people, places and partnerships. Journal of Heritage Tourism, 15(3), 243–248. Thimm, T., & Karlaganis, C. (2020). A conceptual framework for indigenous ecotour­ ism projects – A case study in Wayanad, Kerala. India. Journal of Heritage Tourism, 15(12), 1–18. Thrift, N. (2000). Commodity. In Johnston, R.J., Gregory, D., Pratt, G., & Watts, M. (Eds.). The Dictionary of Human Geography (pp. 95–96). Malden, MD: Blackwell. Tiberghien, G. (2019). Managing the Planning and Development of Authentic Eco-Cultural Tourism in Kazakhstan. Tourism Planning & Development, 16(5), 494–513. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/21568316.2018.1501733 Tiberghien, G., Bremner, H., & Milne, S. (2017). Performance and visitors’ perception of authenticity in eco-cultural tourism. Tourism Geographies, 19(2), 287–300. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/14616688.2017.1285958. Tiberghien, G., Bremner, H., & Milne, S. (2020). Authenticity and disorientation in the tour­ ism experience. Journal of Outdoor Recreation and Tourism, 30, 100283. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.jort.2020.100283 Tilley, C. (1997). Performing culture in the global village. Critique of Anthropology, 17(1), 67–89. Timothy, D.J., & Tosun, C. (2003). Appropriate planning for tourism in destination com­ munities: Participation, incremental growth and collaboration. In Singh, S., Timothy, D.J., & Dowling, R.K. (Eds.). Tourism in Destination Communities (pp. 181–204). Cambridge, MA: CABI Publishing. Todd, L., Leask, A., & Ensor, J. (2017). Understanding primary stakeholders’ multiple roles in hallmark event tourism management. Tourism Management, 59, 494–509. Tosun, C. (1999). Towards a typology of community participation in the tourism develop­ ment process. International Journal of Tourism and Hospitality, 10(2), 113–134. Tosun, C. (2000). Limits to community participation in the tourism development process in developing countries. Tourism Management, 21, 613–633. Trupp, A., & Sunanta, S. (2017). Gendered practices in urban ethnic tourism in Thailand. Annals of Tourism Research, 64, 76–86.

Ethnic Tourism Development

55

Tu, J., & Zhang, D. (2020). Does tourism promote economic growth in Chinese ethnic minority areas? A nonlinear perspective. Journal of Destination Marketing & Manage­ ment, 18, 100473. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdmm.2020.100473 Urry, J. (1990). The Tourist Gaze. London: Sage. Van den Berghe, P. (1992). Tourism and the ethnic division of labor. Annals of Tourism Research, 19, 234–249. Van den Berghe, P. (1994). The quest for the other: Ethnic tourism in San Cristobal, Mexico. Seattle, WA: University of Washington Press. Van den Berghe, P., & Keyes, C. (1984). Introduction: Tourism and re-created ethnicity. Annals of Tourism Research, 11, 343–352. Verheijen, B., & Putra, I. (2020). Balinese cultural identity and global tourism: The Garuda Wisnu Kencana Cultural Park. Asian Ethnicity, 21(3), 425–442. Viken, A., & Müller, D.K. (2017). Tourism and Indigeneity in the Arctic. Bristol: Channel View Publications. Vincent, V.C., & Thompson, W.T. (2002). Assessing community support and sustainability for ecotourism development. Journal of Travel Research, 41, 153–160. Virloget, K.H., & Kavrečič, P. (2019). Traditional festivities in North Istria in terms of authenticity and (dis)continuity. Academica Turistica, 12(2), 109–120. https://doi.org/ 10.26493/2335-4194.12.109-120 Vitolla, F., Raimo, N., Rubino, M., & Garzoni, A. (2019). The impact of national culture on integrated reporting quality. A stakeholder theory approach. Business Strategy and the Environment, 28(8), 1558–1571. Waitt, G. (2000). Consuming heritage: Perceived historical authenticity. Annals of Tourism Research, 27(4), 835–862. Waligo, V.M., Clarke, J., & Hawkins, R. (2013). Implementing sustainable tourism: A multistakeholder involvement management framework. Tourism Management, 36, 342–353. Walsh, B. (1996). Authenticity and cultural representation: A case study of Maori tourism operators. In Hall, C.M., & McArthur, S. (Eds.). Heritage Tourism Management in Aus­ tralia and New Zealand (pp. 202–207). Auckland: Oxford University Press. Walsh, E.R., & Swain, M.B. (2004). Creating modernity by touring paradise: Domestic eth­ nic tourism in Yunnan, China. Tourism Recreation Research, 29(2), 59–68. Wang, C.Y., & Mattila, A.S. (2015). The impact of servicescape cues on consumer prepur­ chase authenticity assessment and patronage intentions to ethnic restaurants. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Research, 39(3), 346–372. Wang, N. (1999). Rethinking authenticity in tourism experience. Annals of Tourism Research, 26, 349–370. Wang, N. (2000). Tourism and Modernity: A Sociological Analysis. Amsterdam: Pergamon. Wang, Y. (2007). Customized authenticity begins at home. Annals of Tourism Research, 34(3), 789–804. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2007.03.008. Wang, Y., Shen, H., Yea, S., & Zhou, L. (2020). Being rational and emotional: An integrated model of residents’ support of ethnic tourism development. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, 44, 112–121. Warner, M. (1997). ‘Consensus’ participation: An example for protected areas planning. Public Administration and Development, 17(4), 413–432. Werdler, K. (2011). Africa’s natural heritage: Trouble in paradise or new opportunities in a world looking for experiences and authenticity? Tourism Analysis, 16(1), 57–66. Wesley, A., & Pforr, P. (2010). The governance of coastal tourism: Unravelling the layers of complexity at Smiths Beach, Western Australia. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 18(6), 773–792. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09669581003721273.

56

Ethnic Tourism Development

White, C. M. (2005). Tourism as an ethnic landscape and the landscape of ethnic tourism: The case of Fiji. Race, Gender & Class, New Orleans, 12(3/4), 155–175. Wijesinghe, S., Mura, P., & Bouchon, F. (2019). Tourism knowledge and neocolonial­ ism – A systematic critical review of the literature. Current Issues in Tourism, 22(11), 1263–1279. Wimmer, A. (2009). Herder’s heritage and the boundary-making approach: Studying ethnic­ ity in emigrant societies. Sociological Theory, 27(3), 244–270. Winch, G. (2004). Managing project stakeholders. In Morris, P.W.G., & Pinto, J.K. (Eds.). The Wiley Guide to Managing Projects (pp. 321–339). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. Wondirad, A., Tolkach, D., & King, B. (2020). Stakeholder collaboration as a major factor for sustainable ecotourism development in developing countries. Tourism Management, 78, Article 104024. Wood, R. (1997). Tourism and the state. In Picard, M., & Wood, R. (Eds.). Tourism, Ethnic­ ity, and the State in Asian and Pacific Societies (pp. 1–34). Honolulu, HI: University of Hawaii Press. Wood, R. (1998). Touristic ethnicity: A brief itinerary. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 21(2), 218–241. Woodland, M., & Acott, T.G. (2007). Sustainability and local tourism branding in England’s south downs. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 15(6), 715–734. Woosnam, K.M., Maruyama, N., & Boley, B.B. (2016). Perceptions of the ‘other’ residents: Implications for attitudes of tourism development focused on the minority ethnic group. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 33(5), 567–580. Wray, M. (2011). Adopting and implementing a transactive approach to sustainable tourism planning: Translating theory into practice. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 19 (4–5), 605–627. Xie, P.F. (2011). Authenticating Ethnic Tourism. Bristol: Channel View Press. Xie, P.F., & Lane, B. (2006). A life cycle model for aboriginal arts performance in tourism: Perspectives on authenticity. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 14(6), 545–561. https:// doi.org/10.2167/jost601.0 Xie, P.F., & Wall, G. (2002). Visitors’ perceptions of authenticity at cultural attractions in Hainan, China. International Journal of Tourism Research, 4, 353–366. Xie, P.F., Wu, T.C., & Hsieh, H.W. (2012). Tourists’ perception of authenticity in indigenous souvenirs in Taiwan. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 29(5), 485–500. Xu, H., Wan, X., & Fan, X. (2014). Rethinking authenticity in the implementation of Chi­ na’s heritage conservation: The case of Hongcun Village. Tourism Geographies, 16(5), 799–811. Yang, J.J., Ryan, C., & Zhang, L.Y. (2013). Ethnic minority tourism in China: Han perspec­ tives of Tuva figures in a landscape. Tourism Management, 36, 45–56. Yang, J.J., Ryan, C., & Zhang, L.Y. (2016). Impersonation in ethnic tourism – the presenta­ tion of culture by other ethnic groups. Annals of Tourism Research, 56, 16–31. Yang, L. (2011). Ethnic tourism and cultural representation. Annals of Tourism Research, 38(2), 561–585. Yang, L. (2012). Tourists’ perceptions of ethnic tourism in Lugu Lake, Yunnan, China. Jour­ nal of Heritage Tourism, 7(1), 59–81. Yang, L. (2013). Ethnic tourism and minority identity: Lugu Lake, Yunnan, China. Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, 18(7), 712–730. Yang, L. (2015). Rural tourism and poverty alleviation: The case of Nujiang, Yunnan, China’ International Journal Tourism Anthropology, 4(4), 343–366.

Ethnic Tourism Development

57

Yang, L. (2019). Cultural tourism in a replicated old town: Tourists’ views. Tourism Plan­ ning & Development, 16(1), 93–111. Yang, L., & Wall, G. (2009). Authenticity in ethnic tourism: Domestic tourists’ perspectives. Current Issues in Tourism, 12(3), 235–254. Yang, L., & Wall, G. (2014). Planning for Ethnic Tourism. Surrey: Ashgate Publishing Company. Yang, L., Wall, G., & Smith, S. (2008). Ethnic tourism development: Chinese government perspectives. Annals of Tourism Research, 35(3), 751–771. Yang, X., Peng, C., Jiang, X., Wang, J., & Liu, J. (2020). Spatiotemporal changes and simu­ lation of the architectural ethnicity at world heritage sites under tourism development. Complexity, 2020, Article ID 6715897. https://doi.org/10.1155/2020/6715897. Ye, S., Xiao, H., & Zhou, L. (2018). Commodification and perceived authenticity in com­ mercial homes. Annals of Tourism Research, 71, 39–53. Yi, X., Fu, X., Yu, L., & Jiang, L. (2018). Authenticity and loyalty at heritage sites: The moderation effect of postmodern authenticity. Tourism Management, 67, 411–424. Yi, X., Lin, V.S., Jin, W., & Luo, Q. (2017). The authenticity of heritage sites, tourists’ quest for existential authenticity, and destination loyalty. Journal of Travel Research, 56(8), 1032–1048. Young, M., & Markham, F. (2020). Tourism, capital, and the commodification of place. Progress in Human Geography, 44(2), 276–296. Yun, H.J., & Zhang, X. (2017). Cultural conservation and residents’ attitudes about ethnic minority tourism. Tourism and Hospitality Research, 17(2), 165–175. Zapalska, A., & Brozik, D. (2017). Māori female entrepreneurship in tourism industry. Tour­ ism, 65(2), 156–172 Zeppel, H. (1995). Authenticity and Iban Longhouse tourism. Borneo Review, 6(2), 109–125. Zeppel, H. (1997). Meeting “wild people”: Iban culture & longhouse tourism in Sarawak. In Yamashita, S., & Eades, J.S. (Eds.). Tourism and Cultural Development in Asia and Oceania (pp. 119–140). Bangi: Penebit Universiti Kebangsaan. Zhang, J., Xu, H.G., & Xing, W. (2017). The host – guest interactions in ethnic tourism, Lijiang, China. Current Issues in Tourism, 20(7), 724–739. Zhang, Q. (2007). On modern tourism affecting traditional ethnic culture. The Border Econ­ omy and Culture, 2, 22–23. Zhang, T., & Yin, P. (2020). Testing the structural relationships of tourism authenticities. Journal of Destination Marketing & Management, 18, 100485. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. jdmm.2020.100485 Zhou, Q., Zhang, J., Zhang, H., & Ma, J. (2015). A structural model of host authenticity. Annals of Tourism Research, 55, 28–45. Zhu, X.Y., & He, Y.H. (2019). Does tourism promote economic growth in the ethnic areas of China? Emerging Markets Finance and Trade, 1–14. Zhu, Y. (2012). Performing heritage: Rethinking authenticity in tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 39(3), 1495–1513. Zhuang, L., Taylor, T., Beirman, D., & Darcy, S. (2017). Socially sustainable ethnic tourism: A comparative study of two Hakka communities in China. Tourism Recreation Research, 42(4), 467–483. Zoomers, A. (2008). Global travelling along the Inca Route: Is international tourism ben­ eficial for local development? European Planning Studies, 16, 971–983.https://doi.org/ 10.1080/09654310802163769.

2 WHO ARE ETHNIC TOURISTS?

Tourists’ thirsts for pristine environments and exotic culture have driven the tour­ ism industry to explore opportunities beyond the borders of easily accessible areas (Butler & Hinch, 2007). Tourists constitute the demand side of tourism; thus, under­ standing their travel demands and needs, and behaviors and concerns is essential information for tourism suppliers (Smith & Brent, 2001; Su & Wall, 2010). Much of the discussion of ethnic tourism has concentrated on the impacts of tourism on host communities. Less research has been devoted to the market for ethnic tour­ ism and a few studies have examined visitor profiles and their on-site behaviors, experiences and satisfactions. Tourists are key players in tourism development and they can contribute to the sustainability of the ethnic destinations that they visit. An understanding of visitor demands and expectations is essential to the search for new commercial opportunities to attract more and a wider range of customers (McIntosh, 2004). Tourists’ assessments of ethnic attractions, perceptions of tour­ ism product features, and satisfaction with their experiences are important indica­ tors of the success of tourism. More market research is needed to identify what tourists want and expect from their experiences of ethnic culture. While much emphasis in the literature on ethnic tourism has been given to issues of tourism development, only limited information is available about the nature of the demands for ethnic tourism and tourists’ experiences with minority culture. This chapter synthesizes conclusions about demands for ethnic tourism through exploration of the characteristics and behavior patterns of ethnic tourists. The chap­ ter first analyzes the market for ethnic tourism, by focusing upon tourist clients, including who they are and what they are demanding. It explores the attributes that differentiate ethnic tourists through an analysis of their motivations, needs, attitudes and concerns, sociodemographic attributes, and the influence of social, cultural and natural environments in order to create a profile of ethnic tourists. DOI: 10.4324/9781003373964-3

Who Are Ethnic Tourists?

59

Two case studies are presented that examine tourists’ perceptions of ethnic tour­ ism at well-known ethnic attractions: Lugu Lake and Yiren Town in China. Tour­ ists’ perceptions and interactions with Maori culture are also analyzed in empirical research conducted in New Zealand. These case studies provide important insights into tourists’ motivations, experiences and preferences for ethnic tourism products. Ethnic people, too, may be tourists with their own distinctive travel patterns and attention is drawn to the fact that ethnic enclaves may be tourism destinations and they are also sources of tourists who visit friends and relatives and renew their cultural connections with their place of origin. Finally, a summary of the chapter is provided. 2.1

Building a Profile of Ethnic Tourists

As discussed in the first chapter, ethnic tourism has been traditionally used to refer to tourism directed to a culturally, geographically and economically distinct, and often isolated, ethnic enclave. Such enclaves, usually poor and undeveloped, are often portrayed in the tourism literature as being besieged by affluent tourists from the industrialized and urbanized world. Ethnic tourism, thus, was sometimes assumed to cater to “only a limited number of visitors motivated by curiosity and elite peer approval” (Smith, 1977, p. 4). In such contexts, many tourists were unfa­ miliar with minority communities living in remote places, but who were willing to share their music, folk culture, festivals, religions, traditions and customs with out­ siders. Ethnic tourism has expanded substantially in recent decades and the profile of ethnic tourists visiting remote sites has grown from a limited number of visitors motivated by curiosity and cultural exoticism to become a more varied phenom­ enon. Contemporary ethnic tourists are no longer solely travelers who observe the exotic cultural expressions and lifestyles of ethnic peoples in remote places, but now include travelers motivated by reunion with their cultural roots or who wish to explore ethnicity in other locations. Some consume ethnic products at cultural theme parks, in urban neighborhoods and ethnic enclaves in large multicultural cities where distinctive other cultures can be readily accessed through ethnic res­ taurants, museums, shops and local festivals. As such, the ethnic tourist market is multifaceted and heterogeneous. It includes those who specifically wish to engage with ethnic culture, some who are happy to do this as part of a broader experience, such as visiting a relatively natural area, and others who tag along with friends or relatives, or find themselves dropping by as a spot selected for them by others on a tour. The profile of ethnic tourists has been explored in a number of empirical stud­ ies at ethnic minority villages, native homes, aboriginal communities or indige­ nous destinations (Batra, 2008; Dearden & Harron, 1994; Henderson et al., 2009; Hughes, 1995; Maleki & Gholamian, 2020; Moscardo & Pearce, 1999; Silver, 1993; van den Berghe, 1992; Xie & Wall, 2002; Xu & Ye, 2016; Yang, 2012, 2013, 2019a, 2019b), In these studies, the aboriginal, ethnic and indigenous terminology

60

Who Are Ethnic Tourists?

is used interchangeably. This is not usually a problem although in some circum­ stances the terms can have different legal implications. These studies of tourists have emphasized differing agendas, such as the segmentation of tourists based on their interest in culturally based products or activities (Chang, 2006; Dearden & Harron, 1994; Moscardo & Pearce, 1999; Wu et al., 2012), issues of authenticity (Condevaux, 2009; Daniel, 1996; Henderson et al., 2009; Sang, 2020; Xie & Wall, 2002; Xie et al., 2012; Yang, 2019b), tourists’ knowledge, perceptions and satisfac­ tion with ethnic experiences (Gholamian et al., 2020; van den Berghe, 1992; Silver, 1993; Wong et al., 2019; Yang, 2019a), the motivation, satisfaction and revisit intentions for attending ethnic minority cultural festivals (Savinovic et al., 2012; Wei & Dai, 2019), and tourists’ preferences for product features (Kutzner et al., 2009; McIntosh, 2004; Xu & Ye, 2016). A variety of variables, including leisure motives, preferences, benefits and socio-economic characteristics, have been used to categorize tourists and understand the composition of the ethnic tourism market. Many of these studies have concluded that ethnic tourists are travelers who are edu­ cated and well-off, and they are interested in culture, nature and outdoor activities (Notzke, 1999, 2006; Zeppel, 2002; Yang, 2013). Corresponding key market seg­ ments include the “dual track” (interested in both culture and nature) niche market and culture-only markets within North America and Europe (Kutzner et al., 2009). Volkman (1990) noted that when the object of the tourists’ gaze is local ethnic cul­ ture that is scrutinized, admired, photographed and brought home, aspects of the culture become separated from their own society and become aesthetic objects or even commodities to be consumed by strangers. Hughes (1995) suggested that there are two possible market segments for ethnic tourism: the “postindustrial” segment and the “postmodern” segment. Postindus­ trial tourists are likely to be sensitive to their effects on the host people and are concerned with behaving responsibly in ethnic contact situations. The postmodern segment tends to be a highly active and flexible group that enjoys contrived spec­ tacles while being aware of their lack of authenticity. Dann (1996) stated that post­ modern tourists are not concerned with authenticity as long as the visit is enjoyable, and van den Berghe (1992) supported the interpretation of postindustrial tourists and noted that consumers of ethnic tourism are highly educated and respect cultural diversity. They are frequently sensitive about their impact on local culture and are aware of the irony that their presence and behavior can destroy the authenticity they seek. Silver (1993) proposed a new category of ethnic tourists who are similar to postindustrial tourists. This group consists of sophisticated and well-educated people who seek to be morally responsible and politically correct when pursuing authentic experiences. Moscardo and Pearce (1999), in an empirical study at an aboriginal cultural park in Australia, identified significant differences in terms of motivation and purpose among different types of tourists. They found four distinct groups of ethnic tourists based on degrees of interest in various aspects of ethnic tourism: the ethnic tour­ ist connection group, the ethnic products and activities group, the passive cultural

Who Are Ethnic Tourists?

61

learning group and the low ethnic tourism group. The first and second groups are postmodern ethnic tourists: the first group enthusiastically embraces all aspects of cross-cultural contact, while the second is interested in fun and activities but reluc­ tant to contact ethnic people directly. The third group is made up of postindustrial tourists who are concerned with their own impacts and are disinterested in the com­ mercial aspects of the experience. The last group is not made up of postmodern or postindustrial tourists and has a low level of interest in ethnic tourism. They are the most likely to visit the park as part of tour or because someone else in their travel group wanted to visit. Ryan and Huyton (2002) reported that tourists rank attractions based on Australian aboriginal culture as being less attractive than other activities and only a small minority has high interest in aboriginal culture, which is contained within a broader tourist perception of landscape. Chang et al. (2006) segmented aboriginal tourists from a novelty-seeking per­ spective and identified different levels of curiosity. Yang (2019a), in an empirical study of tourists’ perceptions of ethnic tourism in Western China, found that the majority of ethnic tourists were highly educated young affluent Chinese urbanites from the economically developed areas of China. Dearden and Harron (1994), in their study of trekkers in the hills of Northern Thailand, found that ethnic tourists were relatively young and the majority was tertiary-educated and a third had pro­ fessional occupations. Batra (2008) identified significant demographic differences in gender, age and monthly income of ethnic tourism travelers in Bangkok. Wu et al. (2012) divided indigenous tourists into three segments: “expert”, who are driven by a serious leisure interest (indigenous culture); “interested”, who are curi­ ous about indigenous appeals; and “apathetic”, who are not interested in aboriginal culture at all. These three segments differed significantly in terms of marital sta­ tus, travel motives and preferences for culture-based tourism products. Pratt et al. (2013) noted that the tourists attracted to indigenous tourism in Fiji tended to be adventurous, wanted authenticity, and sought to be educated about local culture and desired personal interaction. The motivation studies reveal that tourists’ motives and preferences for visit­ ing ethnic destinations are varied. Many studies suggest not all visitors to cultural destinations seek to engage in cultural activities (McIntosh et al., 1990). Tourists may travel in search of a sense of ethnic identity, to seek novel experiences, or to satisfy their curiosity through encounters with other cultures. Curiosity was found to be the main motive of tourists visiting aboriginal attractions (Chang et al., 2006). Many tourists visiting indigenous resorts only gazed upon the view or simply fol­ lowed the itinerary of a package tour (Ryan & Huyton, 2002) and some were not even interested in local culture (Moscardo & Pearce, 1999). Albeit in a very dif­ ferent context and using rather different data, McKercher and du Cros (2002) also found that few tourists were purposefully seeking a cultural experience. McIntosh (2004) stated that experiencing Maori aboriginal culture was not the primary moti­ vation of tourists visiting New Zealand, although most were exposed to it dur­ ing their visit. They identified five dimensions of tourists’ preferences, including

62

Who Are Ethnic Tourists?

gazing, lifestyle, authenticity, personal interaction and informal learning. In a simi­ lar vein, Yang et al. (2013) revealed that culture was not a primary motive for the majority of their respondents in the Kanas Scenic Area in Northwest China, where Han tourists regarded the Tuva minority people as a supplementary attraction that formed part of their image of the landscape. Thus, minority culture was bound with the scenic values and prestige of visiting Kanas. Xie and Wall (2002) ranked the preferred activities of ethnic tourists to Hainan Island, China, and revealed that tourists preferred, in order, architectural style, dance performances, apparel, chil­ dren and the natural landscape. These studies indicate that ethnic culture is often not a primary motivation for visiting a destination, but most visitors express some level of interest in experiencing local culture. Xu and Ye (2016) found that visitors to Lijiang in Western China escape from everyday life to relax and pursue novel­ ties and pleasure, hoping to release their tensions and develop relationships without responsibilities. They do not deliberately seek love affairs and sexual encounters in ethnic destinations; instead, they enjoy the leisure and romantic environment of the old town of Lijiang, which contributes to easy interpersonal interactions and facilitates casual intimate gender relationships. Many studies show that tourists’ perceptions of authentic experiences differ with the social context. For instance, authenticity is perceived differently by Han tour­ ists and Tibetan tourists in Gala Village, Tibet (Sang, 2020), and by domestic and international visitors in Dai villages in Yunnan Province (Yang, 2009a) and in Miao villages in Guizhou Province, China (Henderson et al., 2009). Han tourists attempt to gaze upon the “primitive, backward” lives of Tibetans to obtain the objective authenticity of their culture, while Tibetan tourists, who are cultural insiders, are able to assess the significance of cultural symbols more objectively (Sang, 2020). Domestic tourists in Western China usually visit folk villages as a part of tour pro­ grams arranged by travel agencies, and they enjoy staged events and are mainly in search of enjoyment and relaxation on their visits; on the other hand, authenticity is a major concern among international tourists who often think that folk villages are tourist-centric and artificial, and they prefer to see local culture in its natural setting (Yang, 2009b). Most visitors are relatively young (under 40) and they are enticed to Miao villages by minority culture, which is represented by food items, handicrafts, clothing, festivals, folk dances and marriage rituals. They judge overall authentic­ ity to be high and sense that the destination village has resisted modern influences and retained its originality, although there are contrasting receptions from domestic and international tourists (Henderson et al., 2009). Cultural experiences are often consumed and negotiated based on tourists’ prior knowledge, interests, expecta­ tions, mythologies and personal meanings, and not solely by the original cultural attributes and cultural offerings of a destination (McIntosh & Prentice, 1999). Tourists’ appreciation of host culture often derives from the beneficial experi­ ences gained from their “mindful” interaction with local culture (Pearce, 1995; Moscardo, 1996), such as emotional attachment to iconic landscapes (Pren­ tice & Guerin, 1998), endearment to local people (Prentice et al., 1994), active

Who Are Ethnic Tourists?

63

participation in authentic cultural experiences (Daniel, 1996) or purchase of sym­ bolic indigenous arts, crafts or souvenirs (Littrell et al., 1994; Asplet & Cooper, 2000). Tourists’ perceptions of the authenticity of ethnic souvenirs have been found to be blurred and varied (Xie & Wall, 2002). Many tourists judge authentic­ ity against stereotypical images (Xie & Wall, 2002). Ethnic souvenirs may not be valued so much for their authenticity, but for the strong empathetic response to the artisan they provoke in modern tourists (Xie et al., 2012). Domestic visitors to Taiwan did not perceive indigenous uniqueness as the most important factor associated with authenticity; rather, distinctive markers, design, materials used and production methods were considered to be more important (Wall & Chang, 2009). Tourists visiting Paiwan tribes in Taiwan also perceived modern design combined with indigenous markers to be more authentic than traditional designs (Xie et al., 2012). Using Yang et al.’s (2013) model of tourism experience, Wong et al. (2019) evaluated the influences of three dimensions (scenery, ethnic interaction and enter­ tainment) of memorable tourism experiences on ethnic tourists’ satisfaction in Guangxi Autonomous Region, China. They concluded that all of the three dimen­ sions were positively related to tourists’ overall satisfaction, word-of-mouth refer­ rals and intention to revisit. In an empirical study of Iranian Kurd tourists who had traveled to the Kurdistan region of Iraq, Maleki and Gholamian (2020) revealed that ethnic identity had a significant negative moderating role on the relationship between tourist satisfaction and its consequences, while place attachment mediated the effect of destination image on tourist satisfaction. Given that the interests in and commitment to ethnic culture vary among visitors, the impacts of tourist behavior at ethnic attractions may also vary. Tourists with weak motivations or who are less interested in culture-based activities often lack understanding of local culture and do not greatly appreciate the richness of the culture presented to them. In con­ trast, tourists with a serious attitude toward indigenous tourism are more likely to support ethnic culture, spend more on their visit and contribute more to the local economy (Wu et al., 2017). The perceptions of tourists at ethnic cultural festivals have been examined in the festival and event studies literature, particularly as related to perceived authen­ ticity (Chhabra, 2005; Chhabra et al., 2003), motivation, satisfaction and revisit intentions (Savinovic et al., 2012), host–guest relations and tourists’ perceptions of power (Wei & Dai, 2019). Savinovic, Kim and Long (2012) noted that festival audience members’ motivations had an impact on their overall satisfaction and likelihood of future attendance. They identified eight main motivational dimen­ sions for ethnic minority cultural festival attendance: community support; escape; knowledge/education; food, wine and entertainment; novelty; family togetherness; marketing and socialization. Wei and Dai (2019) observed that host–guest rela­ tionships changed along with a shift in the dominant power status, as power was transferred from tourists to hosts when the ethnic festival started, and tourists felt powerless partly due to the hosts’ prior arrangement and control of the festival

64

Who Are Ethnic Tourists?

activities. The overall perceptions of tourists directly determine their loyalty to the festival (Akhoondnejad, 2016). In summary, the studies outlined earlier provide a variety of perspectives for understanding the demand for ethnic tourism, including identification of who the ethnic tourists are, and their motivations, perceptions and satisfactions regarding ethnic products and experiences. These studies reveal that tourists’ satisfaction and appreciation of local culture can result from affective as well as cognitive dimen­ sions of experience, from cultural experiences that are familiar or exotic, or derived from brief, superficial interactions with local people in a destination or from more formal interaction with hosts (McIntosh, 2004). Furthermore, interactions can be directed or mediated by others, such as tour guides. A better understanding of tour­ ists’ expectations and experiences may be used to facilitate intercultural under­ standing and enhance future tourism planning and management. However, the lack of sufficient ongoing research into visitors’ perspectives upon ethnic tourism results in the use of anecdotal and piecemeal information to help ethnic tourism businesses to develop products that meet market demands. As such, the demand for ethnic tourism is not fully understood. Moreover, the majority of studies define ethnic tourists as those who pursue exotic cultural experiences as their primary motivation but, in reality, there may be other motivations underpinning their visits. For instance, they visit an ethnic village because it is a part of a package tour or because someone else in their travel group wants to visit. Thus, the ethnic tourism market is essentially complex and heterogeneous and, as such, it is not easy to dis­ tinguish ethnic tourists from the overall tourist market because an ethnic tourist can be a sightseer, shopper or conference attendee. In the following sections, three case studies are presented to examine visitor profiles, perceptions and behavior patterns in order to better understand the ethnic tourism markets in China and New Zealand. 2.2

Case Study: Ethnic Tourism in Lugu Lake, China

Introduction: Ethnic Tourism in China

China is a multiethnic country with a large number of ethnic and linguistic groups. Fifty-six ethnic groups have been identified and recognized by the central govern­ ment. The Han Chinese make up 92% of the population in 2005, while 55 minority groups (many of which include subgroups) compose 8%. Great cultural, regional and developmental differences exist between them. Most of China’s minorities inhabit the poorest western regions of the country in terms of economic devel­ opment, which have the lowest levels of industrial development, urbanization, provisions for health care and education, communication and transportation infra­ structure, and general standard of living (Postiglione, 1992). Traditionally, China’s minorities have been described as exotic, colorful and primitive as well as marginal representatives of earlier forms of society, living fossils, savages and barbarians (Tong, 1989). They survive in relative isolation and many live in traditional ways

Who Are Ethnic Tourists?

65

permitting the romantic envisioning of them as “primitive” peoples living in places that are far removed from the complexity and confusion of contemporary society (Schein, 1994). With the opening up of the Chinese economy in the 1980s, tourism emerged as a sector of strategic importance for local development. Inspired by government policies, ethnic tourism has developed rapidly in rural China since the 1990s as a means of helping the minorities to break their isolation, cast off their “backward” status, and as a vehicle for economic development and cultural sustainability. Eth­ nic tourism is not just seen as a propaganda and marketing tool, but also as a pro­ cess of development and integration encouraging minorities to become modern (Oakes, 1998). Minority groups have been gradually incorporated into tourism through commoditization of ethnicity – the production and consumption of ethnic cultures and indigenous ways of life. Representations of exotic culture and charm­ ing customs through ethnic costumes, food, handicrafts, festivals and architecture have become core products of the tourism industry. Today, ethnic tourism has been well developed in three forms: ethnic dance and musical dinners, ethnic minority villages, and tourism packages that combine exotic ethnic culture with magnificent natural landscapes. Lugu Lake and Mosuo People

Lugu Lake, located at the borderland between Yunnan and Sichuan Provinces, China, is a nationally well-known ethnic tourism destination famous for its pictur­ esque natural scenery and unique ethnic cultures. Mosuo people, the main ethnic group residing in the lakeside villages, constitute 50% of the local population (Yan et al., 2008). They settled in this region 1,500 years ago and assimilated Tibetan, Mongolian, Yi, Naxi and Pumi cultures to form their own unique Mosuo culture (Dong et al., 2008). The Mosuo are not identified officially as an independent eth­ nic group; instead, they are classified as a subgroup of the Naxi in Yunnan and as Mongolian in Sichuan (Harrell, 2001). In the late 1980s, their attempts to gain state recognition won the Mosuo the ability to call themselves “Mosuo people” (Walsh, 2005). The Mosuo have been stereotyped by Chinese scholars as a “living fossil” (Yan, 1982), or “the last rose of China’s primitive societies” (Yu, 1996). They are well known for their matrilineal family system and a tradition of zouhun (literally, “walking marriage”) in which there is no formal contract of marriage between men and women. Men visit female partners only in the evenings, and the couples reside in their own natal households (Liu, 2006). Children live in their mother’s house­ hold, raised by uncles. A Mosuo family consists of all living members of a kinship based on the lineage of the women. Often a household includes three or more generations of siblings. The size of a household commonly ranges from 20 to 30 people, and the head of a household is an older female who is in charge of house­ hold property, family events and farm work (Liu, 2006). The practice of visiting,

66

Who Are Ethnic Tourists?

flexible or “walking” marriages is the key cultural device through which the mat­ rilineal descent group is preserved (Guo, 2008). The man and woman involved in the relationship are usually free of economic bonds and remain independent in economic and social activities. A man may provide some manual labor as a cour­ tesy to his partner’s family. The Mosuo households seldom divide traditionally; a new residence is built only when a household grows too big for its members to be accommodated (Guo, 2008). Walking marriage was tacitly approved by the state and Mosuo couples, except for government employees, were not required to reg­ ister for a marriage certificate until 2012. However, many couples still continue to live in separate households. Mosuo people used to engage in interregional trade with horse caravans and many returned to run tourism-related businesses in lakeshore villages in the 1980s (Wei et al., 2021). Local Community Involvement in Tourism

Tourism started with a dozen households running restaurants on the lakeshore and providing homestays for occasional travelers. The Ninglang County Government built an entrance gate and began charging an admission fee to the lake area in 1988. Tourism greatly expanded in the 1990s after the area was approved as a tourist destination by the State Council and officially opened to tourism in 1990 and to foreign tourists in 1992 (Xiong et al., 2008). The pristine natural landscape, the alleged “matriarchal” social system of the Mosuo, and their distinct marriage practice have attracted increasing tourist attention. The lakeside villages have been frequented by an enormous number of visitors with the improvement of roads, accommodation and other infrastructure. Mass media, tourism agents and local communities have contributed to transform this remote rural settlement into a pop­ ular tourist destination. Local villagers are engaged in tourism business by open­ ing guesthouses and restaurants, selling souvenirs and handicrafts, or involving in bonfire parties and dance shows. Tourism reached its peak around the mid-2000s. Lugu Lake has become one of the most popular tourist attractions in Yunnan and is well known to the middle and upper classes in China. Tourism has enriched a few Mosuo villages in the lake area. The village of Luoshui has been turned into the premier tourist site of Lugu Lake due to its good location and easier access than other villages, and it receives over 80,000 tourists annually (Walsh & Swain, 2004). The village consisted of 104 households and the residents were predominantly Mosuo (40%), Pumi (40%) and Han (12%) in 2009 (Yang, 2012). Luoshui was a poor village prior to tourism development, but it is now the wealthiest village in the county. Tourism has become virtually its only industry outside of agriculture and the primary source of income in the village since the late 1990s. Many households have abandoned traditional agriculture and put priority on tourism business and making money. The tourism boom has led vil­ lagers to take in more guests and supply larger accommodations for them. By 2005, almost all households had one or more family inns. More than 50 guesthouses and

Who Are Ethnic Tourists?

67

over 3,300 beds were available for tourists in a village of 580 residents in 2009 (Yang, 2012). Most tourism services provided by villagers were based on commu­ nally shared rules and conventions. The village committee organized the tourism activities, set prices for boat and horse rides, and scheduled regular bonfire parties/ evening shows with a fixed entrance fee in order to reduce the competition among villagers. Two collectivized teams have been formed to deliver these activities to visitors. All households in the village, including Mosuo, Pumi and Han, contrib­ uted one member to the teams, and all earnings were split equally among the team members. As tourism development quickened, vendors from other regions flooded into the region and opened shops, bars, KTV (karaoke television), tea houses and so on. The previously quiet lakeshore is now filled with numerous restaurants, sou­ venir shops and large guesthouses with decorative gates and signs. Local villagers have largely withdrawn from the lodging business since 2012 and instead have leased their guesthouses and land to outside entrepreneurs. Tourism Marketing and Mosuo Identity

The Mosuo were unknown to most Chinese before 1990. Contemporary litera­ ture as well as ethnographies and documentaries brought the Mosuo into main­ stream Chinese consciousness in the 1990s (Walsh, 2005). The state representation and mass media accounts of Mosuo culture put emphasis on three elements: (1) matriarchy – a land where women rule, (2) free love – zouhun (walking marriage) and (3) the primitive – a backward society that has not evolved (Walsh, 2005). Increasing tourism has led to the growing tendency to romanticize Mosuo people – through images, words and titillation. Mythologized and eroticized portrayals of young Mosuo, who are lovely and seductive waiting for lovers to fulfill their dreams, are usually the focus of tourism marketing. Enticing images of attractive young women in Mosuo costume boating on Lugu Lake or dancing on the stage as well as Mosuo men courting females adorn the cover pages of travel brochures and magazines. Lugu Luke is advertised as a primitive “Arcadia” outside the humdrum of modern life and the hustle and bustle of highly commercialized tourist destina­ tions (Wei et al., 2018). A romantic picture of the lake region featuring a relax­ ing, joyful and exotic atmosphere has been widely circulated in media discourses. Local nature and culture, especially the beauty and mystification of the Mosuo, are seen as exploitable economic assets and utilized by the state and the tourism indus­ try as a promotional strategy. The vastly distorted, even stigmatizing portrayals of walking marriage have been depicted in tourism advertising. Yang (2013) explored the impacts of ethnic tourism development on Mosuo people and their identities in an ethnic community in Lugu Lake. Her findings revealed that tourist villages offer a vision of a happy and simple pastoral life to visitors. They highlight certain aspects of traditions that may be appealing to tour­ ists, such as extended families, close communal ties, respect for nature, vibrant religious belief and so on. For instance, Mosuo are presented as a harmonious

68

Who Are Ethnic Tourists?

group who still live in large extended families under the leadership of a female household head and who work peacefully and cooperatively together. The cultural trait that villagers stress is not zouhun or matriarchy but rather family unity and harmony. The large family is given as the reason for the Mosuo having been cul­ turally sustainable and economically reliable. Traditionally, real Mosuo are very “shy” and it is a taboo for them to discuss sex-related topics in public and in the family. They even do not mention their sexual partners in front of the opposite sex of family members. Their sexual relationships are regulated by communal norms and conventions, and they are not morally loose. This “shy” culture still remains at the core of their moral beliefs today. Talking of sex with visitors is thus very embar­ rassing for them. Many Mosuo, especially the elders and women, are particularly sensitive to tourists’ questions regarding their sexual customs and they avoid talk­ ing with outsiders about zouhun. Economic benefits derived from tourism give local villagers the strong motives to preserve traditional Mosuo culture. Mosuo identity, reconstructed through a negotiation of cultural difference between Mosuo and Han Chinese, is thus promi­ nent and exaggerated at tourist sites. Performing Mosuo identity has become an important component of the village life. As an essential symbol of ethnic identity, traditional Mosuo costume has become a business uniform in touristic representa­ tions of minority culture. The village committee requires that all villagers wear Mosuo clothes and present themselves as Mosuo while engaged in activities for tourists. The villagers who do not wear ethnic attire while servicing tourists are subject to fines. Locals feel that visitors can get a sense of authenticity when they see tour guides, vendors and dancers in ethnic attire. Today, only senior Mosuo women wear traditional clothes in their daily life, while the younger generation does not like inconvenient old-style Mosuo clothes and rarely wears them. Due to the tourism demand, young people put on newly designed bright Mosuo clothes as business uniforms. The modified Mosuo costume, then, has become a distinctive marker of a recreated ethnic identity stimulated by touristic encounters. Locals take pride in their ethnicity and strive to rectify the stereotyped touristic images. To protect the images of Mosuo as honest, friendly and kindhearted, vil­ lagers are not allowed to quarrel in public or charge inflated prices to tourists. The adoption of Mosuo identity by non-Mosuo members of the community has created new pride in Mosuo culture. Tourism income has also stimulated the interest of young people in their cultural traditions, while the admiration of visitors for their culture has reinforced their sense of identity and their pride in being Mosuo. They did not passively accept challenges sparked by tourism development, but they have been actively adapting to market needs and presenting various aspects of Mosuo culture such as history, legends, folk customs and love stories to tourists. They carefully manage the boundaries between the front stage and back stage of Mosuo life. Their attempt to maintain the ambience of authenticity is more discernible in household visits and cultural shows, which are echoed by many tourists, as dis­ cussed in the following section.

Who Are Ethnic Tourists?

69

Tourists and Hosts Encounters

Yang (2012) examined tourists’ perceptions of ethnic tourism and satisfaction with their experiences based upon empirical research in Lugu Lake. Her findings revealed that the quest for romance and exoticism has inspired mass Han Chinese visits to the lake area. Tourists come to the area year-round and, especially during long public holidays, thousands of visitors come in busloads. Tour groups consti­ tute the majority of visitors who usually stay a night at a local guesthouse. Visit­ ing ethnic villages is a part of tour programs arranged by travel agencies. Tourist villages provide a variety of standardized tourism experiences, including boating, horseback riding, household visits and bonfire parties (song/dance shows). Tourists can pay extra money to sample local food and rent minority clothes or boats. Tour guides also take tourists to souvenir stores to purchase jewelry, handicrafts and local herbals. Most of these stores are run by Han people and sell mass-produced products that are unrelated to the Mosuo. A few tour guides are local minorities, while others are Han people from out­ side the region. The guides earn commissions if tourists attend bonfire parties and household visits or buy souvenirs. Independent tourists from Yunnan or nearby Sichuan Province tend to stay for a few days or longer than tour groups. These tourists either search for “authentic” encounters with Mosuo people or just wish to relax surrounded by the simple pas­ toral life. They usually walk along the lake to enjoy the beautiful view or wander around the village to see the everyday lives of the Mosuo. Many talked about the liberation from urban life that they found in the simple and loving minority vil­ lage, or the freedom from sexual constraints. A few urbanites stayed for a month or longer because the area provides them with peace and a more simple way of life to reflect on life or love. The tranquility of the lake and its beautiful scenery impresses these urbanites and satisfies their nostalgia for the untouched, the simple and the natural. They are eager to escape life stresses and seek an idealized simple life in a pleasant, natural setting. Away from and in contrast to modern lifestyles, Mosuo villages become a simple and carefree “paradise” in which modern souls can rest and recuperate. In addition to enjoying nature, an encounter with Mosuo people ranked at the top of primary travel motivations. Romantic yearnings have inspired mass Han Chinese visits to the lake area. The tourist gaze is focused upon ethnic culture. Curious about zouhun, many tourists are keen to peep into its practice, and if possi­ ble, wish to try it. Conversation in tourist settings most frequently revolves around the themes of zouhun and Mosuo customs. Sexual titillation is popular in the pri­ mary activities prepared for tourists (Walsh, 2005). Many male tourists joke about the necessity of trying zouhun in order to experience authentic Mosuo culture. In fact, many travel in the hope of dating a Mosuo maiden. Although sexual encoun­ ters started with male visitors, a growing number of Han women have also sought adventure and affection in the arms of Mosuo men since 2000. These women

70

Who Are Ethnic Tourists?

(either married or unmarried) tend to hire local men as their “guides” on the trips, and some even buy expensive gifts for their lovers. They have claimed that they found free love with local men who are gentle, caring and manly, and they enjoyed a temporary break from the usual restrictions and pressures they face at home. However, most sexual encounters are short-term relationships or merely one-night stands, though a few of those relationships have turned into marriages. In negotiating tourists’ desires, locals present different portraits of Mosuo culture to outsiders. Business names of local shops, restaurants and guesthouses usually use the term “girls”, “daughters”, “princesses” or “beauty” attached with images of young Mosuo women to allure customers. The villagers who frequently engage with visitors are usually tour guides and team members of organized tourist activities. Acting as a buffer for other members of the community as well as culture brokers, these people are used to gauging the interests of visitors and know how to sell fantasies to curious metropolitan tourists. They often depict the Mosuo as a matriarchal society of women supporting and caring for one another with women in control. Lugu Lake is portrayed as the last paradise in the human world and lovely Mosuo women who inhabit this paradise are waiting for their lovers with tender affection. At bonfire parties, what is said to tourists is carefully polished, standardized and rehearsed, to be sensational and seductive (Wei et al., 2018). When entertaining tourists at bonfire parties, they sing love songs, tell dating jokes and encourage visitors to dance with pretty Mosuo women or take photos with handsome Mosuo cowboys. The overt reference to zouhun in tourism promotion falsifies a myth of easy sexual availability to accommodate tourists’ search for radical alterity (Wei et al., 2018). As tourists repeatedly question villagers on local sexual customs, they try to explain to tourists that the sexual relationships are sta­ ble between a female and a male, albeit not contractual in Mosuo communities, but tourists are in most cases not receptive to their clarification. Then locals retreat from directly challenging and debating with tourists to telling jokes about zouhun and troubles with multiple partners. Some even offer to help tourists to date Mosuo women if they buy their products or stay in their guesthouse. When tourists indeed propose a sexual encounter with local women, however, they are swiftly turned down. Both entertaining stories and tendentious jokes are used by locals as tactics of covert resistance to the outsiders as well as a legitimate response to the subtle tensions and conflicts inherent in tourist encounters. Tourists’ Perceptions of Authenticity

Yang (2012) found that tourists were generally satisfied with Lugu Lake as an exotic, rustic and stunning destination, which offers natural beauty, a pastoral lifestyle and unique customs. The most positive experiences for tourists centered on aspects of exoticism, uniqueness and naturalness. They enjoyed village tours, staged shows and engage in sexual banter at bonfire parties, while a small num­ ber of authenticity-seekers searched for more meaningful experiences and closer

Who Are Ethnic Tourists?

71

encounters with Mosuo people. Many tourists perceived a strong sense of authen­ ticity and described their experience as “authentic”, “exotic”, “unforgettable” or “wonderful” and regarded “ethnic costumes”, “dances and songs”, “food”, “tradi­ tional houses” and “the involvement of the audience in evening shows” as the main authentic aspects of Mosuo culture. The judgments about authenticity were most frequently made with reference to cultural products such as cultural shows, ethnic clothing, local timber houses, food and the presence of Mosuo people. “Local fla­ vor” and “traditional characteristics” were perceived as the most important attrib­ utes associated with authenticity. Authenticity appeared to emerge genuinely in staged cultural performances for ethnic tourists when they were involved in bonfire parties and had closer contact with Mosuo people. Beyond the enjoyment of the shows, many found the village settings to be authentic since most houses in the village were made of traditional wooden mate­ rials with Mosuo features. They thought that, compared with many attractions in China, Lugu Lake was a very undeveloped, natural place with a unique eth­ nic minority and the local villages were, thus, still relatively authentic. Villagers seemed to be genuinely hospitable and sincere during their interactions with visi­ tors. Many were keen to explain Mosuo traditions and some invited tourists to visit their homes. Although the services and facilities in local guesthouses were not as good as those of city hotels, staying in ethnic guesthouses gave them a sense of authenticity as they could chat with minority people and eat homemade local food. Some thought that the trip was educational and they learned a lot about minority culture. These tourists generally left satisfied, believing they had found a matriar­ chal society with “free love”. Overall, the majority of tourists liked their experiences in Lugu Lake, intended to revisit the site in the future, and would recommend the site to others. How­ ever, most visitors had limited time and interpretation was rudimentary so that their exposure to the visited culture was superficial. Furthermore, preexisting knowledge of local culture was rare and visitors were unsure of the attributes of authentic culture. They were often exposed primarily to staged representations of ethnic culture. Authenticity was not a major concern for the majority of tourists as they were mainly in search of enjoyment or relaxation on their visits and few sought or expected a detailed understanding of local cul­ ture. Their perception of authenticity was positively correlated to spending as the prospect of encountering exotic otherness motivated them to purchase services and experiences. Rather than authenticity, many tourists were concerned about other areas such as environmental issues, cultural change, service quality, souvenirs and cost. They felt that local villages were losing their authentic ethnic flavor and were becoming business-oriented. Such unsatisfied tourists often strike out for more remote lake villages that have not yet been “spoiled” and are not “fake”. Such visitors are interested in self-discovery experiences and prefer to observe the back stage of a real village, rather than simply accepting and enjoying the staged shows at bonfire parties.

72

Who Are Ethnic Tourists?

Complexities of Tourism Development

Yang (2013) found that tourism development has created complicated outcomes for Mosuo communities. It not only provides income, fuels local economic devel­ opment and increases awareness and knowledge of ethnic culture but also brings about various changes to host communities and presents increasing challenges to local people. As Mosuo people are actively engaged in tourism, the local life has shifted from a slow and laid-back pastoral life to a busy one driven by the market. The once-isolated and impoverished villages have undergone tremendous changes in living conditions, culture and lifestyles. Politically, tourism has helped increase Mosuo’s visibility in Han-dominated Chinese society. There has been an increase in public interest in learning about Mosuo culture, history, language and customs. Culturally, tourism has resulted in creative responses by the Mosuo and people involved with tourism have played an active role in the maintenance, dissemina­ tion, revival and development of minority culture. Though the playing up of ethnic traditions is a positive trend in that it has led to a resurgence of ethnic pride, it has exacerbated cultural change and ethnic tensions in the community. As the Mosuo have gained great economic returns from tourism, their way of life has evolved from traditional matrilineal families to assimilation into modern marital life. The increase of wealth in households has resulted in complications in family relation­ ships and the splitting of matrilineal families. Locals evinced an ambivalent attitude toward tourism, which they perceive as both a challenge to cultural identity and a promising source of prosperity. The unique traditions have made the Mosuo famous worldwide and turned their culture into the most valuable asset for local economic development. However, the inva­ sion of ethnic villages by Han Chinese visitors is also seen as a “cultural pollu­ tion” threat. Tourism is accused of being a major corrupting influence on minority culture, monetizing social relations, weakening communal ties and relaxing moral standards. Older villagers are more protective of Mosuo culture and more fearful of its dilution than the younger generation who show greater optimism. Although some make efforts to tell tourists that they adhere to specific moral codes and do not embrace promiscuity, younger villagers are increasingly keen to seek material well-being and use the possibility of “free love” to allure tourists. Mosuo people are facing a paradoxical situation. On the one hand, tourism has opened up the lake area to the outside world and increased its dependence on a global market. On the other hand, tourism acts as a social force under the transforming power of ethnic identities that are increasingly subject to renegotiation, reconstruction and contestation. The authenticity of cultural identity is often compromised in tour­ ism representations. For Mosuo, the touristic emphasis on culture has provoked a concern about their identity – “Who is real Mosuo?”. They are concerned about the erosion of traditional culture, although attitudes to tourism are shaped by age and opinions regarding personal gains and losses. They get caught in a dilemma of ambiguous subjectivities, straddling fluid boundaries between performance and reality, timelessness and dynamic change (Wei et al., 2018).

Who Are Ethnic Tourists?

73

Neither culture nor identity is static. Rather they are negotiated and recreated. Tourism is a force that both freezes cultures and promotes change. Active involve­ ment in tourism and commercialization of Mosuo cultural traditions have resulted in the consolidation of a collective Mosuo identity for economic, social and cul­ tural purposes. Ethnic identities are shaped by government mandates, tourists’ interests and minority economic necessities. State policies directly affect minority expressions of their cultural identity. Tourists’ interests and media attention create the public image of minority people and their culture. Minorities daily engage with selling their culture and negotiate fantasies and nostalgia that bring tourists and income to their community. They have to discuss and present Mosuo identity, as made by both insiders and outsiders, to please tourists and they worry about losing it and, along with it, their income. They are not merely passive tourees existing to serve tourists’ interests, but actively express their identity and recreate costumes, dances and religions to satisfy tourists’ desires for authenticity. Authenticity, albeit romanticized in tourism set­ tings, is still associated with the negative implication of backwardness and under­ development. For Mosuo, authenticity is a delicate equilibrium between modernity and traditions. They are not comfortable with tourists’ association of ethnicity with primitiveness, loose moral norms and the absence of modern lifestyles. Their identity is not antithetical to development, but needs to be defined and referenced in relation to social progress and economic well-being. Cultural authenticity and identity thus should be perceived as lived realities embedded in local development and social changes, instead of a frozen state presented in cultural zoos or, at the other extreme, hyperrealities imbued with exaggerated excesses. Discussions and Conclusions

Ethnic tourism allows Chinese urbanites to seek temporary reprieve from large crowded cities. Seeking the sublime and exotic minority life becomes a trend com­ mon among middle- to high-class consumers. Peripheral regions such as Yunnan have been imagined as a mysterious frontier and ethnic groups are portrayed as “primitive” and living a “pre-modern” and “backward” life. The Lugu Lake area pre­ sents an exotic world of minority people to satisfy metropolitan tourists’ yearnings for adventure, romance and exoticism. Ethnic villages allow tourists to see, experi­ ence and taste a form of minority culture and reinforce their prior imagined concepts about minorities. Tourists flood ethnic villages and seek exotic encounters. Many Han Chinese are drawn to the lakeshore villages by the misconception of a freeloving society, where Mosuo women will sleep with whoever attracts their interests. The desire for authenticity is a driving force in ethnic tourism. Authenticity, even in a staged or constructed context, is highly pursued by tourists who seek different experiences. Tourists’ views of authenticity in ethnic culture relate to both local settings (situational authenticity) and to tourists’ fulfilling personal needs (behav­ ioral authenticity). An authentic experience may be gained despite compromise

74

Who Are Ethnic Tourists?

of cultural values or modifications to cultural products and activities presented to tourists. What is authentic and what is real are blurred in the tourist shows. In the case of Lugu Lake, a packaged version of traditions was appreciated by many visi­ tors and staged cultural performance was embraced as one of the most authentic dimensions of tourist experiences. Some tourists were seeking deeper experiences and close engagements with purveyors of culture, whereas others were satisfied with more superficial experiences. They experienced spontaneity and authentic­ ity through their brief glimpses of the visited culture and their few moments of participation in a cultural performance. Both authenticity and inauthenticity are simultaneously enjoyed and celebrated. Authenticity is not a fixed attribute but is negotiated between the insiders (minority people) and the outsiders (tourists) with the involvement of intermediaries such as the media and tour guides (Yang, 2019a, 2019b). There is considerable variation among visitors in their evaluation of exactly what constitutes authenticity. The perception of authenticity is thus a dynamic, fluid and creative process. The Mosuo community and its heritage are recognized by both residents and visitors as a fascination for outsiders, but much of cultural presentation in tourism settings is stage managed and shaped by preconceptions of what audiences want to see, linked to commercial objectives. The key destination attributes affecting tour quality that are likely to be attractive to Chinese tourists include beautiful scenery, rich cultural resources, performance of spectacles and good accommodation. Perceptions of these key attributes will greatly influence the decision regarding whether or not to visit. It appears that overall satis­ faction is severely compromised by inadequate tourism facilities, false advertising, poor service quality and misrepresentation. The satisfaction of tourists can, thus, be enhanced by an improved quality of service, authentic cultural display, provision of diverse tourist activities and the availability of native products. Effective man­ agement to protect valuable, yet vulnerable, ethnic heritage resources while ensur­ ing the socio-economic opportunities which can accompany tourism development emerges as essential. A better understanding of the diverse preferences of visitors should be useful to host communities and to those marketing and managing ethnic culture. The authentic and accurate representation of ethnic culture and preservation of minority identity should be strengthened if long-term sustainable development of tourism is to occur and the evolving nature of ethnic identity is to be recognized. 2.3 Case Study: Ethnic Tourism in Yiren Town, Chuxiong Prefecture, China Yiren Town

Yiren Town (literally, “Old Town of Yi People”) is located in Chuxiong Yi Autono­ mous Prefecture in the north-central part of Yunnan Province, Southwest China. Chuxiong Prefecture is an underdeveloped area with nine impoverished counties,

Who Are Ethnic Tourists?

75

where minority people live. More than 90% of the territory is comprised of hills and mountains. In 2016, 2.73 million people lived in the region, of whom 0.95 million were ethnic minorities who comprised one-third of the prefecture’s total popula­ tion (Yang, 2019a). Eight ethnic groups had a population of over 10,000, including Yi (762,446), Lisu (58,119), Miao (47,612), Dai (23,560), Hui (21,603) and Bai (17,900) (Yang, 2019a). Yi, with 13 subgroups, is the largest minority group in the region. Yi people are largely scattered throughout the mountain areas, some at high altitudes with frigid winter temperatures, and a small number live in the valleys or on flat land. They have held on to their unique traditional customs, notably their torch festival and Tiaojiao folk dance. Chuxiong Prefecture is a center of rural Yi culture, featuring small towns and villages that rely mostly on agriculture as the main source of income. It began to embrace tourism in the late 1990s as a vehicle for local economic development. In addition to the attractive natural setting and unique vernacular architecture, Chux­ iong has been capitalizing on its Yi cultural heritage. Local festivals, folk customs and traditional ways of life of Yi people have been widely promoted as tourist attractions. Yiren Town, famed for its traditional Yi architecture, its serene canals and exquisite garden scenery, is located in Chuxiong City, the capital of Chuxiong Prefecture, which is 127 km west of Kunming City, the provincial capital. Built on the site of vanished ancient Dejiang City, Yiren Town has an area of 710,000 km2 with 150,000 people in 3,500 households (Yang, 2019b). Featuring “authentic replicas”, which is an oxymoron that elides some of the tensions and challenges, the town showcases Yi culture through cultural perfor­ mances, exhibitions of Yi arts, crafts and costumes, and traditional courtyard architecture. The town is a combination of the old and new, tradition and moder­ nity. Commercial streets, entertainment complexes and accommodation facilities occupy the center of the town, forming culturally distinctive and visually stimulat­ ing places for tourists. Over 30% of the buildings in the town are tourist-oriented shops, restaurants, bars, star-rated hotels and numerous small motels. Visitors can gain a brief exposure to aspects of the rich Yi cultural heritage in a day. A small cultural theme park, Yiren Tribe, was built near the entrance to the town to provide easy exposure to the daily life of Yi people and their folk customs. Visitors can observe recreated ancient Yi culture, taste homemade wine and partake in a Yi feast while watching cultural shows in the park. The attraction draws mainly mid­ dle- and upper-class Chinese tourists, and the annual number of visitors grew from 1.3 million to 7.2 million between 2007 and 2016 (Yang, 2019b). It was ranked as a 4A national tourist attraction and one of the ten most beautiful cultural theme parks in China by the China National Tourism Administration (CNTA) in 2009. Tourism Real Estate Development in the Town

Yang (2019b) explored the role of tourism real estate and its socio-economic conse­ quences in Yiren town. The findings revealed that the town was proposed and built

76

Who Are Ethnic Tourists?

after 2000 under the policies of Chuxiong Prefecture Government to create a “Grand Yi cultural showcase” and to promote cultural tourism. The ultimate goal is to trans­ form Chuxiong from a place that travelers pass through on their itinerary into a diver­ sified tourist destination with leisure activities and cultural tourism holiday-making. Construction was divided into eight phases in 2004–2012, with the business district being built in phases 1–4 (2004–2008) and the residential area was created in phases 5–8 (2009–2012). The business district was opened to the public during the Yi Torch Festival in 2006. The total investment to create the town, including government and private funds, was 320 million RMB (47 million USD) (Yang, 2019a). Many semi­ detached villas and luxury accommodations have been built in the residential area to attract holidaymakers and retirees. Tourism real estate development has deeply influ­ enced the local atmosphere and significantly changed the physical appearance of a formerly rural environment. Large areas of farmland have been converted into new commercial uses, and subsequently tourism has become the most important source of income for the community. The rural landscape surrounding the town is now gone, replaced by prosperous entertainment spaces for tourists. Construction of new houses and other buildings is widespread to meet the special needs of different businesses. Gated villas house the pleasure seekers from economically developed urban areas and a few star-rated hotels have been constructed as striking landmarks for upperclass tourists. Large-scale construction is still underway in the town’s periphery to exploit the surrounding rural lands. As in some other tourist towns in China, local residents are deprived of the opportunity to access their previous land and homes through strict security and surveillance measures (Xu et al., 2012). Tourism real estate construction is considered by the government as an effective tool to attract outside investment and tourists, promote regional development and achieve urbanization. Investments in real estate have transformed a small town through the construction of new urban areas, which attract new businesses and diversify the economy. The spending of visitors and owners of leisure properties stimulates the local economy. However, only a limited number of often seasonal low-income jobs have been created, many of which are taken by migrants. There is a price to be paid for the economic benefits, including high prices for the rental or purchase of houses and shops, and environmental drawbacks due to the overcrowd­ ing of the destination during the tourist season, social friction between “outsiders” and residents, and visual pollution. In the low season, such resort areas resemble ghost towns. The seasonality of the tourist trade, low tourist traffic, inflation and poor compensation all offset the benefits of new development opportunities. The market prices of local properties today have risen far beyond the affordability of lower- to middle-class residents. Tourist Activities and Motivations

Yang (2019a) examined ethnic tourist experiences in Yiren Town and found that visitors were mainly Han Chinese tourists who were relatively young adults,

Who Are Ethnic Tourists?

77

educated and mainly from the economically developed areas of China. The clien­ tele included both large tour groups and independent tourists. International tourists were currently rare and repeat visitors were few. They visited the town mainly during weekends and public holidays. The peak tourist season was in the summer, especially during ethnic festivals. Thousands of tourists inundated the town during the Yi Torch Festival in July. The majority of tourists stayed in the town only for a few hours and then either went back to Kunming City or on to Dali or Lijiang at the end of the day. Only a few tour groups arrived in the late afternoon and stayed at the star-rated hotels for a night. Visitors usually wandered around the town, visited Yiren Tribe, observed ethnic houses and arts and crafts, attended cultural shows or shopped for local goods and souvenirs. Exotic minority culture was represented by courtyard-style white buildings, fire rituals, folk dances, clothing, handicrafts, food and festivals that attracted tour­ ists to come to the site. In addition to seeing Yi culture, relaxation and recreation ranked at the top of the primary purposes for visiting. Many tourists wished to relax and have a pleasurable experience, while some searched for an “authentic” encounter with Yi people. The town provided visitors with an exotic picture of China’s southwest ethnic region featuring a peaceful, relaxing and joyful atmos­ phere. The traditional Yi architecture, beautiful garden scenery, serene canals and “happy” minority people, who always dance and sing, impressed many urbanites and satisfied their nostalgia for the exotic, the simple and the natural. A variety of entertainment programs, such as a Yi feast, costume shows and a bonfire party, also addressed tourists’ desires for fun and enjoyment. The tourist gaze was focused upon Yi cultural heritage as displayed in the town. Many tourists showed strong interest in Yi culture and wanted to learn about their folk customs and traditions. Tourists’ Perceptions of Authenticity

Yang (2019a) reported that perceptions of authenticity were strong among the tour­ ists. The majority of those who were surveyed perceived their experiences to be authentic and believed that the town authentically represented the life and culture of Yi people. In general, they had a positive impression of the town, particularly regarding their experiences and the town appearance/structural design. Cultural experiences, especially fire rituals, were perceived to be the most authentic element by visitors. The fire ritual, which was based on an ancient religious ceremony, was performed by an aboriginal Yi priest. At the end of the ceremony, the entire audi­ ence was invited to join a bonfire party and sing and dance with Yi dancers. Many tourists thought the fire rituals were sacred and authentic. Yi feast and dance shows were also popular attractions enjoyed by most visitors. In addition to sampling traditional Yi food during the feast, the audience was also invited to join in a song or dance, or simply to pose for photographs with the performers. These tourists were encouraged to encounter Yi people as individuals and to acquire a feeling of authenticity. Many tourists described the nature of their experiences as “authentic”

78

Who Are Ethnic Tourists?

or “close to authentic”, and regarded “Yi people”, “fire rituals”, “cultural shows”, “traditional courtyard houses” and “ethnic costumes and handcrafts” as the main authentic aspects of the town. The physical appearance of the site was vital to the evaluation of authentic­ ity. The presence and involvement of minority people and religious practitioners at the site had a positive effect on tourists’ authentic experiences. The spiritual atmosphere of fire rituals was considered to be an essential element of authentic­ ity by many visitors. Interactions with locals were also found to increase tourists’ perceived authenticity. While the experiences of Yi culture and a relaxed and calm atmosphere during visits were found to affect perceived authenticity positively, commodification and constructed modern elements had negative effects. A consid­ erable proportion of visitors perceived inauthenticity and thought that the town was merely a commercial replica construction and a superficial exhibition of Yi culture, which diverged substantially from the actual culture. The presence of large num­ bers of shops, restaurants and other tourist services also reduced the authenticity of cultural experiences. The high density of tourist facilities created the image of a purpose-built tourism attraction, diminishing perceived authenticity significantly. Serious cultural tourists demanded authenticity rather than familiarity and, therefore, might have been expected to react negatively to contrived elements in their experiences of cultural attractions, whereas sightseers and recreational tour­ ists did not necessarily require uncontrived authenticity for satisfactory experi­ ences. These recreational tourists were less concerned with objective authenticity than with enjoying themselves. They knew that Yiren was a simulation, but they did not mind it and enjoyed quality leisure time there. They expressed nostalgia or romanticism for an idealized way of life in a small town ethnic attraction, find­ ing personal rewards in the contrasts with modernity. As in other types of attrac­ tions, cultural authenticity was not generally a concern for those tourists who were aware that the settings were staged and who were mainly in search of enjoyment and relaxation on their visits. These tourists shared a pragmatic understanding of authenticity, being aware of the constructed aspects of cultural reproduction. They experienced spontaneity and authenticity in their brief glimpses of superficial exhibits and spectacular shows. Tourists’ Satisfaction

Yang (2019a) found that her survey respondents perceived high levels of satisfac­ tion with their visits. Patrons’ overall experiences were perceived to be “unique”, “fantasy”, “exotic”, “adventurous” and “fun”. Cultural display was the most favored attribute of the town, while recreational activities were the second most popular tourist experience. Most tourists were satisfied with the reproduced set­ tings and staged shows, and enjoyed their experiences and the town’s offerings. Many commented that the site provided excellent entertainment/recreational opportunities and described their trips as being very pleasant and worthwhile. They

Who Are Ethnic Tourists?

79

thought that the trip helped them to get away from the stresses and strains of work, allowed them to get close to their families or friends, and they gained freedom on the trip for they felt free to do things they could not do at home. Thus, visits were rewarding in many ways so that visitors felt much better about their circumstances and themselves after the trip. Some managed to do exciting things and experienced a lot of thrills. On the other hand, a small number of tourists were disappointed with the super­ ficial portrayals, insufficient interpretation, low quality and inauthentic ethnic sou­ venirs, and brief encounters with minority people. Overcommercialization, a high concentration of tourist facilities, and the artificial and modern surroundings were the major concerns of these visitors. They were concerned that tourism may turn ethnic towns into “Disneylands” where locals are outnumbered by Han Chinese. Some complained that the town square was very crowded in the evenings and felt a bit like a zoo during the tourist events. Others thought that local minorities were losing their exotic image as they saw modern garments and cell phones held by minority people. Many disliked the construction of luxury villas in the town and suggested that authenticity is important and that it is essential to maintain the Yi architectural style and that preservation of cultural differences should be empha­ sized in tourism planning. They expressed a need to reduce commercialization and enhance the educational content of tours. They suggested that more interpretation of the exhibits and more educational programs are desirable for cultural tourists. Discussion and Conclusions

Tourism real estate development has transformed Yiren from a sleepy small town in a remote rural area into a diverse landscape with many new buildings. It is now a popular tourist destination in Yunnan, attracting tens of millions of domestic visi­ tors yearly into its maze of motels, restaurants, bars and shops. Although Yiren is a pastiche, a substitute for real engagement with Yi people, it is clearly a source of great enjoyment and learning, and provides a good day out, which is what the majority of tourists want. There were mixed reactions in visitor experiences, with greater satisfaction with the overall experience than with the quality and authentic­ ity of specific offerings. Although some tourists are dissatisfied with the fabrication of reality, most appear to enjoy their experiences and regard them as authentic. There was general agreement that the visit was fun, enjoyable or relaxing. Rather than authenticity, many tourists were more concerned about other things, such as tourist facilities, service quality and commercialization. Although the authenticity of the culture was important, natural scenery and recreational activities appealed to the tourists the most. The divergent viewpoints from tourists visiting Yiren confirm the difficulties inherent in defining and interpreting authenticity. There is large variation among tourists in their evaluation of exactly what constitutes authenticity. Authenticity is a multifaceted concept involving the relationships among objective, constructive and

80

Who Are Ethnic Tourists?

existential attributes in tourists’ experiences of authenticity (Rickly-Boyd, 2012). Nevertheless, the critical role of authenticity in ethnic tourism necessitates des­ tination developers and managers to preserve local culture, architecture and folk customs to present an authentic portrayal of the host culture. Moreover, “staged authenticity” can be utilized to recreate and reenact cultural traditions as tourists actively seek various manifestations of authenticity (Chhabra et al., 2003). Hence, on the one hand, tourism planners and developers should consider how to create and maintain an overall authentic appearance and atmosphere on the site. A prolif­ eration of “modern intrusions” such as trendy cafes, eateries and bars is a common occurrence in the development of many tourist towns. Given that authenticity relies heavily on the physical attributes of the town, there is a need to avoid massive intrusion of modern elements that detract from the subjective appraisal of authen­ ticity. On the other hand, the subjective judgment of what constitutes an authentic experience is also important, but varies among different tourists visiting the town. Thus, it is vital to provide joyful events and interactive programs in order to create a positive tourist experience and a feeling of existential authenticity. By engaging tourists interactively in culture-related activities, the existential experience can be enhanced. Overall Yiren is a successful imitation of an old town and it is a relaxing leisure destination. Some tourists receive low levels of satisfaction because their desire to encounter real Yi culture in an old town is not met. This is substantially the result of the differences between the preconceived images promised by travel agencies and staged experiences provided by the attraction. These tourists choose Yiren with high cultural expectations before the tour; however, they do not experience authen­ tic Yi culture and this leads to frustration and disappointment. Yiren is marketed as a real home of the Yi hill tribe by the media. Such myths are perpetuated by the tourism industry, keen to lure travelers with promises of the unique, authentic and exotic. However, only a small number of real Yi people live in the town. Thus, tourism curators should pay more attention to the issue of perceived authentic­ ity and develop appropriate operation and marketing plans which present the site accurately while offering authentic experiences. The creation of simulated cultural attractions might be a good compromise separating front and back stages of the dis­ played culture, thereby helping to protect the original culture, but developers need to be cautious in taking such initiatives. It is important to select locations carefully, analyze the tourism market, understand the needs of the clientele and, especially, respect local people and their culture when developing such attractions. 2.4

Case Study: Maori Cultural Tourism in New Zealand

Maori People and Tourism

The term “Maori” is commonly used to refer to the indigenous peoples of New Zealand and originated as a means of cultural identity that derived from their

Who Are Ethnic Tourists?

81

contact with European settlers (Amoamo, 2007). As a result, the terms Maori and Pakeha (non-Maori) arose which refer to the two sets of people (O’Regan, 2001). Maori did not operate as a unified ethnic collective historically and it is a politi­ cal and social construct with its own historicity (Amoamo, 2007). Today, Maori are highly integrated into modern society (Carr, 2004) and represent about 16% of New Zealand’s total population (Amoamo, 2008). There were 565,329 people who identified themselves as Maori and 643,977 who were of Maori descent in the 2006 Census (Amoamo, 2008). Images of Maori became increasingly avail­ able to tourists and colonists during the colonial period of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries through mass media (e.g., photographic prints, postcards, newspapers, brochures and travel guidebooks) (Amoamo, 2007). Maori identity was created under a patronizing and sensual colonial gaze, situated within a naturebound stereotype (Taylor, 1998). Idealized and sentimentalized images of the noble savage, warrior and Maori maidens contributed to a belief in Pakeha supremacy (Edwards, 1989). Today, Maori have the opportunity to re-present their culture based on traditional imagery or through the integration of contemporary elements of their culture as they cater to modern tourist demands (Amoamo, 2007). Maori have had long involvement in tourism as entrepreneurs, guides and per­ formers (Dwyer, 2013; Ryan, 1997, 1999). Maori guides from the Te Arawa tribe were already involved in tourism in the 1870s, initially hosting international visi­ tors at the Pink and White Terraces in Rotorua prior to their destruction by a vol­ canic eruption in 1886, and also in the Whakarewarewa geothermal valley where guiding continues today (McClure, 2004). Maori people also presented dance and song performances when guiding tourists to the terraces. Many of the early tour­ ists were from whaling vessels that plied their trade in Antarctic waters (Barnett, 2001). Maori entrepreneurs provided accommodation for European voyagers in the early 1850s at Manawapou (Belich, 1996). Barnett (1996) identified 152 Maorirun tourism-related businesses ranging from small museums exhibiting taonga (treasured possessions), to carving specialists selling products in souvenir shops, to Maori-owned small tour companies and large ventures like the whale watching operation at Kaikoura in the South Island. Today, Maori people are active in the tourism industry both as objects of the tourists’ gaze and as commodifiers of eth­ nic products (Ryan, 2002). They have been involved in tourism in various ways, such as entertainment, arts and crafts, display of taonga, cultural interpretation and accommodation operations (Barnett, 2001). Maori culture is an important focus for tourism activities in New Zealand and it contributes to the distinctiveness of the country’s tourism profile. According to Statistics New Zealand (2019), there were 234 Maori tourism businesses in 2019 and more than half of these businesses were in the arts and recreational services, accommodation and food services industries. Maori and their images have been widely used as a marketing tool and stereotyped by the tourism industry which presents them as entertainers, carvers and guides (Barnett, 1997). The stereotyped imagery of Maori featuring poi dancers, and the haka and wero, or ritual challenge

82

Who Are Ethnic Tourists?

with their rolling eyes, grimacing face and protruding tongue are widely used in tourism promotion and marketing (Amoamo & Thompson, 2010). Complexities of Tourism Development

In recent years, indigenous tourism has grown into a significant component of the tourism industry in New Zealand (Puriri & McIntosh, 2019). Tourism benefits both Maori and tourists through culture sharing and appreciation (McIntosh, 2004; Zahra & McIntosh, 2007). Gaining an insight into Maori history, traditions and ways of life provides distinctive cultural experience for visitors (Barnett, 2001). A growing demand for different cultural experiences has led to an increase in Maori tourism products. Maori tourism is seen as being an effective means to increase employment, develop cultural revival and pride, and empower Maori (Puriri & McIntosh, 2019). Tourism has contributed to the revitalization of Maori communi­ ties by promoting economic growth and vibrancy through increased employment, thereby enhancing overall well-being (Zapalska & Brozik, 2017). Maori-owned businesses have also encouraged the growth of tourist facilities, services and com­ munal spaces that promote Maori culture and foster recognition and appreciation of traditional indigenous values. Bunten (2010) found that Maori employees enjoyed sharing their culture and personal experiences, and this adds value to cultural tourism products. Zapalska and Brozik (2017) reported that Maori entrepreneur­ ship provides products and services that focus on Maori cultural and traditional experiences, thereby creating employment, preserving culture and conserving the environment. However, at the same time, their indigenous background has also curtailed their entrepreneurial success within the tourism industry. Tourism development has not only brought benefits to Maori communities but also caused adverse effects on Maori people and their culture. Issues of authentic­ ity, commercialization, intellectual property rights and the disregard of Maori con­ cerns by tourism policymakers have been evident (McIntosh et al., 2002). Maori cultural values have been overridden by tourism in the development of Tongariro National Park. Tourism promotions have created cultural stereotypes, which are detrimental to Maori people (McClure, 2004; Zygadlo et al., 2001). Tourism has also changed the artistic output of traditional arts in terms of carving, weaving and performances for tourists (Ryan & Crotts, 1997). McIntosh et al. (2002) identified three major Maori tourism attractions that have created an attraction-based, com­ mercialized version of cultural identity despite good intentions of being representa­ tive and authentic. Representation and recognition of tribal identity and diversity is still an issue in Maori tourism (Amoamo, 2007; Amoamo & Thompson, 2010). Maori tourism is vulnerable to a number of factors that endanger its sustainabil­ ity, such as the availability of skilled labor and entrepreneurial skills, funds for investments and growth, adaptation to dynamic market conditions and increasing competition, and an increase in the infrastructure and forms of business that protect the environment (Zapalska & Brozik, 2017). Although Maori are one of the most

Who Are Ethnic Tourists?

83

entrepreneurial indigenous groups in the world, the growth of their entrepreneurial endeavor has been constrained since British colonization deprived them of equal rights to operate businesses and many of their businesses have been replaced by the Pakeha (non-Maori New Zealanders of European descent) offerings (Frederick & Chittock, 2005; Zapalska & Brozik, 2006, 2017). Cultural distinctiveness enables Maori communities to offer unique, original and genuine tourism products that align with their abilities and competencies; however, they face substantial challenges in the process of tourism development (Barnett, 1997). There remains a struggle for Maori to maintain control over the commodification of their tourism products (Puriri & McIntosh, 2013). They want to be autonomous and run their own businesses (Barnett, 2001). Cultural restrictions make them cautious about what aspects of their culture and natural assets are to be exposed to tourism. On the other hand, economic demands require them to deliver profitable outcomes. A resurgence of Maori culture over the last two decades has also led to demand for Maori control over their tourism development as well as the use of cultural artifacts and images in promotion, for many cultural products have been provided or managed by non-Maori people and these products and services have been altered and commoditized for tourists (Barnett, 1997). Maori people are concerned that commercialization of their culture causes its misinterpretation and oversimplification by non-Maori. Scholarship has been concerned with the cultural values that indigenous people choose to share as cultural tourism experiences (Ransfield & Reichenberger, 2021). For instance, Puriri and McIntosh (2013) acknowledged the need for Maori tour­ ism operators to balance spiritual, cultural, social and environmental considera­ tions within a business strategy. McIntosh et al. (2004) argued that tourism has the potential to offer Maori the opportunity to extend Western management practices by positioning Maori philosophies at the forefront of decision-making. The incor­ poration of Maori cultural values and practices into commercial development has been advocated as being essential for sustainable Maori self-determined develop­ ment (Durie, 2002). Maori-centered tourism should be based upon Maori values that recognize local desires to protect and develop Maori cultural and intellec­ tual property and the need for self-controlled tourism development (Horn, 2008). A Maori-centered approach could strengthen commitment to cultural and environ­ mental sustainability by giving this priority over narrow economic goals (Puriri & McIntosh, 2013). The involvement of Maori in the control and management of tourism is crucial for generating employment and economic benefits but also for safeguarding cultural integrity and control over representation (Dwyer, 2013). The tourism industry in New Zealand is highly dependent on government funding and support (Amoamo & Thompson, 2010). Therefore, governmental policies should continue to support indigenous entrepreneurial initiatives and provide access to education on Maori wisdom, unity, harmony, control, and preservation of the envi­ ronment and natural resources as means of maintaining the Maori way of life and community development (Zapalska & Brozik, 2017).

84

Who Are Ethnic Tourists?

Tourists’ Perceptions of Maori Culture

McIntosh (2004) examined international tourists’ motivations for, perceptions of, and experiences with Maori culture before and after their visit to New Zealand. He found that the majority of visitors had traveled independently, and many stayed in the private home of a friend or relative or backpacked around the country. Tourists’ prior knowledge of Maori culture was low despite the high level of recognition of the Maori as New Zealand’s indigenous people. Their knowledge was largely confined to the history of Maori as New Zealand’s first settlers and the physical appearance of Maori people. Guidebooks (e.g., The Lonely Planet Guide), film and television were the frequently reported sources of their cultural awareness. MacIntosh’s survey results revealed that tourists generally held traditional and stereotypical impressions of Maori people and their culture. They described Maori culture as “traditional”, “exotic” and “different” in their preconceptions of host culture on their arrival. Most tourists did not change their cultural perceptions after their visit. However, fewer respondents in the departure survey perceived Maori culture as “exotic” than those interviewed on arrival. They also were more likely to perceive Maori culture as “everyday” and “familiar” following their visit. They held more contemporary and less stereotypical views of Maori culture from their visit, albeit to a minimal extent. However, for the majority of tourists, stereotypical perceptions of ethnic culture are reinforced by their cultural experiences, poten­ tially due to the nature of tourism products and the contents of tourism marketing. While not a primary draw, most visitors expressed some level of interest in Maori culture and rated cultural experiences as an important part of their visit. The most frequently mentioned activities that respondents intended to experience included Maori dance, concerts or performances, visiting a marae or Maori com­ munity, buying Maori arts and crafts, or sampling Maori food. Similarly, the most intriguing or appealing aspects of Maori culture reported in the departure survey were the Maori way of living, food/hangi, dance performances or concerts, reac­ tions to white settlers, museums/galleries, history, myths and legends, crafts, art and music and so on. These tourists were mainly interested in cultural differences, including both traditional aspects of culture and staged experiences that were enter­ taining, such as Maori history, contemporary lifestyle, dance performances/haka, crafts, art and food. Maori culture appeared to be an integral part of what tourists experienced dur­ ing their visit. The most frequently gained cultural experiences included visits to museums, Maori villages, or the Treaty House, watching a dance performance, a haka or a demonstration of Maori carving, going to a hangi, and social interaction with Maori. Most of these experiences were gained in Rotorua or Waitangi which are notable for Maori historical sites. Tourists received information about their experiences mainly through their tour operators, travel guides or brochures and information centers. However, some perceived there to be a lack of promotion and opportunities for accessing Maori culture in other parts of New Zealand, especially in the South Island.

Who Are Ethnic Tourists?

85

Five central dimensions of Maori culture experiences were preferred by tourists, including gazing, lifestyle, authenticity, personal interaction and informal learning. The majority of tourists sought superficial, easy-to-consume experiences. Visual experiences were preferred by those tourists who desired to “gaze on cultural dif­ ference”. The hangi and concert were reported as being the most interesting activi­ ties because they represented “something different” and often directly involved audience participation in something “traditional”. Besides historic culture, tourists also showed strong interests in learning about the difference between traditional and contemporary Maori lifestyles, and they appreciated exposure to Maori peo­ ple’s everyday life. Many indicated that they preferred to visit a Maori community or village and encounter Maori people in a genuine manner and in a more natural and less commercial setting. Although most tourists were satisfied with their experiences, some reported upon exposure to superficial and contrived cultural exposure. Many expressed a desire for authentic experiences of Maori culture, such as having “incidental con­ tact” with Maori people, rather than an organized, commercial, touristy experi­ ence. It was important for them to know that the arts and crafts that they purchased were Maori made. It was essential to have a Maori perspective or interpretation given by a real Maori person on tours. Although many tourists demanded direct contact with indigenous people, through personal interaction or a hands-on experi­ ence with Maori people, they preferred to have a brief experience rather than to be immersed in the host culture due to limited time or cultural barriers. Tourists reported an increased understanding and appreciation for Maori culture from their visit, although the level of learning was shallow. They acquired new knowledge about Maori culture, such as history, traditional lifestyle, legends, stories and cus­ toms. Tourists often sought and appreciated opportunities to visit indigenous com­ munities to learn about the culture from the indigenous people themselves in a context that is perceived to be authentic, interactive and personally meaningful. Despite tourists reported preferences for “sincere” and informal interaction with indigenous people, their consumption of indigenous culture tended to be organized, brief and superficial. Authenticity in Tourists’ Interactions

Condevaux (2009) explored the way cultural authenticity is defined in tourist inter­ actions in the context of Maori cultural shows in New Zealand. Mario cultural shows that include action songs, haka and poi performances are commonly offered to tourists visiting New Zealand. Action songs include a combination of dance and sung poetry, while haka is a rhythmic chant and posture dance (Werry, 2001). Poi refers to both a dance and an object used in the performance. These shows are often accompanied by narratives that depict the ancient way of life and some aspects of Maori culture. The shows generally promote Maori people as close to nature and as warriors. The romantic picture that Maori people lived in harmony with nature,

86

Who Are Ethnic Tourists?

honoring deities of natural elements such as sea, wind, forest and so on, is high­ lighted. Performers usually appear in traditional dress although they do not wear it in daily life. Male performers often carry weapons such as spears or clubs, which are usually demonstrated between dances or during the ritual challenge before visi­ tors enter a reconstituted village or from the performance stage. Most tourists had little information about Maori culture prior to their trip, except for some Australians and Europeans who had some knowledge of Maori through rugby (e.g., the haka is performed before international games), TV programs and the Internet. They were looking for both authenticity and entertainment. Many tourists had a high degree of satisfaction with the show, particularly during the live interaction with the performers. Visitors were often encouraged to learn a dance during the shows. Some joined the performers on stage and followed their move­ ments, while others remained in the audience and were invited to take photographs with the dancers. Being involved on stage created a relaxed and entertaining atmos­ phere for tourists. Besides using well-known techniques of inviting the audience to participate, a joking tone was adopted to avoid a serious interpretation of cultural reconstitutions and ensure that every participant understood the ludic character of the show. A dramatic modern theatrical effect was created for the shows through the loud sound of conches, multicolored lights, costumes and heartfelt singing or shouting as well as the emphasis on eye rolling and tongue thrusting. The con­ sciousness of taking part in the show and the humorous, joyful atmosphere all contributed to the visitors’ satisfaction. Many visitors described the Maori per­ formers as “friendly” and “welcoming people” and they believed that what they had seen from the staged shows was traditional while, to the contrary, the perform­ ers recalled through narratives that they belonged to the same world as the visitors, something omitted in the advertisements that commonly portray Maori as “people of nature”. Thus, the tourists’ encounter not only provided entertainment to visi­ tors but also enabled them to change or verify the image conveyed by the tourist media. Tourists are sensitive to publicity, which influences their judgment on a performance’s authenticity. Their interaction with the performers allowed them to reconsider the stereotypical images received through advertisements. Maori generally conceived their participation in the evening shows as a kind of “hobby”, and monetary gain was not the main reason for taking the job. They thought that tourist programs do not compromise Maori culture; rather, the ele­ ments displayed are key aspects of their way of being and living. The younger performers appreciated the fact that their culture is “brought to the world” through the culture shows and they were not concerned that they provided a stereotypical image of themselves, because the shows provide access to only part of their cul­ ture. Ideally, this glimpse should encourage tourists to learn more. For Maori, cul­ tural shows are also occasions where their identity is defined and exhibited. They reflect their way of defining themselves as much as tourists’ expectations. There­ fore, tourism shows are a good way of educating foreigners about their culture and the existence of indigenous people. Participation in cultural shows implies more

Who Are Ethnic Tourists?

87

than simply entertaining visitors, and it also enables them to keep in touch with their culture. Here, indigenous people are neither powerless nor misrepresented in cultural shows and interactions. Humor, physical strength, uniqueness and rich­ ness of culture are all adopted by Maori performers to define themselves. As such, authenticity is a social construction experienced as inherently experiential in nature and it lies in the complex interaction process between hosts and guests. The host community is more active in this process than the visitors. Discussions and Conclusions

Tourist studies have revealed that indigenous products, such as those offered in Rotorua, are enjoyed but many aspects of Maori culture are not understood or rec­ ognized by international visitors (Horn, 2008, McIntosh, 2004, Wilson et al., 2006). New Zealand is not seen by most as a cultural destination, and indigenous culture is just a part of the tourism offerings (Wilson, 2007). International tourists are not drawn to New Zealand primarily by Maori tourism products (McIntosh, 2004). Also, most tourists are not as concerned about authenticity as one might expect. Many overseas visitors did not realize that Whale Watch Kaikoura is a Maori prod­ uct since they perceived Maori only through a historical lens (Wilson et al., 2006). Ryan (2002) found that Maori culture was of little interest to most Asian tourists, although the spectacles that were provided were of interest. Visitor experiences are subjective and influenced by personal backgrounds and prior knowledge. Cultural differences may lead to a diversity of attitudes and perspectives among tourists. Although tourism suppliers and host communities show strong interest in devel­ oping cultural attractions, there are challenges to meeting the market demand for authentic Maori products (Horn, 2008). Various issues are derived from the expectations and perceptions of domestic and international tourists, including their understanding of what constitutes a Maori tourism experience. Overseas visitors generally know little about Maori culture and do not recognize forms of Maori experience outside of the traditional concert party (Fitt et al., 2007; McIntosh, 2004). Meanwhile, there is limited domestic interest in Maori cultural attractions (Ryan, 2002; Ryan & Pike, 2003; Wilson et al., 2006). The level of interest in Maori history and culture is generally low, with domestic visitors expressing less interest than international counterparts in such products (Ryan & Pike, 2003; Horn, 2008). Maori cultural products do not appear to be unique to the New Zealand context (Ryan & Huyton, 2002), while the natural environment is a key driver for domestic tourism as the country is commonly depicted as an ideal place for tourists in quest of intimate contact with nature (Wilson et al., 2006; Fitt et al., 2007). Cultural prox­ imity may be part of the reason why domestic travelers are less interested in Maoribased tourism (Ryan, 2002). Another issue is the stereotyping in Maori tourism products which have little appeal to local visitors, resulting in the marginalization of such products for the domestic market (Ryan & Pike, 2003). Touristic repre­ sentations tend to stereotype certain aspects of the host community with images

88

Who Are Ethnic Tourists?

that cater to exotic and primitive depictions of otherness (Amoamo & Thompson, 2010). Stereotypical representations of the Maori past blind tourists to contempo­ rary Maori (Wilson et al., 2006). Maori culture is found to be more popular with foreign-born (usually European) domestic tourists (Wilson et al., 2006), which may relate to spatial proximity (Ryan, 2002). Rotorua is seen as a primary place where tourists learn and experience Maori culture and most international cultural tour­ ism experiences have occurred there (Horn, 2008). Hence, it is difficult for other regional areas, such as the South Island, to develop Maori-related tourism products. Indigenous cultures can add a rich dimension to both domestic and international visitors’ experiences. Engaging in Maori culture in a tourism encounter can deepen the quality of visitor interaction with host communities. Maori culture needs to be strengthened in international marketing efforts by the involvement of Maori people at all levels of the tourism industry, and not simply as icons or attractions (Barnett, 2001). More visitors would be attracted by adding Maori culture to mainstream tourism products (McIntosh, 2004). An understanding of the differences between international and domestic tourists is important for tourism providers as cultural attractions need domestic patronage to survive in the long term, especially in areas away from the main international tourist routes (Horn, 2008). The quality of tour­ ist experiences and, in particular, the sincerity of the interactions and the sense of connection that guests feel with their hosts may be more important than the quantity of cultural elements (Taylor, 2001; McIntosh, 2004; McIntosh & Johnson, 2004). Managers need to consider the balance between creating authentic and sin­ cere cultural interactions and providing joyful and entertaining staged experiences for mainstream tourists. 2.5

Case Study: Diasporas

Increased mobility, both voluntary and forced, has resulted in the movement of large numbers of people across international borders, and their resettlement in new loca­ tions, where they form transnational communities. Thus, for example, many cities have Chinatowns, where people of Chinese ethnicity congregate, stores and restau­ rants cater to Chinese tastes, distinctive services such as medical and banking facili­ ties may be found, ethnic festivals are celebrated, and connections are maintained to overseas origins across the generations. There is a tendency of immigrants of common origins to coalesce in particular locations, particularly in urban areas, where they can seek support from their compatriots while they establish themselves in their new land. In such places, minority people may constitute a majority, or at least a substantial proportion of those living, working or visiting an ethnic neighborhood in which they feel more comfortable. At the same time, the distinctive characteristics of the place may attract visitors who are interested in getting a taste of the ethnic other. Immigrants may retain ties with their former homelands and may travel back to their places of origin to seek their roots, to renew ties with their culture, to con­ duct business and to visit friends and relatives. The connections may persist across generations. Thus, for example, in recent years, it has become fashionable for the

Who Are Ethnic Tourists?

89

descendants of slaves in North America to visit Africa to seek their roots and better understand the lives of their ancestors (Araujo, 2010; Essah, 2001; Yankholmes et al., 2009). Indeed, while being voluntary rather than forced migrants, both of the authors of this book are immigrants who have made their homes in new continents, while retaining ties to people and places in other countries. Thus, there are links between migration and tourism (Zaidan & Wall, 2013) which complicate the mean­ ings of such seemingly simple words as “home”, “away” and “home away from home” and reflect increasing levels of globalization and international migration. Zaidan (2010) explored the relationships between long-term mobility (migration) and short-term mobility (tourism) by investigating the visits made to Palestine by Palestinian residents of Toronto and their families, thereby demonstrating the inter­ relationships between the two contemporary phenomena, as well as the distinctive travel behavior of this minority group. She found that their situation is made more difficult by the complexities of citizenship which complicate international travel. Different categories of migrants have different rights in the country of settlement. In spite of this, ethnic reunion is important in shaping the travel patterns of these immi­ grants and travel to the ancestral homeland has strong social, cultural and political meaning. More than half (51%) of informants had a very strong sense of belonging to Palestine and an additional third (35%) reported a strong sense of belonging. Almost all were either very positive (55%) or positive (39%) about their travels to Palestine. Her study revealed that the majority of the Palestinian Canadians living in Toronto travel overseas regularly and their outbound travel patterns demonstrate a significant ethnic tourism component. Palestinian Canadians travel to their country of birth as their dominant outbound travel destination for the purposes of visiting friends and relatives and maintaining social and cultural ties, indicating strong ties with homeland that have ethnic links. The return visits have social and cultural sig­ nificance to both first and second generations. However, these return visits do not result in return migration. Palestinians holding Canadian citizenship have a higher propensity to travel overseas than permanent residents (those lacking citizenship status in Canada). This fact has implications for travel as revealed in the movements that occur between the places of origin and residence. Zaidan argued that there has been an absence of research that explores the relationships between the travel pat­ terns of immigrants, many of whom are minority people in their new homeland, and their citizenship status. It is clear that diasporas, that is, the relocation of large numbers of people from their country of origin and their settlement in new places, have significant implications for tourism in both their origin and destinations. Summary

Ethnic tourism provides myriad opportunities for contemporary tourists to experi­ ence and consume diverse landscapes and cultures. Although reports on the demand for ethnic tourism as well as potential development strategies are widespread, only limited attention has been given to visitors’ perspectives on such tourism. In the few empirical studies, considerable efforts have been made to classify groups of

90

Who Are Ethnic Tourists?

tourists with similar travel preferences or behaviors, striving to better understand each segment of the tourism market. Complex relations between tourist motivation, expectation, satisfaction, experience and future destination choice have been inves­ tigated. To date, research on the ethnic tourism market has primarily focused on the development and planning of such tourism, visitor profiles and behavior patterns (McIntosh, 2004; Notzke, 2004; Ryan & Huyton, 2002). Much research on tourists’ experiences in ethnic tourism have focused on the perspectives held by members of Western societies (Chang et al., 2008), while less has been written about domestic tourists who are the main component of the ethnic tourism market in many devel­ oping countries (Li, 2004), although a few such studies have been undertaken in China and elsewhere (Xie & Wall, 2002; Wei et al., 2018; Yang, 2011, 2012, 2019a; Sang, 2020). At the same time, it should not be forgotten that ethnic people often retain their ties with their place of origin and return to visit friends and relatives and renew their cultural ties. In addition, many studies have focused largely on the views of mainstream tour­ ists visiting popular ethnic attractions or sites and, as such, they offer little insight into the level of interest and satisfaction expressed in other wider or more special­ ized markets. For instance, few studies have explored ethnic tourists’ satisfaction in trips to places in different neighboring regions and countries with the same or differ­ ent ethnic identities (Maleki & Gholamian, 2020). The literatures tend to perpetuate the assumption of ethnic people as suppliers and objects of tourism experiences, while there is a dearth of research exploring tourist practices of minority people (Wei et al., 2021). The existing studies have provided only a partial and piecemeal understanding of demand and have not investigated fully whether or not tourist experiences, perceptions or satisfactions are similar across diverse ethnic cultures and destinations (Yang, 2012). Tourists’ perspectives on ethnic tourism are impor­ tant for identifying consumer demand for product and service development and for assessing tourism practices that are beneficial to both host and tourist. Thus, there is a need for a better understanding of the nature of this market and what specific products ethnic tourists are interested in, and what style, format or nature of deliv­ ery is preferred. An increased understanding of the diverse preferences of visitors should be useful to governments, developers, operators and marketing executives when developing staged experiences for different market segments. More longitu­ dinal studies are needed to research and compare travelers who explore ethnicity in small rural minority communities as well as in ethnic enclaves in large urban neigh­ borhoods. Such information will have important consequences for ethnic product development and the economic viability of local tourism enterprises. References Akhoondnejad, A. (2016). Tourist loyalty to a local cultural event: The case of Turkmen handicrafts festival. Tourism Management, 52, 468–477. Amoamo, M. (2007). Maori tourism: Image and identity – a postcolonial perspective. Annals of Leisure Research, 10(3–4), 454–474.

Who Are Ethnic Tourists?

91

Amoamo, M. (2008). Decolonising Maori Tourism: Representation and Identity. Unpub­ lished PhD Thesis, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand. Amoamo, M., & Thompson, A. (2010). (Re)Imaging Maori tourism: Representation and cultural hybridity in postcolonial New Zealand. Tourist Studies, 10(1), 35–55. Araujo, A.L. (2010). Welcome the diaspora: Slave trade heritage tourism and the public memory of slavery. Ethnologies, 4(4), 145–178. Asplet, M., & Cooper, M. (2000). Cultural designs in New Zealand souvenir clothing: The question of authenticity. Tourism Management, 21, 307–312. Barnett, S.J. (1996). Authenticity and Commoditisation of Culture: A Tourism Perspective. 26.499 Research Report. Department of Management Systems, Massey University. Barnett, S.J. (1997). Maori tourism. Tourism Management, 18(7), 471–473. Barnett, S.J. (2001). Manaakitanga: Maori hospitality – a case study of Maori accommoda­ tion providers. Tourism Management, 22, 83–92. Batra, A. (2008). Foreign tourists’ motivation and information source(s) influencing their preference for eating out at ethnic restaurants in Bangkok. International Journal of Hos­ pitality & Tourism Administration, 9(1), 1–17. Belich, J. (1996). Making Peoples: A History of New Zealand. Auckland: Penguin Books. Bunten, A.C. (2010). More like ourselves: Indigenous capitalism through tourism. The American Indian Quarterly, 34(3), 285–311. Butler, R., & Hinch, T. (2007). Tourism and Indigenous Peoples. London: Routledge. Carr, A.M. (2004). Interpreting Culture: Visitors’Experiences of Cultural Landscape in New Zealand. Unpublished PhD Thesis, Otago University, Dunedin, NZ. Chang, J. (2006). Segmenting tourists to aboriginal cultural festivals: An example in the Rukai tribal area, Taiwan. Tourism Management, 27(6), 1224–1234. Chang, J., Wall, G., & Chang, C.L. (2008). Perception of the authenticity of Atayal woven handicrafts in Wulai, Taiwan. Journal of Hospitality Marketing & Management, 16(4), 385–409. Chang, J., Wall, G., & Chu, S. (2006). Novelty seeking at aboriginal attractions. Journal of Tourism Research, 33(3), 729–747. Chhabra, D. (2005). Defining authenticity and its determinants: Toward an authenticity flow model. Journal of Travel Research, 44(1), 64–73. Chhabra, D., Healy, R., & Sills, E. (2003). Staged authenticity and heritage tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 30(3), 702–719. Condevaux, A. (2009). Maori culture on stage: Authenticity and identity in tourist interac­ tions. Anthropological Forum, 19(2), 143–161. Daniel, Y.P. (1996). Tourism dance performances: Authenticity and creativity. Annals of Tourism Research, 23(4), 780–797. Dann, G. (1996). Images of destination people in travelogues. In Butler, R., & Hinch, T. (Eds.). Tourism and Indigenous Peoples (pp. 349–375). London: Routledge. Dearden, P., & Harron, S. (1994). Alternative tourism and adaptive change. Annals of Tour­ ism Research, 21(1), 51–142. Dong, R., Yu, L., & Liu, G. (2008). Impact of tourism development on land-cover change in a matriarchal community in the Lugu Lake area. International Journal of Sustainable Development & World Ecology, 15(1), 28–35. Durie, M.H. (2002). The Business Ethic and Maori Development. Maunga Tu Maunga Ora: Economic Summit 2002, 21 March 2002. School of Maori Studies, Massey University Auckland, New Zealand. Dwyer, T. (2013). Interpretation in Maori cultural tourism in New Zealand: Exploring the perspectives of indigenous and non-indigenous guides. Pacific Geographies, 39, 22–26.

92

Who Are Ethnic Tourists?

Edwards, S. (1989). Cinematic imperialism and Maori cultural identity. Illusions, 10(10), 17–21. Essah, P. (2001). Slavery, heritage and tourism in Ghana. International Journal of Hospital­ ity & Tourism Administration, 2(3–4), 31–49. Fitt, H., Horn, C., & Wilson J. (2007). A Profile of Tourism in the Lake Waikaremoana Region: Independent Visitation in Rural New Zealand. Landcare Research Science Series No. 33 Manaaki Whenua Press. www.mwpress.co.nz/store/viewItem.asp?idProduct=693 (accessed 10 August 2008). Frederick, H., & Chittock, G. (2005). Global Entrepreneurship Monitor Aotearoa New Zea­ land (GEM). Unitec New Zealand’s Centre for Innovation & Entrepreneurship Research Report Series, 4(1). Auckland: Unitec New Zealand. Gholamian, A., Maleki, F., & Rezaii, A. (2020). Are they the ‘other’? The ethno-nationalism experiences of Iranian Kurdish ethnic tourists. Journal of Tourism and Cultural Change, 19(10), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/14766825.2020.1802471 Guo, X. (2008). State and Ethnicity in China’s Southwest. Leiden: Brill Publishing. Harrell, S. (2001). Ways of Being Ethnic in Southwest China. Seattle, WA: University of Washington Press. Henderson, J., Teck, G.K., Ng, D., & Tan, S. (2009). Tourism in ethnic communities: Two Miao Villages in China. International Journal of Heritage Studies, 15(6), 529–539. Horn, C. (2008). Present visitors’ interest in Maori cultural tourism on Banks Peninsula. Paper presented at the New Zealand Tourism and Hospitality Research Conference, December 3–5. Hughes, G. (1995). The cultural construction of sustainable tourism. Tourism Management, 16(1), 49–60. Kutzner, D., Wright, P.A., & Stark, A. (2009). Identifying tourists’ preferences for Aborigi­ nal tourism product features: Implications for a northern First Nation in British Colum­ bia. Journal of Ecotourism, 8(2), 99–114. https://doi.org/10.1080/14724040802695991 Li, J. (2004). Molding Dai-ness on China’s Periphery: Ethnic Tourism and the Politics of Identity Construction in Contemporary Xishuang Banna. PhD Dissertation, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA. https://repository.upenn.edu/dissertations/AAI3138046 Littrell, M.A., Baizerman, S., Kean, R., Gahring, S., Niemeyer, S., Reilly, R., & Stout, J. (1994). Souvenirs and tourism styles. Journal of Travel Research, 33(1), 3–11. Liu, X. (2006). Discovering the Mysterious Oriental Kingdom of the Female. Kunming: Yunnan Nationalities Press. Maleki, F., & Gholamian, A. (2020). Antecedents and consequences of ethnic tourist sat­ isfaction: the moderating role of ethnic identity. Journal of Heritage Tourism, 15(6), 597–611. https://doi.org/10.1080/1743873X.2020.1712408 McClure, M. (2004). The Wonder Country: Making New Zealand Tourism. Auckland: Auck­ land University Press. McIntosh, A.J. (2004). Tourists’ appreciation of Maori culture in New Zealand. Tourism Management, 25(1), 1–15. McIntosh, A.J., Hinch T., & Ingram T. (2002). Cultural identity and tourism. International Journal of Arts Management, 4(2), 39–49. McIntosh, A.J., & Johnson, H. (2004). Exploring the nature of the Maori experience in New Zealand. Tourism, 52(2), 117–129. McIntosh, A.J., & Prentice, R.C. (1999). Affirming authenticity: Consuming cultural herit­ age. Annals of Tourism Research, 26(3), 589–612. McIntosh, A.J., Zygadlo, F.K., & Matunga, H. (2004). Rethinking Maori Tourism. Asia Pacific. Journal of Tourism Research, 9(4), 331–351.

Who Are Ethnic Tourists?

93

McIntosh, R.W., Goeldner, C.R., & Ritchie, J.R. (1990). Tourism Principles, Practices, Philosophies. New York: John Wiley. McKercher, B., & du Cros, H. (2002). Cultural Tourism: The Partnership between Tourism and Cultural Heritage Management. New York: The Haworth Hospitality Press. Moscardo, G. (1996). Mindful visitors. Heritage and tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 23, 376–397. Moscardo, G., & Pearce, P. (1999). Understanding ethnic tourists. Annals of Tourism Research, 26(2), 416–434. Notzke, C. (1999). Indigenous tourism development in the Arctic. Annals of Tourism Research, 26(1), 55–76. Notzke, C. (2004). Indigenous tourism development in Southern Alberta, Canada: Ten­ tative engagement. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 12(1), 29–54. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/09669580408667223 Notzke, C. (2006). The Stranger, the Native and the Land: Perspectives on Indigenous Tour­ ism. Concord: Captus Press. Oakes, T. (1998). Tourism and Modernity in China. London: Routledge. O’Regan, H. (2001). Ko Tahu, Ko Au: Kai Tahu Tribal Identity. Christchurch: Horomaka Publishing. Pearce, P.L. (1995). From culture shock and culture arrogance to culture exchange: Ideas towards sustainable socio-cultural tourism. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 3(3), 143–154. Postiglione, G.A. (1992). China’s national minorities and educational change. Journal of Contemporary Asia, 22, 20–44. Pratt, S., Gibson, D., & Movono, A. (2013). Tribal tourism in Fiji: An application and exten­ sion of Smith’s 4Hs of indigenous tourism. Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, 18(8), 894–912. Prentice, R., & Guerin, S. (1998). The romantic walker? A case study of users of iconic Scot­ tish landscape. Scottish Geographical Magazine, 114, 180–191. Prentice, R.C., Witt, S.F., & Wydenbach, E.G. (1994). The endearment behaviour of tour­ ists through their interaction with the host community. Tourism Management, 15(2), 117–125. Puriri, A.R., & McIntosh A.J. (2013). Indigenous tourism and heritage: A Maori case study. In Garrod, B., & Fyall, A. (Eds.). Contemporary Cases in Heritage (pp. 79–102). Oxford: Goodfellow. Puriri, A.R., & McIntosh, A.J. (2019). A cultural framework for Maori tourism: Values and processes of a Whānau tourism business development. Journal of the Royal Society of New Zealand, 49(S1), 89–103. https://doi.org/10.1080/03036758.2019.1656260 Ransfield, A.K., & Reichenberger, I. (2021). Maori Indigenous values and tourism busi­ ness sustainability. AlterNative: An International Journal of Indigenous Peoples, 1177180121994680, online pre-publication. Rickly-Boyd, J.M. (2012). Authenticity & Aura: A Benjaminian approach to tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 39(1), 269–289. Ryan, C. (1997). Maori and tourism: A relationship of history, constitutions and rites. Jour­ nal of Sustainable Tourism, 5, 257–278. Ryan, C. (1999). Some dimensions of Maori involvement in tourism. In Robinson, M., & Boniface, P. (Eds.). Tourism and Culture Studies (pp. 229–245). Oxon: CABI Publishing. Ryan, C. (2002). Tourism and cultural proximity. Examples from New Zealand. Annals of Tourism Research, 29(4), 952–971.

94

Who Are Ethnic Tourists?

Ryan, C., & Crotts, J. (1997). Carving and tourism: A Maori perspective. Annals of Tourism Research, 24(4), 898–918. Ryan, C., & Huyton, J. (2002). Tourists and aboriginal people. Annals of Tourism Research, 29(3), 631–647. Ryan, C., & Pike, S. (2003). Maori based tourism in Rotorua – perceptions of place by domestic tourists. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 11, 307–321. Sang, S. (2020). A study on tourists’ perceived authenticity in Gala Village, Nyingchi Prefec­ ture. Journal of Tourism and Cultural Change, 18(2), 150–163. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 14766825.2018.1535601 Savinovic, A., Kim, S., & Long, P. (2012). Audience members’ motivation, satisfaction, and intention to re-visit an ethnic minority cultural festival. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 29(7), 682–694. https://doi.org/10.1080/10548408.2012.720154 Schein, L. (1994). The dynamics of cultural revival among the Miao in Guizhou. New Asia Academic Bulletin, 8, 119–212. Silver, I. (1993). Marketing authenticity in Third World countries. Annals of Tourism Research, 20(2), 302–318. Smith, V. (1977). Hosts and Guests: The Anthropology of Tourism. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press. Smith, V. (1989). Hosts and Guests: The Anthropology of Tourism (2nd ed.). Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press. Smith, V., & Brent, M. (2001). Hosts and Guests Revisited: Tourism Issues of the 21st Cen­ tury. New York: Cognizant Communication Corp. Statistics New Zealand. (2019). Maori Tourism Statistics 2019. www.stats.govt.nz/information­ releases/tatauranga-umanga-maori-statistics-on-maori-businesses-2019-english. Su, M., & Wall, G. (2010). Implications of host-guest interactions for tourists’ travel behav­ iour and experiences. Tourism, 58(1), 37–50. Taylor, J.P. (1998). Consuming Identity: Modernity and Tourism in New Zealand. Auckland: Department of Anthropology, The University of Auckland. Taylor, J.P. (2001). Authenticity and sincerity in tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 28(1), 7–26. Tong, E. (1989). Morgan’s model and the study of ancient Chinese society. Social Sciences in China (June), 182–205. van den Berghe, P. (1992). Tourism and the ethnic division of labor. Annals of Tourism Research, 19(2), 234–249. Volkman, C. (1990). Visions and revisions: Toraja culture and the tourist gaze. American Ethnologist, 17(1), 91–110. Wall, G., & Chang, J. (2009). Indigenous people and domestic visitors of Taiwan. In Singh, S. (Ed.). Domestic Tourism in Asia (pp. 197–218). London: Earthscan. Walsh, E.R. (2005). From Nü Guo to Nü’er Guo: Negotiating desire in the land of the Mosuo. Modern China, 31(4), 448–486. Walsh, E.R., & Swain, M.B. (2004). Creating modernity by touring paradise: Domestic eth­ nic tourism in Yunnan, China. Tourism Recreation Research, 29(2), 59–68. Wei, J., & Dai, G. (2019). Tourists’ power perception at an ethnic festival: A qualitative approach. Journal of Vacation Marketing, 25(3), 363–374. Wei, L., Qian, J., & Sun, J. (2018). Self-orientalism, joke-work and host-tourist relations. Annals of Tourism Research, 68, 89–99. Wei, L., Qian, J., & Zhu, H. (2021). Rethinking indigenous people as tourists: Modernity, cosmopolitanism, and the re-invention of indigeneity. Annals of Tourism Research, 89, 103200. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2021.103200

Who Are Ethnic Tourists?

95

Werry, M.L. (2001). Tourism, Ethnicity and the Performance of New Zealand Nationalism, 1889–1914. Ann Arbor, MI: UMI Dissertation Service. Wilson, J. (2007). Unpacking the OE. Unpublished doctoral thesis, Lincoln University, New Zealand. Wilson, J., Horn, C., Sampson, K., Doherty, J., Becken, S., & Hart, P. (2006). Demand for Maori Eco-cultural Tourism (No. 31): Landcare Research Science Series No. 31. Can­ terbury: Lincoln University. Wong, J., Lai, I., & Tao, Z. (2019). Memorable ethnic minority tourism experiences in China: A case study of Guangxi Zhuang Zu. Journal of Tourism and Cultural Change, 17(4), 508–525. https://doi.org/10.1080/14766825.2019.1600866 Wu, T., Liu, C., & Yu, W. (2012). Segmenting indigenous tourists from a serious leisure perspective. Journal of Vacation Marketing, 18(1), 17–29. Wu, T., Wall, G., & Tsou, L. (2017). Serious tourists: A proposition for sustainable indig­ enous tourism. Current Issues in Tourism, 20(13), 1355–1374. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 13683500.2014.970143 Xie, P., & Wall, G. (2002). Visitors’ perceptions of authenticity at cultural attractions in Hainan, China. International Journal of Tourism Research, 4(5), 353–366. Xie, P.F., Wu T., & Hsieh, H. (2012). Tourists’ Perception of Authenticity in Indige­ nous Souvenirs in Taiwan. Journal of Travel & Tourism Marketing, 29(5), 485–500. https://doi.org/10.1080/10548408.2012.691400 Xiong, X., Ding, D., Deng, H., & Zhang, S. (2008). Preliminary study on effects of tour­ ism on Mosuo matriarchal culture. International Journal of Sustainable Development & World Ecology, 15(1), 42–47. Xu, H., Wu, Y., & Wall, G. (2012). Tourism real estate development as a policy tool for urban tourism: A case study of Dali and Lijiang, China. Journal of China Tourism Research, 8(2), 174–193. Xu, H., & Ye, T. (2016). Tourist experience in Lijiang – The capital of Yanyu. Journal of China Tourism Research, 12(1), 108–125. https://doi.org/10.1080/19388160.2016.1168758 Yan, R. (1982). Living fossil of family development: Research on the family form of Naxi in Lugu Lake. Social Sciences in China, 3, 187–204. Yan, Y., He, Z., Duan, J., Ding, D., & Zhang, S. (2008). Analysis of the role of the Mosuo culture in local environmental protection in Lugu Lake region. International Journal of Sustainable Development & World Ecology, 15(1), 48–55. Yang, J., Ryan, C., & Zhang, L. (2013). Ethnic minority tourism in China: Han perspectives of Tuva figures in a landscape. Tourism Management, 36, 45–56. Yang, L. (2011). Cultural tourism in an ethnic theme park: Tourists’ views. Journal of Tour­ ism and Cultural Change, 9(4), 320–340. Yang, L. (2012). Tourists’ perceptions of ethnic tourism in Lugu Lake, Yunnan, China. Jour­ nal of Heritage Tourism, 7(1), 59–81. Yang, L. (2013). Ethnic tourism and minority identity: Lugu Lake, Yunnan, China. Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, 18(7), 712–730. Yang, L. (2019a). Cultural tourism in a replicated old town: Tourists’ views. Tourism Plan­ ning & Development, 16(1), 93–111. Yang, L. (2019b). Tourism-driven urbanisation in China’s small town development: Yiren Town, China. International Journal of Tourism Anthropology, 7(2), 132–156. Yankholmes, A.K.B., Akyeampong, O.A., & Dei, L.A. (2009). Residents’ perceptions of transatlantic slave trade attractions for heritage tourism in Danish-Osu, Ghana. Journal of Heritage Tourism, 4(4), 145–178. Yu, H. (1996). The Last Rose of Primitive China. Beijing: China Youth Publishing Group.

96

Who Are Ethnic Tourists?

Zahra, A., & McIntosh, A.J. (2007). A cultural encounter through volunteer tourism: Towards the ideals of sustainable tourism? Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 15(5), 541–556. Zaidan, E. (2010). Mobility and Transnationalism: Travel Patterns and Identity among Palestinian Canadians. Unpublished PhD thesis, University of Waterloo, Waterloo. Zaidan, E., & Wall, G. (2013). Mobility, migration and tourism. In Costa, C., Panyik, E., & Buhalis, D. (Eds.). European Tourism Planning and Organisation Systems, Volume I. (pp. 351–359). Clevedon: Channel View Press. Zapalska, A., & Brozik, D. (2006). The Socioeconomic conditions for growth and devel­ opment of Maori family businesses. Problems and Perspectives in Management, 4(2), 31–45. Zapalska, A., & Brozik, D. (2017). Maori female entrepreneurship in tourism industry. Tourism, 65(2), 156–172. Zeppel, H. (2002). Cultural tourism at the Cowichan Native Village, British Columbia. Journal of Travel Research, 41(1), 92–100. Zygadlo, F., Matunga, H., Simmons, D., & Fairweather, J. (2001). Tourism and Maori devel­ opment in Westland. Report No. 25. Christchurch: Lincoln University, Tourism Recrea­ tion Research and Education Centre.

3 TOURISM AND ETHNIC COMMUNITIES

Tourism is advocated as a development strategy for and in many ethnic communi­ ties due to its potential to deliver socio-economic benefits. It is not just a vehicle for poverty alleviation for it can also serve as a long-term blueprint for sustainable community development. The community’s active involvement in tourism busi­ nesses can have both positive and negative effects on the quality of life (QOL) and attitudes toward tourism development. The tourism industry often makes extensive use of the land and cultural assets of ethnic peoples, but many impacts of tourism are usually borne by the community itself which is often vulnerable to deleterious sociocultural impacts. The tourism potential of destinations may be compromised by negative impacts upon cultural heritage and the QOL of ethnic communities. This chapter explores relationships between tourism and ethnic communities. Community benefits and social costs associated with tourism development are ana­ lyzed and summarized. Four case studies in various destinations are presented to illustrate current tourism practices and their impacts on host communities. A case study in Nujiang, Yunnan, China, explores the impacts of rural ethnic tourism on poverty alleviation in a poor minority village. The impacts of tourism on indig­ enous ethnic communities and local attitudes toward tourism are discussed in stud­ ies of indigenous tourism in Fiji in the South Pacific, Québec, Canada, and of Native Americans in the United States. Finally, the case of ecotourism and liveli­ hoods in Shanmei, Taiwan, is presented. 3.1 Ethnic Tourism and Host Communities: Community Benefits and Social Costs

The emergence of ethnic tourism has been considered to be a mixed blessing for host populations due to the positive and negative consequences that result. DOI: 10.4324/9781003373964-4

98

Tourism and Ethnic Communities

Extensive academic attention has been devoted to understanding the impacts of ethnic tourism on host communities (Cohen, 1988, 2016; Li, 2004; Martinez, 2003; Oakes, 1992, 1997, 1998; Ryan & Aicken, 2005; Smith, 1977; Sun et al., 2018; Swain, 2014; Telfer & Sharpley, 2008; Trupp & Sunanta, 2017; Tu & Zhang, 2020; Wang et al., 2020; Wood, 1997, 1998; Xie, 2011; Yang et al., 2016; Yang & Wall, 2014; Zhu & He, 2019). Tourism appears to be a good option for economic devel­ opment in many ethnic minority areas; however, views of the impacts of tourism on host communities have not yet reached consensus among academics. Some stud­ ies are concerned with negative consequences, such as cultural assimilation and environmental destruction (Cohen, 1988; Cole, 2007; Greenwood, 1989; Oakes, 1998; Selwyn, 1996; Shepherd, 2006; Wood, 1997), alienation of ethnic minorities (Cuong, 2020), economic exploitation (Mowforth & Munt, 1998; Yang & Wall, 2009), increased living costs, higher prices and increased property taxes (Latip et al., 2018), a negative impact on human capital (Zhu & He, 2019) and the subse­ quent poverty trap (Coria & Calfucura, 2012). Conversely, others welcome ethnic tourism for its positive economic impacts (Chow, 2005; Cohen, 2016; Kunasekaran et al., 2017; Lor et al., 2019; Xie, 2011; Yang, 2013), implications for conservation of natural and cultural resources (Falak et al., 2016; Jim, 2000; Henderson, 2003) and culturally constructive contributions (Adams, 2003; Hillman, 2009; Kolås, 2004; Li, 2004; Qu et al., 2019; Theerapappisit, 2009; Xie, 2011). All of these observations are possibilities, with outcomes varying with circumstances, such as the form of tourism and the ways in which indigenous people are, or are not, involved. The literature has focused on the analysis of tourism impacts and how these vary depending upon whether or not local residents participate in the tourism industry (Li, 2006). It has been suggested that if local people participate in tourism, especially in decision-making processes, a trickle-down effect can empower and benefit them (Hampton, 2005; Scheyvens, 2002). In early studies, ethnic tourism was often decried as a destructive force lead­ ing to the decline of traditional cultures and causing problems for the host com­ munity, such as increased social tension, sociocultural breakdown and an erosion of the sense of identity and place (Cohen, 1988; Esman, 1984; Greenwood, 1989; Klieger, 1990; Smith, 1977; van den Berghe, 1992; Wood, 1997). These studies voiced concerns regarding the dislocation or even the survival of ethnic cultures. They stressed the commodification and degradation of ethnic cultures, and the denigration of sacred sites (Crystal, 1989; Hitchcock, 1999; Klieger, 1990). Tour­ ism commodification has often been criticized as being a cause of the “bastardiza­ tion” and “pollution” of previously authentic cultures for the purpose of touristic display (Wood, 1997). According to this perspective, ethnic tourism is in danger of consuming the cultures on which it is based (Altman, 1988; van den Berghe, 1995; Xie, 2011; Li, 2004). It creates a situation akin to a human zoo (van den Berghe, 1992) and leads to negative impacts by commodifying cultural manifestations and undermining their cultural meanings (Cohen, 1988). Host communities develop “phony-folk-cultures” to meet tourists’ desires for cultural otherness, which

Tourism and Ethnic Communities

99

distorts original meanings and leads to the loss of the cultural significance of eth­ nic traditions. Ethnic tourism dilutes unique and authentic traditions and replaces them with standardized stereotypes tailored to the exotic yearnings of Western travelers (Oakes, 1992). Tourism has also been charged with causing increased social tension, sociocultural breakdown and an erosion of the sense of identity and place (Esman, 1984; Goering, 1990; van den Berghe, 1992; Wood, 1993; Li, 2004). Ethnic tourism has become a force of radical transformation, in which local customs are commoditized (Su & Teo, 2008), commercialized, spectacularized (Li, 2012) and exoticized (Fiskesjö, 2015) for the entertainment of the tourist public. As a result, they implicitly lose their authenticity (Cohen, 2016). Traditional ethnic culture has disappeared in the development process of community-based tourism (Cuong, 2020) so that economic development through tourism may be a doubleedged sword for minority culture (Qu et al., 2019). On the other hand, much research also reveals the positive consequences of eth­ nic tourism (Chow, 2005; Harron & Weiler, 1992; Henderson, 2003; Hillman, 2003; Lor et al., 2019; Li, 2004; Sun et al., 2018; Pitchford, 1995; Xie, 2011; Walsh & Swain, 2004). Common aspects are economic benefits, including higher incomes, more employment opportunities and a higher standard of living (Carr et al., 2016; Xie, 2011; Yang & Wall, 2009), although most economic benefits are often gained by outside entrepreneurs instead of those within the communities (Crystal, 1989; Goering, 1990, Oakes, 1998; Li, 2004). Such economic leakages are a risk for des­ tination communities and strategies need to be developed and implemented to mini­ mize them. Over time, as the local economy develops, leakages may be reduced. By marketing itself to tourists, a marginalized group can improve its position economi­ cally through the creation of employment and entrepreneurial opportunities (van den Berghe, 1992). Tourism development may be a response of the local entrepreneur­ ial middle and upper classes to new economic opportunities in many remote parts of Third World countries, as in Izmir, Turkey (Miral et al., 2013), San Cristobal, Mexico (van den Berghe, 1995), Chiang Mai, Thailand (Cohen, 1989; Ishii, 2012), Long Lamai, Malaysia (Falak et al., 2016), other parts of Southeast Asia (Cohen, 2016), and Guizhou and Yunnan, in China (Oakes, 1998; Li, 2004). Ethnic tour­ ism provides income to the Akha minority community near Chiang Mai, Thailand. However, employment opportunities are often higher for the young and women than for older men. Thus, the economic benefits of tourism may affect the division of labor and power dynamics of gender within minority households (Ishii, 2012). Tourism was perceived by the Long Lamai indigenous community in Malaysia as the best option to align and sustain their lifestyle as their needs evolved, providing an opportunity to avoid migration and improve livelihoods in rural areas (Falak et al., 2016). Tourism was found to have a significant nonlinear effect on economic growth in ethnic minority areas, although its contribution tended to decrease along with increasing tourism specialization (Tu & Zhang, 2020). Tourism also provides an important opportunity for ethnic image construction and projection (Roosens, 1989). It can be a positive force for ethnic revitalization

100

Tourism and Ethnic Communities

(Harron & Weiler, 1992), including the revival of religious ceremonies, art forms and craft production (Smith, 1989; Crystal, 1989; Markwick, 2001), as well as in fostering creativity and providing a platform for communities to present them­ selves positively (Cohen, 1988; Pitchford, 1995). Motivated by economic benefits, ethnic communities may promote the “re-localization” of ethnic cultures through their arts, religious ceremonies, traditional festivals and craft production (Adams, 2003; Markwick, 2001; Sun et al., 2018; Theerapappisit, 2009), thereby assisting in the protection of threatened minority heritage and enhancement of ethnic identity (Grünewald, 2002; Henderson, 2003; Yang, 2013). New “tourist arts” are not nec­ essarily degraded, but can lead to the creation of new art forms (Graburn, 1976). As cultural exoticism is the primary attraction for many tourists, the revitalization of minority cultures can contribute to ongoing economic profits through tourism (Yang, 2013). Tourism creates cohesion for many different cultural groups (Miral et al., 2013). Tourism can be used to promote self-awareness and pride in the com­ munity, and strengthen cultural identity through inspiring pride in local culture, especially in less developed areas (Boissevain, 1996; Henderson, 2003; Hillman, 2003; Hitchcock, 2000; Jutla & Scherle, 2006; Morais, 2006; Swain, 2014; Yang, 2013). The reinforcing of ethnic identity through tourism has been observed in Bermuda (Manning, 1979), among Cajuns (Esman, 1984), in Bali (McKean, 1989; Verheijen & Putra, 2020), among Native American Indians (Maruyama et al., 2008; Simpson, 1996), in Malta (Boissevain, 1996), among Malaysians (King, 1993; Mura, 2015), in Yunnan and Guizhou, China (Hillman, 2003; Oakes, 1998; Li, 2004; Sun et al., 2018; Swain, 2014; Walsh & Swain, 2004; Su, 2019; Yang, 2013), in Singapore (Henderson, 2003), and elsewhere. The voluminous empirical studies have reported the positive social impacts of tourism on ethnic communities. Tourism helps to promote the retention and revi­ talization of minority identity and perpetuates an ethnic boundary that might oth­ erwise have disappeared through acculturation (Esman, 1984). Tourism engenders a local awareness of cultural matters, national identity and heritage, and enhances national pride and commitments in Malaysia and many Southeast Asian countries (King, 1993). Oakes (1998) noted that in Guizhou and Yunnan, which share South­ east Asia’s patterns of regional ethnic diversity, ethnic tourism is regarded as an important development strategy that will “result in a modernized national culture with a civic sense of commitment and a common sense of identity” (p. 39). Tour­ ism representations convey the complex realities of identity in Singapore; tourist interest and funding can help to protect and raise awareness of marginalized ethnic cultures that are being undermined by internal and external forces (Henderson, 2003). In Hillman’s (2003) study, Shangri-la’s new tourism has become a force strengthening Tibetan identity, has increased ethnic awareness and has stimulated the cultural rejuvenation for Tibetans whose traditions were previously ridiculed and suppressed. Ethnic tourism contributes to Tibetan identity formation and refor­ mulation, prompting a re-evaluation of others’ stereotypes of Tibetans (Hillman, 2009), through the process of “sacralization”, “ethnicization” and “exoticization”

Tourism and Ethnic Communities

101

(Kolås, 2004). In a similar vein, Qu et al. (2019) noted that Tibetans in the eth­ nic area of Sichuan Province, China have constructed a multicultural identity in response to government cultural policies and tourism market demands. Some com­ munities actively claim their rights to a share of tourism profits at the expense of their culture, while others negotiate their identity to better their lives. As such, the impact of tourism upon ethnic culture can be negative or positive and it depends on the cultural identity and citizenship (Qu et al., 2019). As revealed by Zhu’s (2012) study of a Naxi marriage ceremony for tourists in Lijiang, cultural authenticity is an intricate issue: for the Naxi people, the ritual may still reflect and preserve their culture and be a “performative experience of authenticity”, even if performed just for fun for a tourist audience. Most ethnic tourism destinations are communities’ living spaces; thus, com­ munity support is critical to the success of ethnic tourism and has been the focus of many research efforts. Community studies have identified a range of intrinsic and extrinsic factors that influence residents’ attitudes toward tourism in general (Sharpley, 2014) and various theories have been applied to explain the effects of these factors (e.g., social exchange theory, attribution theory, dependency theory and emotional solidarity theory). The factors generally fall into two categories: economic and noneconomic rationality (Wang et al., 2020). Economic rational­ ity emphasizes the community’s perceptions of the economic impacts of tourism development and relies on quantifiable material benefits to explain their attitudes and behaviors (Nunkoo & Gursoy, 2012; Nunkoo & Ramkissoon, 2011). Vari­ ous econometric methods, such as time series models (Balaguer & Cantavella­ Jord´a, 2002), panel models (Caglayan et al., 2012) and cross-sectional models (Po & Huang, 2008) have been used in tourism studies to investigate the impact of tourism on economic development. On the other hand, noneconomic rationality stresses emotional and psychological aspects of destination communities (Stylidis et al., 2014; Woosnam, 2012) and suggests that communities’ attitudes will likely depend on their emotions, affection and beliefs shaping behaviors (Lee et al., 2012; Strzelecka et al., 2017). Noneconomic constructs such as perceived positive and negative impacts (Yang, 2013), place attachment (Lee, 2013), personal benefits (Rasoolimanesh et al., 2017), cultural identity (Qu et al., 2019), QOL (Liang & Hui, 2016) and resident empowerment (Chen et al., 2016) are commonly used to analyze and evaluate communities’ perceptions of the effects of tourism and cor­ responding attitudes, emotions and actions. Despite multiple factors underlying community attitudes toward tourism, many studies have tended to ground their models in a single rationale (Wang et al., 2020). Simplistic economic perspectives were used to explore ethnic communities’ atti­ tudes based on economic returns in some studies (e.g., Trupp & Sunanta, 2017), while others have solely relied on psychological constructs (e.g., place attachment and QOL). However, destination communities are rarely either completely rational or emotional and they develop perceptions based on diverse factors (Wang et al., 2020). More recent studies have expanded their research frameworks and include

102

Tourism and Ethnic Communities

not only economic but also sociocultural, psychological and environmental factors to explain the complex nature of community attitudes (Woosnam et al., 2019). Diverse theories and the testing of models with new analytical methods have been adopted to examine the indicators of residents’ perceptions and attitudes to tourism (e.g., Olya & Gavilyan, 2017; Wang et al., 2020). For instance, Olya and Gavilyan (2017) developed and tested “configural” models for predicting residents’ support for tourism development in Hawraman, Iran and their findings revealed that a higher level of community attachment, community involvement, knowledge of tourism, power to influence tourism, perceived personal benefit, positive tourism impacts and satisfaction with QOL of life led to a higher community support. Based on social exchange theory and place attachment theory, Wang et al. (2020) proposed an integrative model to investigate the effects of rational factors (perceived costs and benefits) and emotional factors (place identity and dependence) on residents’ attitudes toward tourism and subsequent pro-tourism behaviors in Xijiang Miao Village in China. Their study findings revealed that place identity and depend­ ence fully mediate the effects of perceived benefits and costs on residents’ support. Woosnam et al. (2019) used multiple regression analyses to examine Brazilian and Korean residents in two Japanese towns and their findings revealed that minority residents’ perceptions of tourism can be a significant predictor of their attitudes toward ethnic neighborhood tourism. In summary, community benefits and social costs induced by tourism have been extensively discussed in the literature. These studies enhance understanding of the interaction between tourists and communities, and the resulting consequences. Researchers have considered various predictors of residents’ attitudes about tour­ ism from economic dependence to levels of development, attachment to commu­ nity, knowledge of tourism, contact between residents and tourists, and a range of sociodemographic and residential variables including age, income and occupa­ tion, length of residence and education (e.g., García et al., 2015). More recently, research has shifted to focus on outcomes of residents’ attitudes, such as well-being and life satisfaction (Kim et al., 2013), trust in government (Nunkoo & Smith, 2013), and support for alternative versus mass tourism (Gursoy et al., 2010). The concerns of scholars and their suggestions can inform community planning for future development. However, despite extensive research on residents’ attitudes about tourism in general, few have paid much attention to the perspectives of eth­ nic minority groups or indigenous communities concerning ethnic tourism per se (Henderson, 2003; Woosnam et al., 2019; Yang, 2013; Yang & Wall, 2009, 2014). As a result, only limited evidence has been generated, especially from the grass­ roots, on what minority communities really perceive their role(s) and the impacts of ethnic tourism development in their locality to be (Falak et al., 2016). Minority residents’ attitudes toward tourism development in ethnic destinations therefore warrant further exploration. In the following sections, three case studies are pre­ sented that examine the impacts of tourism on host communities and local attitudes toward tourism development.

Tourism and Ethnic Communities

103

3.2 Case Study: Poverty Alleviation Through Ethnic Tourism in Nujiang, Yunnan, China Introduction: Pro-poor Tourism

Tourism has become an increasingly popular component of development strategies in many underdeveloped regions, with the potential to boost the local economy and alleviate poverty (Muganda et al., 2010). Since the late 1990s, the concept of pro-poor tourism (PPT) has received extensive support from governments, devel­ opment agencies and tourism organizations (Gibson, 2014; Scheyvens, 2009). PPT is expected to “increase the net benefits for the poor from tourism” and ensure that “tourism growth contributes to poverty reduction” (Ashley et al., 2001, p. 8). Pro­ ponents of PPT have argued that although the tourism industry is primarily driven by business interests, it has greater potential for poverty alleviation than many other sectors because it is labor-intensive and can generate employment for many people and provides scope for wide participation (Truong et al., 2014). Many inter­ national initiatives have revealed that tourism can make a substantial contribution to socio-economic development and help to improve living conditions for local people in varied destinations (Akyeampong, 2011; Scheyvens & Russell, 2012). Lor et al. (2019) grouped the studies of tourism and poverty into two categories: the profit camp and the structures camp. The profit camp emphasizes the busi­ ness of PPT, while the structures camp focuses on the structural barriers to ensure that poor residents actually benefit from tourism. Scholars of the profit camp sug­ gest that tourism industries located in poor rural areas often generate employment opportunities for local villagers (Croes & Rivera, 2015; Kim et al., 2016), diversify local economies, spark rural development, constitute an alternative to migration (Li et al., 2016; Lo et al., 2018; Panyik et al., 2011), and provide economic benefits to the poor (Ashley et al., 2001; Croes, 2014; Kim et al., 2016). Moreover, invest­ ment in tourism infrastructure can connect villagers to the larger economy, which may stimulate local agriculture (Hall, 2007; Li et al., 2016). Economic growth can increase tax revenues, which can be invested in welfare and development pro­ jects (Jamieson et al., 2004; Schilcher, 2007; Snyman, 2012). This group is ori­ ented toward profits first and the inclusion of the poor and ensuring their benefits becomes a vital but a secondary goal because PPT cannot exist without a viable tourism industry (Lor et al., 2019). In contrast, members of the structures camp stress factors that facilitate or block local people from gaining tourism benefits. A number of issues such as lack of edu­ cation, skills and funds, along with elitism and external migrant entrepreneurship have been identified as barriers preventing local people from accessing tourism opportunities that could lift them out of poverty (Muganda et al., 2010). Pessimists argue that political and market power largely preclude the poor from benefiting from tourism with some even dismissing the PPT ideal (Bianchi, 2009; Bid­ dulph, 2015; Scheyvens, 2009). More optimistic advocates offer solutions to help

104

Tourism and Ethnic Communities

overcome structural barriers, such as empowerment of the poor (Aref et al., 2009; Ndivo & Cantoni, 2016), the promotion of local participation in tourism (Feng, 2008; Nyaupane et al., 2006; Ying & Zhou, 2007), ensuring tourism initiatives remain small in scale (Wheeler, 1992), sourcing food and labor from local produc­ ers (Schilcher, 2007), supporting small local businesses (Fleischer & Felsenstein, 2000; Lo et al., 2018; Zhao & Ritchie, 2007), accessibility improvement (trans­ port and communication) and entrepreneurial training (Muganda et al., 2010). This group recognizes the importance of generating profits, but also emphasizes ensur­ ing that tourism is and remains pro-poor (Lor et al., 2019). In spite of the benevolent intentions of proponents, PPT has been subject to many criticisms. Although PPT places a strong emphasis on benefiting the poor, it is unclear whether benefits can be sustained over time (Truong et al., 2014). There is little research that provides substantial concrete evidence to support the claims that many so-called PPT initiatives actually bring the desired improve­ ments to the living conditions of the poor (Blake et al., 2008; Goodwin, 2007). Different frameworks for PPT have emerged over the past decade to reconcile the dilemma of promoting profits while reducing barriers simultaneously. Scheyvens (2009) reviewed the evolution of thinking on the relationship between tourism and poverty from the 1950s paradigm of tourism as a modernizing factor, through dis­ courses of the disenfranchisement of the poor from tourism prevalent in the 1970s and 1980s, to a renewed belief in the potential of tourism for poverty alleviation in the 1990s. Zhao and Ritchie (2007) combined micro and macro perspectives to present an integrated framework that specifies the principles and mechanisms of a tourism-based approach to poverty alleviation. Mitchell and Ashley (2010) suggested three main pathways through which tourism can contribute to poverty alleviation, including direct effects (labor income and other forms of earnings), secondary effects (indirect earnings from tourism and induced effects from tour­ ism workers re-spending their earnings in the local economy), and dynamic effects (long-term changes in the macroeconomy due to tourism growth). Using a value chain approach, Mitchell (2012) highlighted ways in which the benefits of tourism can be maximized and better targeted as tourism spending flows through the econ­ omy. PPT has been examined at a macro level through policy implications (Nelson, 2012; Truong, 2013; Winters et al., 2013) as well as at a micro level with a focus on benefit distribution (Blake, 2008) and on the effectiveness of tourism in satisfy­ ing poor people’s needs (Mensah & Amuquandoh, 2010; Muganda et al., 2010). Many scholars have stressed the need to enhance poor people’s access to tourism benefits at a micro level (Mitchell & Ashley, 2010; Hall, 2007; Scheyvens, 2009; Schilcher, 2007; Zhao & Ritchie, 2007). Community-based tourism enterprises are seen as having potential for, and have already contributed to, the development of local economies (Yang, 2015). Overall, the empirical evidence on the degree to which ethnic tourism contrib­ utes to poverty alleviation is limited and insufficient to provide investment and policy guidance (Harrison & Schipani, 2007; Winters et al., 2013). Furthermore,

Tourism and Ethnic Communities

105

despite the extensive literature at various scales of analysis, little has been revealed about the perceptions and experiences of poor people themselves, and the substan­ tial real benefits gained from ethnic tourism (Holden et al., 2011), especially in underdeveloped impoverished ethnic areas. How poor minority people interpret ethnic tourism as a means of poverty alleviation remains a substantial knowledge gap (Holden et al., 2011; Pleumarom, 2012; Truong, 2014). There is a need for fur­ ther detailed study from a micro socio-economic perspective to explore the actual effects of ethnic tourism on poor and disadvantaged minority groups (Zeng & Ryan, 2012). Poverty and Tourism Initiatives in Nujiang Prefecture

Covering an area of 14,703 square kilometers, Nujiang Lisu Autonomous Prefec­ ture (hereafter referred to as Nujiang Prefecture), is located in the northwest of Yunnan Province, Southwest China. Nujiang Prefecture is well known for its lofty mountains, steep gorges, rich flora and fauna, and diverse ethnic cultures. The area is home to 22 minorities, among which 12 are indigenous tribes including Lisu, Nu, Pumi and Dulong. Because of isolation in mountains, ethnic minority people still maintain their traditional cultures and unique lifestyles. Nujiang Prefecture is one of the poorest regions in China with more than 239,900 people living in poverty comprising 53.9% of the agricultural population (Yang, 2015). In 2012, the average annual income of farmers was 2,773 RMB (US $447), which was only one-third of the national average. The poverty rate is 40% higher than the country’s average (Yang, 2015). All four counties in the prefecture, that is, Lanping, Lushui, Fugong and Gongshan, are designated as “national key poverty counties”. Like other poverty-stricken areas, agriculture and labor exports are traditional sources of local household income (Zhao, 2009). However, the return from farming is meager due to the mountainous landforms and fragile ecology and has been on the decline. Local residents are engaged primarily in subsistence farming supplemented by hunting, fishing and grazing animals. The yield of grain crops in this mountainous region is very low due to the high elevation and poor soil conditions. Inadequate housing and difficult access to running water, education and health care are major problems in the area. More than one thousand (1,458) villages are not accessible by highways (Yang, 2015). The ethnic minority people who live in the small vil­ lages high up in the mountains are desperately poor. They have not been touched by modernity. Rather, they live a harsh existence tilling the land by hand. The slopes on which they live are too steep to plow even with oxen. There is widespread illit­ eracy. Local livelihoods depend heavily on government subsidies. To alleviate poverty, in the 1990s, the local government encouraged communi­ ties to become involved in a diversity of projects such as organic agriculture, min­ ing, refining and tourism. Tourism provides a potential solution to local problems because it can diversify the agricultural economy and retain younger generations that previously moved away in search of better opportunities. Although Nujiang is

106

Tourism and Ethnic Communities

endowed with attractive landscapes, plus diverse ethnic cultures, its potential for tourism remained largely untapped until the rise of domestic tourism in China in the late 1990s. In 2003, the Three Parallel Rivers region, one of the primary attractions of the prefecture, was designated by UNESCO as a World Natural Heritage Site. As a result, tourism initiatives have become a top priority among local officials as a means of generating financial returns from the World Heritage designation. The Nujiang Prefecture government has formally included tourism development in the strategic planning of the rural economy. Over the past decade, indigenous familyowned enterprises have proliferated across the area. Improvements in transporta­ tion infrastructure, accommodation services and other tourism facilities led to an increase in tourist numbers from 232,717 visitors in 1997 to over 1.73 million in 2011 (including 1.71 million domestic tourists and 172,000 international visitors); tourism revenue increased from 35.9 million RMB (US $5.8 million) in 1997 to 996.85 million RMB (US $160.64 million) in 2011 (Yang, 2015). A “Tourist Model Village” – Zhongding Village

Zhongding village is located at the core zone of the Three Parallel Rivers World Her­ itage Site in Nujiang Prefecture. The village consists of 51 households with a local population of 161 (Liu, 2009). It is a cultural and natural amenity-rich community, which is a mixture of diverse religions and different minority groups. The majority of residents are ethnic Nu, Lisu, Tibetan and Dulong. Prior to tourism, residents lived by subsistence farming and their major income came from planting wheat, highland barley, corn and potatoes, but fishing, grazing animals and gathering mush­ rooms and herbs also played an important role in their daily lives. The village lacked electricity and running water and had limited medical and educational infrastructure. Village life was described as “bitter” and “hard” due to the harsh natural envi­ ronment and poor roads. The low returns from farming drove villagers to leave home and engage in labor work in other areas. Although the problem of poverty in the village was rampant, the stunning rustic landscape and unique cultures of ethnic minorities have increasingly drawn tourists into the area since the late 1990s. At first, village tourism businesses were spontane­ ous responses to external demand, and the tourists were mainly from international markets. The villagers provided food, horseback riding and guides to visitors. Some opened small restaurants, souvenir shops and guesthouses, while others performed ethnic music and dances for tourists. Younger villagers now drive tourists around using minivans. Since the 2000s, the township government has actively promoted community-based tourism, especially nongjiale (happy farmer’s home), to combat poverty and modernize the conditions of rural areas by increasing the amounts of domestic tourists. The major strategies are growth-oriented, including increasing investments in infrastructure and tourist facilities, and the provision of supportive policies for setting up indigenous tourism businesses. The nongjiale operators were provided with marketing and financial aids by the government.

Tourism and Ethnic Communities

107

Improvement of local accessibility and public investment brought new opportu­ nities to the impoverished village. Zhongding, as a primary tourist village, has been included in tour packages by many travel agencies. As a result, the community has seen a growing economy based on tourism. Most families provide food and ser­ vices to tourists during the peak season. The average living standard of the village has become much higher than that of neighboring villages in terms of disposable income, quality of housing, roads and public facilities. Zhongding was praised as being “a model village for entertainment and leisure” and “a harmonious cultural village” by the Prefecture Government in 2006. Community and Government Perceptions of Tourism Impacts

Yang (2015) examined the impacts of rural ethnic tourism on poverty alleviation in Nujiang Prefecture and explored the role of community-based tourism activi­ ties for the livelihoods of the poor minority people, using a “tourist model vil­ lage” (Zhongding) as a case study. Her study results reveal a complex picture, with strong agreement about improvements in living standards, employment and accessibility, and a diversity of views on the impacts on household incomes, entre­ preneurial opportunities and government subsidies. Tourism has contributed posi­ tively to village livelihoods. Overall, local residents felt that their living standards, roads and public services had been improved as a result of tourism development in the area, although their assessment of the extent of the contribution varied. In addi­ tion to agriculture, tourism has now become an important source of income in the village. The tourism boom has also spurred roads and other physical infrastructure construction in the area, and the development of roads and bridges has resulted in the arrival of more tourists in a synergistic fashion. The village has experienced rapid changes resulting from increasing tourism activities in recent years. As a designated “model village”, the villagers have received more financial aid from the local government. As a result, Zhongding has much better conditions for developing nongjiale than other nearby villages in terms of transportation and lodging capacities. Tourism has increased local peo­ ple’s awareness of business opportunities. There is a growing entrepreneurial spirit among villagers influenced by the desire to lift themselves out of poverty. The vil­ lagers also noted that tourism helped them to enhance their lives beyond the finan­ cial aspects and their QOL of life was improved due to enhanced education, health and social services, and improved water and power supply. Tourism also increased their awareness and appreciation of their own traditional culture and rural life­ styles. They became more aware of the tangible value of their cultural heritage and were highly motivated to preserve declining minority traditions. The desire for education among youth has grown rapidly due to the increased need for education in order to access tourism opportunities. Almost all respondents in the study acknowledged that tourism had increased economic opportunities in the community, but it was also evident that there was

108

Tourism and Ethnic Communities

a level of dissatisfaction among local residents about the uneven distribution of government subsidies and money earned from tourism. Such complaints were largely voiced by residents who were not benefitting from tourism directly. Tour­ ism had provided additional income for a small number of local people, but it had not lifted all residents out of poverty. Only a few privileged households enjoyed governmental loans and many households felt left out of the tourism development opportunities. A number of issues were identified as major obstacles impeding the poverty alleviation potential of tourism in Zhongding. In particular, lack of education, skills and capital was perceived as the main difficulty preventing residents from becom­ ing involved in tourism. There was a general feeling among villagers that tourism was only improving the livelihoods of a few large-scale nongjiale households. The key to success for a nongjiale business relies on whether guesthouses are con­ veniently located, and have good facilities and political affiliations. The majority of residents do not have the economic or political capacity to operate nongjiale successfully. Because of the higher price of vegetables and fruits in the market, residents who have provided nongjiale services were not much better off due to the higher cost of living. Furthermore, some residents had to surrender their land to the government in the name of promoting nongjiale. The loss of farmland poses serious challenges to rural communities whose livelihoods mainly depend on their most precious natural resource – land. Inadequate public infrastructure and the small scale of tourism investments were seen as barriers limiting local people’s access to tourism benefits that would improve their lives. The government officials considered the poor accessibility as a major barrier for local development and they perceived the urgent need for new public investments in transportation infrastructure. However, there were controver­ sial views regarding the building of highways and dams. Environmental conserva­ tionists were concerned about pollution of rivers and destruction of natural habitats and fauna due to the infrastructure construction. There was also a concern whether the local farmers actually needed modernization to improve their living standards, which would destroy their traditional lifestyle. However, residents and local offi­ cials generally support the construction of roads and dams in order to modernize the area and further develop tourism. Tourism, thus, presented a dilemma between development initiatives and environmental conservation. Discussion and Conclusion

Since the 1980s, tourism has been highly promoted by the Chinese Govern­ ment as an antidote for struggling economies, especially in impoverished rural, remote areas where ethnic minority people live. Although tourism has generated additional income for some communities, there are limits to its potential. The case of Zhongding reveals the complexities of tourism as a development tool and provides useful insights into the actual effects of tourism on the poor and

Tourism and Ethnic Communities

109

disadvantaged minority groups. The rural tourism industry has diversified the local economy, but it has not prominently contributed to the growth of incomes in the village. The benefits of tourism development did not reach the majority of the rural poor, although the contribution of small businesses to the increased income of some households was well recognized. Tourism impacts are substantial for the few people who directly benefit, but most residents have not benefited much from tourism development due to lack of capital, business skills and connections. There is great potential for improvement in the system of public support and local entrepreneurship. Poverty is a multifaceted problem (Spenceley & Goodwin, 2007). Pro-poor out­ comes do not automatically arise from rapid growth of the tourism industry; the success of such initiatives is largely dependent on a supportive socio-economic environment specifically targeting the poor (Scheyvens & Russell, 2012). Smallscale, family-owned businesses may be vulnerable in a tourism market dominated by larger enterprises. There is a lack of sustained governmental support for small enterprise development in China. Yet, in impoverished rural areas with high levels of illiteracy and marginal opportunities for agriculture, community-based tourism enterprises can be one of the few businesses to generate supplementary income and improve local livelihoods. The governmental tourism policy generally encourages the development of large tourism projects, while indigenous businesses often do not receive the support that they require to be successful in the long term (Yang & Wall, 2009). There are weak linkages between tourism and the wider economy with a heavy reliance on government subsidies. Many governmental development projects tend to be one-off projects without any follow-up, and external entrepre­ neurs are also reluctant to invest with local villagers due to the high risk involved (Cho, 2011). Considerable time and effort are required to build local business capacity. Gov­ ernment aid is needed if poor families are to establish and operate tourism enter­ prises. Positive interventions include improving access to education and training, along with establishing a facilitating policy environment that ensures ongoing sup­ port. It is also important to nurture the entrepreneurial spirit in ethnic communi­ ties and stimulate the development of community-based businesses. Some scholars have called for participatory poverty reduction through community involvement (Han, 2011; Job & Paesler, 2013; Wang, 2011). Targeted governmental interven­ tion and institutional adjustments are prerequisite conditions for minority people to obtain greater benefits from tourism (Wu et al., 2011). Poor, disadvantaged minority people need to be included in decision-making processes, development planning, and tourism project design and implementation (Truong et al., 2014). Tourism has the potential to alleviate poverty in some rural ethnic areas; however, the tourism sector is not a panacea that can resolve all poverty issues. Additional livelihoods other than tourism may be needed so that tourism may be better viewed as an initiative that can supplement and diversify existing activities, rather than a replacement for them.

110

Tourism and Ethnic Communities

3.3 Case Study: Tourism Impacts on Quality of Life in Indigenous Communities in Fiji Introduction: Tourism and Quality of Life in Indigenous Ethnic Communities

Quality of life (QOL) has become an important topic of broad discussion in the social scientific literature in recent years. Many scholars have explored the contri­ bution that tourism can make in enhancing aspects of the QOL in host communities (Moscardo, 2009; Neal et al., 2007). The term QOL is “concerned with under­ standing people’s perceived satisfaction with the circumstances in which they live” (Moscardo, 2009, p. 162). It is a broad concept that is affected in a complex way by an individual’s physical health, psychological state, level of independence, social relationships and their environment (Saxena et al., 1997). QOL research explores ways in which factors in a person’s social environment contribute to or detract from the quality of their lives (Matatolu, 2020). These factors are either subjective, linked to perceptions and feelings, or objective, related to tangible or measurable aspects of the possibilities and resources that can be accessed to (Ferriss, 2004). In fact, this distinction has resulted in two streams of QOL research with somewhat different emphases and content. An emerging body of literature has studied the relationship between tourism and QOL in indigenous ethnic communities in various locations, such as Australia (Greiner et al., 2005), Mauritius (Sharpley & Naidoo, 2010), Hawaii (McCub­ bin et al., 2013), Tanzania (Buzinde et al., 2014), Nicaragua (Usher & Kerstetter, 2014), Alaska (Vogt et al., 2016), New Zealand (Bunten, 2010), Taiwan (Hung, 2017) and so on. These studies have revealed significant similarities and differ­ ences which focus on the social, cultural and psychological needs of people, their families, institutions and communities in order to understand the various elements that impact QOL or community well-being (Matatolu, 2020). Many studies have highlighted indigenous worldviews on tourism impacts in their QOL assessments and have stressed the importance of family and community in perceptions of QOL. For instance, the Nywaigi traditional owners in Australia viewed family and com­ munity as priorities in their QOL, followed by health and health services (Greiner et al., 2005). A Tongan community considered family and mutual obligations as key domains in their community well-being and, for the Maasai in Tanzania, QOL priorities were children, livestock and land resources: tourism development had both benefits such as providing employment opportunities and enhancing the sta­ tus of women, while negative impacts centered on land use conflicts and loss of cultural values (Buzinde et al., 2014). Stewardship of land and natural resources was highlighted as the key component of QOL among Alaskan natives and Maori people. Their communities strive for tourism development that “culturalizes com­ merce” rather than “commercializes culture” (Bunten, 2010). Given limited development opportunities, many destination communities have embraced tourism as a tool to achieve socio-economic development (Sharpley &

Tourism and Ethnic Communities

111

Telfer, 2014), commonly based on the premise that an increase in income from tourism will improve the community’s QOL (Andereck & Jurowski, 2006). How­ ever, tourism development can positively or negatively influence community QOL (Andereck & Nyaupane, 2011; Usher & Kerstetter, 2014). In fact, it is likely to do both of these things at the same time. Despite the fact that tourism is often advo­ cated as a tool for community development, its relationship with QOL is neither clearly articulated nor well understood in many host communities (Tham et al., 2020). A number of scholars have called for the need for more discussions about relationships between externally defined measures of QOL and localized concep­ tions of well-being (Buzinde et al., 2014). An enhanced understanding of and incorporation of indigenous worldviews and knowledge in tourism discourse could improve the resilience of these communities and, at the same time, be a sustainable input into the tourism industry (McCubbin et al., 2013). Tourism in Fiji

Fiji is a renowned destination in the South Pacific, located about 3,000 km east of Australia and 2,000 km north of New Zealand. It is a developing country and highly dependent on tourism for its economic development (Pratt et al., 2016). The country consists of more than 330 islands and covers a land area of 18,274 km2 (Matatolu, 2020). The two major islands are Viti Levu and Vanua Levu. Accord­ ing to the 2017 Population and Housing Census, Fiji had a population of 884,887 people in 2017 and about 80% of the population lived in coastal areas and were dependent upon fish and marine resources for subsistence (Fiji Islands Bureau of Statistics, 2017). Fiji is also home to a large indigenous population, comprising slightly over half of the total population. Indigenous Fijians have rich cultural heritage and still live a largely traditional lifestyle. Traditional knowledge and practices of subsistence farming, their veiwekani (kinship), collective community work and cultural capital known as solesolevaki (Seruvakula, 2000) are essential to community lives. Fiji has abundant cultural and natural assets that attract tourists from all over the world (Kerstetter & Bricker, 2009). Tourist attractions are mainly concentrated on the western coast of Viti Levu. Tourism was recognized as a path to economic development in Fiji as early as the 1960s (Harrison & Pratt, 2013). The tourism industry has grown steadily over the past decades and it has become an important economic engine in the country. According to the South Pacific Tourism Organisa­ tion (2018), tourism provided employment for over 41,338 people, and generated an estimated revenue of US $ 931 million in 2018, contributing 38.5% to national GDP. International visitor arrivals reached 870,309 in 2018, which accounted for 40% of total international visitor arrivals into the South Pacific region (South Pacific Tourism Organisation, 2018). The tourism industry provides significant opportunities for Fiji’s economic growth, shared prosperity and improved QOL (World Bank, 2016).

112 Tourism and Ethnic Communities

Tourism Impacts on Quality of Life in Indigenous Fijian Communities

A number of empirical studies investigated the impacts of tourism on the QOL of indigenous communities in Fiji and examined tensions that arise from the interac­ tion between tourism and indigenous community spaces. Kerstetter and Bricker (2009) explored what place means to indigenous Fijians, the people of the Tikina of the Yasawa Island group, who have been involved in tourism development. Their study revealed that Fijian residents valued their village and way of life, the culture and history associated with traditions, and also new technology and its impact on daily life. They noted that place has meaning derived through the challenges of living in a remote village, maintaining and celebrating culture and traditions, and thereby increasing their QOL. They became aware of and attached meaning to the impacts tourism development has had on their place. These meanings have envi­ ronmental, social, cultural and economic/political components that are central to the notion of sustainability. Study participants identified multiple benefits resulting from tourism develop­ ment. The economic benefits of tourism were well recognized, such as helping with everyday life, church maintenance and paying for schooling. Tourism was also seen as an impetus for maintaining a clean and orderly village, contributing to QOL improvements in the community, as well as preserving traditional skills such as mat weaving. Interactions with tourists expanded Fijians’ worldview, and they became more aware of their past and the value of sustaining it. Many agreed that children need to learn business principles if tourism, the primary source of income, is to flourish. They also stressed the importance of protecting the physical envi­ ronment, for this was regarded as being central to the maintenance of their liveli­ hoods, traditions and lifestyle, as well as tourism. Island life has been impacted by the rapid growth of tourism and inadequate public infrastructure has resulted in increased pressure on the natural environment. Local relationships with their home place have evolved as tourism and its impact on the village have increased. Fijians use the term vanua to describe their connection with the environment (i.e., place), which includes land, vegetation, animal life and other objects on it, but also encom­ passes the social and cultural system – the people, their traditions and customs, beliefs and values, and the various institutions. Movono and Becken (2018) examined how tourism has impacted the devel­ opment pathway of the indigenous Fijian village of Vatuolalai and explored how preferential access to tourism benefits has created disparities within the commu­ nity. Their study focused on the two clans in the village and highlighted how their involvement in tourism has altered their practice of solesolevaki, or communal collaboration. They found that tourism development has been both a blessing and a curse for local people: it has enhanced livelihoods but also weakened solidarity and led to regrouping and restructuring of the traditional society. Most study par­ ticipants agreed that disparities in tourism benefits derived by the two tribes were the source of the erosion of social capital of the community. The increased wealth

Tourism and Ethnic Communities

113

of one tribe has resulted in significant economic and sociopolitical disparities, cre­ ating feelings of discontent, mistrust and abandonment, leading to conflicts and marring relationships between the two clans. Many participants stated that tourism introduced individualism and “ignorance of cultural values” to their community, while some attributed conflicts to behavioral changes such as increased pride, alco­ hol abuse, extramarital affairs and conflict between kin. The emergence of new behaviors and ways of life has led to the collapse of the preexisting social capital systems. These changes have affected community linkages, forcing community members to retreat and regroup, thereby strengthening internal bonds and social capital in their smaller social units, leading to both dependency and opportunityseeking behaviors among participants, while reducing community cohesion at a higher level. The authors argued that money alone does not lead to development, but rather tourism, and the greater access that it can provide to a variety of types of capital, can. Pratt et al. (2016) measured the Gross Happiness Index in two Fijian villages, one of which had a high dependency on tourism income and the other had very little contact with tourism. They compared the levels of well-being between these villages and found that despite the tourism village being materially wealthier, the non-tourism villagers were happier across a wide range of life domains. The tour­ ism village of Votulalai is located adjacent to an international four-star resort and a high proportion of the local community was employed by the resort. It is one of the most developed villages in the country and has modern housing and amenities. A close relationship with the tourism resort has enabled an increase in the mate­ rial wealth of the villagers. About 92% of villagers were engaged either directly or indirectly in tourism (Movono et al., 2015). The non-tourism villages in Buca Bay were typical of most of Fiji’s rural and semi-subsistence communities and the majority of villagers were subsistence farmers or fishers. The land was com­ munally owned and gender roles were clearly demarcated. There was little tourism in the village. Pratt et al. (2016) applied the methodology of Bhutan’s Gross National Hap­ piness Index to compare the levels of well-being, or QOL, between the tourismdependent community and the community untouched by tourism from several dimensions (psychological well-being, health, education, good governance, cul­ tural diversity, community vitality and ecological diversity). They found that although people from the non-tourism village were often financially less well-off, they claimed to be wealthier socially as they valued kinship and traditions, and had fewer concerns about money and material wealth. In contrast, tourism villagers expressed higher negative emotions, such as selfishness, jealousy, fear, worry and anger. These negative emotions may be partially caused by the transformation of gender relations. As village women have gained more financial independence from increased employment in tourism, they have demanded more freedom and a greater say in family and village affairs, which has challenged the traditional gender roles and resulted in conflict (Movono, 2012). Moreover, the tourism villagers may have

114

Tourism and Ethnic Communities

had to work long hours and have experienced time management problems as they have had to juggle the demands of formal tourism employment while still attending to subsistence farming. The seasonality of tourism work also has resulted in longer working hours for villagers in some parts of the year, while there is not enough paid employment in other parts of the year. People in the non-tourism village had stronger internal governance and were self-reliant, being able to choose to live more “traditionally”. They were perhaps more content because they were detached from broader social and political issues. The tourism village reported lower suf­ ficiency on the indicator of schooling, which may have been due to the guaranteed employment for village youth once they leave high school, with little incentive to further their education. They concluded that money does not necessarily bring hap­ piness, but further research is needed to assess tourism’s ability to contribute to the happiness of indigenous populations across a wider range of villages with varying levels of exposure to tourism. Discussion and Conclusion

The studies revealed that Fijians acknowledged the positive economic, environ­ mental and sociocultural impacts of tourism development on their QOL. While sharing some similarities in QOL priorities, Fijian communities experienced differ­ ences as they variously prioritized their vanua (connection with the environment/ place) and cultural traditions (Matatolu, 2020). These indigenous communities usu­ ally highly value their village, way of life, culture and history associated with their traditions, and their “chiefly” system of governance, family, religion, celebrations and practices. Environmental protection, kinship and solesolevaki were prioritized from an indigenous Fijian perspective (Matatolu, 2020). Solesolevaki (collective community effort) is manifested in the communal nature of Fijian society, where everyone is related and all are obliged to work together (Ravuvu, 1987). It is still observed in post-tourism villages, but is weaker due to tourism involvement, mod­ ernization and development (Movono & Becken, 2018). Encounters with tourists have expanded residents’ worldviews for better or worse. Some have recognized the importance of business knowledge for their children if tourism is to be the pri­ mary source of income in their community (Kerstetter & Bricker, 2009). They have become more aware of the challenges involved in “being in the world” (Gustafson, 2001). Material wealth provided by tourism employment and economic benefits to residents are not necessarily contributing to higher levels of happiness as shown in Pratt et al.’s (2016) study. The non-tourism communities may be happier and socially wealthier as they value kinship and traditions, and have fewer concerns about money and material wealth. These studies also demonstrate the complex and adaptive nature of indigenous communities, and show that tourism develop­ ment has triggered changes in traditional villages, which have led to shifts in social processes that affect social capital and community solidarity (Movono & Becken, 2018).

Tourism and Ethnic Communities

115

Tourism development has been both a blessing and a curse for many host com­ munities (Sroypetch et al., 2016). The sentiments, social tensions and conflicts that arise from tourism on the QOL of indigenous communities are widespread. Tour­ ism development has led to the collapse of preexisting systems of social capital and resulted in the subsequent creation of new social systems. However, greater cohesion and social capital at the lower levels in communities can create opportu­ nities for new internal institutional arrangements, such as female entrepreneurs and youth groups (Glanville & Bienenstock, 2009). The economic benefits of tourism have led to the empowerment of village women economically and socially. Some females have developed new skills and confidence, and have raised their economic and social standards. These changes have affected traditional gender roles in the community. As women demand more freedom and a greater say in family and village affairs, more tensions between men and women occur, resulting in social conflicts. The transformation of gender relationships and associated social tensions are not unique in these Fijian communities as they have been observed worldwide in many ethnic communities exposed to tourism development. The findings of these studies challenge the standard Western-centric QOL defi­ nitions and call for the need to broaden the perspectives on indigenous tourism from a predominantly economic narrative to wider sustainable goals, so as to achieve desired QOL outcomes in host communities. More longitudinal ethnographic stud­ ies are needed to examine social exchanges alongside the tourism value chain in order to ensure greater understanding of the needs, values and concerns of diverse indigenous communities in relation to tourism and their QOL. As Matatolu (2020) conceded, an integrated approach that considers indigenous values and cultural priorities is essential to create an enhanced QOL of life paradigm that is applicable across communities, cultures and countries. 3.4 Case Study: The Impact of Tourism on Indigenous Communities in Québec, Canada Indigenous People and Tourism in Québec, Canada

There were 1,673,785 indigenous people in Canada in 2016, accounting for 4.9% of the total population based on the 2016 census (Statistics Canada, 2017a). Among the indigenous population, 977,230 people (58.4%) were identified as First Nations, 587,545 people (35.1%) as Métis (mixed First Nations and European heritage) and 65,025 people (3.9%) as Inuit (Statistics Canada, 2017a). These indigenous people have their own name, language, ancestral land and culture (Lepage, 2005). The socio-economic conditions of indigenous people are below the national average in Canada (Warry, 2007). The indigenous people are significantly younger than the non-indigenous population, and unemployment rates are higher in comparison with non-indigenous people (Statistics Canada, 2017a). The issues of education, unemployment, a growing youth population, local capacity and various other social

116

Tourism and Ethnic Communities

issues also affect community development and the implementation of regional eco­ nomic strategies, such as the enhancement of tourism (Lemelin et al., 2012). Over the years, numerous policies and programs centered on building the capac­ ity of indigenous peoples to develop, market and deliver cultural tourism products and services have emerged (Williams & O’Neil, 2007). The Indigenous Tourism Association of Canada (ITAC) (2015) defined indigenous tourism as “tourism busi­ nesses majority owned, operated and/or controlled by First Nations, Métis or Inuit peoples that can demonstrate a connection and responsibility to the local Indig­ enous community and traditional territory where the operation resides” (p. xi). Indigenous tourism has been promoted by the government as a means for devel­ opment in impoverished regions (Butler & Hinch, 2007). Some indigenous com­ munities have also flagged tourism as a vehicle for diversifying and strengthening remote and narrowly focused resource-based economies (Williams & O’Neil, 2007; Colton, 2005). Canada has thus witnessed a significant increase in indig­ enous tourism products and services in the past two decades. ITAC (2019) reported that, between 2014 and 2019, there was a significant rise in indigenous tourism revenues in annual Canadian GPD from 1.4 billion to $2 billion, and the indus­ try employed roughly 41,153 indigenous tourism workers in Canada. However, indigenous tourism, as with many other forms of tourism, has since been severely disrupted by the global COVID-19 pandemic. The Province of Québec is known for its spectacular natural environment and diverse cultural mix, including that associated with its rich indigenous heritage. It is the home of 11 culturally distinct ethnic groups and 55 indigenous communities (Cassel & Maureira, 2017). There were 182,890 indigenous people in Quebec in 2016, making up 2.3% of the total population; among the indigenous population, 50.7% (92,655) were First Nations, 37.9% (69,360) were Métis and 7.6% (13,945) were Inuit (Statistics Canada, 2017b). The province has the highest number of indigenous people in Canada claiming an indigenous language as their mother tongue (Curtis, 2012). The northern parts of Québec are largely populated by indig­ enous communities. Indigenous tourism was one of the fastest growing sectors of Québec’s tourism economy due to the fast overall expansion of the tourism indus­ try, favorable policies for economic growth, recognition of indigenous peoples, and compensation for colonial damages (Bunten & Graburn, 2009). It contributes significantly to the creation of jobs and wealth, the diversification of economies and the development of all regions of the province. According to Quebec Indig­ enous Tourism (2019), the number of indigenous tourism enterprises in Quebec has doubled since the early 2000s reaching a total of nearly 225. The industry sustains about 4,200 jobs and attracts 1.2 million visitors annually while generating an esti­ mated $169 million Canadian ($135 million US) in economic benefits each year. Indigenous tourism has become a key socio-economic activity in Québec and a driver for the promotion of culture and history in indigenous communities. It offers a wide range of experiences, such as cultural tourism, ecotourism, outfitting, fes­ tivals and much more. Most of the new indigenous tourism businesses in Québec

Tourism and Ethnic Communities

117

are only a decade old. However, not all indigenous communities have succeeded in tourism development. Indigenous participation in the development of tourism is often constrained by educational, political or cultural factors (Zeppel, 2006). The successful tourism communities are usually located near big cities that are relatively easy to travel to, or in remote areas with spectacular attractions of natural scenery and stunning landscapes (Cassel & Maureira, 2017). Perceptions of Indigenous Ethnic Communities

Cassel and Maureira (2017) examined tourism practices in four indigenous eth­ nic communities in Québec, including Innu (formerly known as Montagnais), Cree (Eeyou), Wôbanaki (Abénakis) and Hurons (Wendat), where indigenous tourism has received increased attention and economic importance in recent years. They found that indigenous tourism influences the ways in which communities see them­ selves, and how they perceive their identity and culture. Indigenous tourism was not only used to improve the economic situation of indigenous communities but also as a tool to pursue their political goals and resuscitate the issue of indigenous identity. The study participants from these four communities held diverse attitudes toward indigenous tourism. Some argued that indigenous tourism had become too commercial, and they expressed disappointment at the superficial representation of their culture, especially within the marketing from federal sources in Québec. In contrast, others welcomed tourism as a way of generating income while reintro­ ducing traditional knowledge and skills into the community. Indigenous tourism business was considered to be a solution to the shortage of job opportunities in the communities. The interviewees stressed that tourism helps reconnect indig­ enous people with their traditional land and territory, reestablishes communication between the elders and the younger generation, and thereby also reunites the com­ munity. Some have started to view tourism as an industry that has a lower impact on the use of natural resources than other industries such as mining, forestry, energy production and fisheries. It, thus, not only supports economic development but also conservation of the land. Tourism is then viewed as a tool to help shape the debate about indigenous people’s rights and to preserve the land and rights to the land. Indigenous tourism businesses play an important role in preserving traditional native culture in dances, songs and language, and in increasing general awareness of indigenous culture. Tourism creates a sense of pride within the community and makes native people want to remain in their community. Through tourism, locals can preserve and develop their culture while sharing it with others. Some respond­ ents started to relearn their native languages and traditional dances after they got involved in tourism. Others claimed that their work with indigenous tourism has given them the opportunity to learn more about themselves and confirm their iden­ tity. The interest in traditional culture, identity and knowledge has increased con­ siderably among young people through tourism. Many respondents expressed a desire to change their everyday lives and be more authentic in terms of identity

118 Tourism and Ethnic Communities

and ethnicity, as well as being better connected to their cultural and heritage sites. People interested in maintaining their culture are also those who take part in devel­ oping indigenous tourism. The work with tourism is also seen as a vehicle for pass­ ing on knowledge, skills and experience from one generation to another. Tourism development is thus crucial to communicating culture between generations. Many respondents use their native language in interaction with tourists to differentiate them from visitors and other suppliers. Some saw the development of indigenous tourism as a way to regain control over the dissemination of cultural knowledge, and to be able to tell their own story. Indigenous tourism workers tend to become more culturally distinctive than the people who are not involved in tourism. These tourism workers are not a homogeneous group, and they include young and old, and people with different heritages and backgrounds. In light of these diverse back­ grounds, indigenous tourism may serve as a platform for learning about culture, history, identity, language and traditions (Maureira & Stenbacka, 2015). As they learn, they can also teach others about their resources and lifestyles. Some respondents stressed that they are trying to find a balance between their ordinary life and their life as a tourism worker, whereas others argued that there is no difference between their roles at home and as tourism workers. Depending on the type of work, indigenous entrepreneurs thought it is either more or less important to create a distance between themselves and tourists. In particular, maintaining distance was important for the entrepreneurs who do performing arts. Internal conflicts in the communities were also induced by tourism since community members do not always agree on how and what to share with the tourists. For instance, some members stopped visiting the new community center/museum because they felt the exhibition did not represent their culture in an appropriate way; instead, they believed that it showed a romanticized and stereotypical image of their culture. Dance performances became an issue of debate in another community. Some dancers complained that the performances for tourists were superficial and did not represent their real culture because dances were modified and the clothes were not those traditionally used for the dance. The community council member argued that they had to offer what the tourists wanted to see, even if the performances and clothes were not authentic. According to interviews, there is always debate in the communities regarding what is the proper thing to do or not to do. Adaptation and revival of cultural tradi­ tions and heritage to meet the visitors’ expectations become part of daily community tourism practice. For example, they produce dream catchers (a typical handmade Native American object) because tourists like to buy them. All respondents agreed that, first and foremost, they wanted to see themselves as indigenous, and that they were proud of their cultural heritage and identity, even if they sometimes modified it. Several mentioned that tourists are usually excluded from certain traditions and activities, such as religious rituals and spiritual places. A few respondents also raised concerns on the transformation of gender relations, a process that has been in pro­ gress for a long time but which seems to be accentuated through the development of tourism (Maureira & Stenbacka, 2015). Some indigenous people have accepted

Tourism and Ethnic Communities

119

male dominance in their communities, while others are working very hard to chal­ lenge such structures and to promote change. Although women gain new sources of income, this does not automatically lead to respect in the family or in the community. Discussion and Conclusion

Indigenous tourism in Canada has long been viewed as a source of potential eco­ nomic growth and independence for indigenous communities. The industry has seen great growth and development over the past decades (Swaikoski, 2020) both in the number of visitors to indigenous tourism places in Quebec and also in the rising number of tourism enterprises, making the province one of the tourism lead­ ers in Canada (Quebec Indigenous Tourism, 2019). However, for most regions of Canada, there existed only anecdotal and piecemeal information for building indigenous tourism development strategies, but also little knowledge of the readi­ ness and capacity of indigenous communities to embrace tourism development (Williams & O’Neil, 2007). Cassel and Maureira’s (2017) study presented empiri­ cal examples of how tourism influences the perceptions of indigenous communities in Québec, what constitutes the core of indigenous culture, and different percep­ tions and perspectives on if and how tourism is beneficial to the communities. Indigenous tourism has been actively promoted for economic growth as well as for social and cultural development, through alternative income opportunities and the revalorization of traditions and cultural practices. Indigenous tourism is often viewed as a double-edged sword, and the question is whether tourism is primarily a means to alleviate socio-economic problems or if it is a new form of colonialism and a threat to traditional culture (Maureira & Stenbacka, 2015). In the case of indigenous communities in Québec, tourism offers great potential for them. It not only provides an opportunity to improve their eco­ nomic and political situation but also to support the process of reclamation of land and other rights. Tourism may help them to protect their territory and initiate a debate on the use of natural resources. However, these communities are facing both opportunities and obstacles in the development of indigenous tourism. Tourism practices, such as the display of objects and performance of art and culture, influ­ ence the ways that indigenous people see themselves and their identity. Cultural practices, once suppressed by colonial powers, are often negotiated and traditions reinvented in relation to the expectations of guests on the one hand, and the con­ venience and economic benefits to the hosts on the other. Cultural authenticity is challenged and performed in ways that benefit contemporary life within the com­ munities. Cultural performances in some contexts may also reproduce or challenge traditional indigenous identities, and fuel tensions and conflicts between different groups within the communities who hold different opinions with regard to the role of tourism. The negotiations of culture and identity in relation to tourism highlight the boundary between front stage and back stage regions in the host–guest encoun­ ter. Authenticity in this case is not only produced based on the guests’ expectations

120

Tourism and Ethnic Communities

and consumption of tourism products but is also controlled and reproduced by the hosts or, even in some cases, by non-indigenous intermediaries. Cultural practices and the ways of life of the community are communicated within the community in order to strengthen their cultural identity and transfer knowledge between generations. They are transmitted outside of the community in order to ensure widespread understanding of the situation and community’s goals. Indigenous communities have adopted non-indigenous ideas and practices, and adapted them to suit their own cultural purposes. Adaptation does not necessar­ ily lead to a weakened cultural identity but may actually strengthen it as it makes locals more aware of differences (Lucero, 2014). Negative feelings may arise in the community when there is uncertainty about what tourism might bring – it could turn everyday life into a tourist show, or result in an uneven distribution of effects within the community. Indigenous hosts who transform their cultural elements into tourist products are constantly faced with the challenge of sharing their culture without compromising its integrity (Notzke, 2004). Furthermore, tourism devel­ opment may change or consolidate gendered identities. The tourism industry has been shown in several studies to modify gender and ethnic identities (Ypeij, 2012) and to encourage a gendered division of labor (Phommavong & Sörensson, 2014). Gender inequality is a common issue in indigenous communities as women usually bear more responsibility for work and family matters than men who are socialized to have more freedom. Female empowerment has increased as women become entrepreneurs and access new roles in society. However, indigenous women tend to experience less support in entrepreneurship. A major barrier to indigenous female entrepreneurship is lack of access to resources as well as lack of confidence and trust in general (Maureira & Stenbacka, 2015). Nevertheless, indigenous tourism not only provides a way of making a living, it is also an opportunity for social movement for indigenous people (Ypeij, 2012). Greater involvement in tourism activities leads to the improvement of indigenous peoples’ overall socio-economic status. As indigenous human and institutional capacity expands, so will opportunities to capitalize on marketplace interest in such tourism. Indigenous tourism may serve as a platform for reconciliation between indigenous groups and non-indigenous people (Higgins-Desbiolles, 2006), but it should not be utilized as a possible solution to all problems in the communities since it has both positive and negative impacts (Hall & Page, 2002; Bresner, 2010; Nielsen, 2010). There is a need for the various stakeholders and players in the tourism industry to learn more about indigenous tourism products and the environ­ ments in which they occur (Notzke, 2004). 3.5 Case Study: Tourism’s Impact on Native Americans in the USA Native Americans and Tourism on Reservations

Native Americans are the most socio-economically disadvantaged and margin­ alized ethnic group in the United States (Spencer & Glover, 2011). Like other

Tourism and Ethnic Communities

121

aboriginal communities around the world, Native Americans have the highest pov­ erty rate among all minority groups and 25.4% of them lived below the poverty line in 2018 (Poverty USA, 2018). Their unemployment rate was 6.6% in the same year (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2019). They had the lowest educational achievement rates in comparison to other ethnic groups, and less than 15% of Native Americans had attained a bachelor’s degree or higher level of education (Muhammad et al., 2019). There were 318 federally recognized tribes, ranging in size from one or two members to over 200,000 on the Navajo Reservation (Lew, 1996). They usu­ ally live in reservations that are tracks of land reserved for them. Some tribes are combined with others on a single reservation, while others are split among several reservations. The federal government recognizes approximately 300 reservations, which range in area from less than one acre to over 17 million acres. Together, they cover some 55 million acres (Lew, 1996). Each reservation has a distinct and sepa­ rate government and administrative structure (Lew, 1998). Most of the residents on reservations are tribal members. Economic and social conditions of reservations vary considerably from state to state (Lew, 1998). These reservations contain largely untapped natural and cultural resources, which are appealing to a large number of tourists from the United States and abroad. In a search for viable economic development opportunities, many abo­ riginal communities have turned to tourism development on their reservation lands (Browne & Nolan, 1989). Deliberate attempts to develop tourism on some reser­ vations, initiated primarily in the 1960s, were not highly successful due to flawed early feasibility studies and deficiencies in market analysis and tourism manage­ ment (Browne & Nolan, 1989). Since then, some tribal groups have been able to adjust to the growth of tourism and establish native-owned, operated and con­ trolled businesses. For instance, Taos Pueblo in New Mexico has attracted a steady increase of visitors over the years and has come to rely heavily on tourism as its primary economic base supporting tribal programs (Lujan, 1993). By controlling the tourism development on their reservations, tribes have the opportunity to assert a degree of economic independence as they capitalize on their lands and cultural traditions. In turn, the increased economic independence helps them heighten their sense of pride, self-esteem and self-determination (Browne & Nolan, 1989). With the growing popularity of Native American culture as a tourist attraction, tourism today has been widely considered an important means to strengthen and diversify the economies of aboriginal communities on reservations (Spencer & Glover, 2011). Despite the booming tribal casino resort industry in recent years, Native American culture remains the main lure for tourists to reservations. The Impacts of Tourism on Native Americans

A number of studies have examined the effects of tourism on indigenous people living on Native American lands. In a survey of 49 tribal managers and officials, Browne and Nolan (1989) reported that tourism was a major component in the economies of 49 of the 161 reservations in the Western USA that responded to

122

Tourism and Ethnic Communities

their survey. They found that reservations varied significantly in degree and type of tourism development. A few had major destination resort complexes while oth­ ers merely offered an opportunity for sightseeing, a visitor center or a museum. Numerous tourist activities and attractions were available, but varied considerably between reservations. Tribal managers generally held favorable attitudes toward tourism development, and they viewed tourism, if appropriately managed, as a force for cultural revitalization and maintenance of cultural identity, and as a means of increasing understanding of native culture. Increased self-esteem, selfdetermination and economic independence were frequently mentioned by the tribes who actively promoted tourism. Tourism was also credited with the preservation of cultural heritage and producing educational opportunities for tribal members. Although tourism was seen as having great potential for economic development on some reservations, many respondents expressed a desire to keep part of their lives and reservations private and stated that tourists should be restricted from some events (e.g., private religious activities, sacred dances, feasts, rites, pilgrimages to shrines, puberty rituals and funerals), and certain parts of their reservation were offlimits to visitors. Some were concerned over existing or potential damage to their reservation’s natural resources, from litter, damage to plants and disturbance of animals, and raised management issues that were not being addressed adequately. In a similar survey of 118 tribal officials in 1994, Lew (1998) also found sig­ nificant regional variations in tourism resources and levels of development across reservations, which were affected by the perceived importance of tourism and its relationship to other tribal activities. The tribes were significant players in tour­ ism development on their reservation lands. Many respondents felt strong com­ munity support for tourism. Tribes in Eastern United States tended to be more business-oriented and expressed stronger community support for tourism, while tourism intensities were lower in many areas of the West due to ambivalent atti­ tudes toward reservation-based tourism in the communities. Community support for tourism declined considerably from the east to the west in the United States. Gaming was found as the most common attraction and generated significant rev­ enues for some tribes. However, Lew (1998) suggested that gaming is not necessar­ ily the best way to achieve high tourism interest and values, and the development of historical and cultural attractions and improvement of other tourist facilities and services are crucial for the long-term success of tourism. Other inquiries have focused on the views of community members in gen­ eral as opposed to tribal officials. Lujan (1993) examined Taos Pueblo’s atti­ tudes toward tourism through in-depth interviews of six informants and informal interactions with other Pueblo residents. His findings revealed that the respond­ ents generally perceived tourism as necessary to the economic well-being of the Pueblo and residents had learned to accommodate tourists in their daily routine, although tourists were regarded as a nuisance and invasive as they tend to be intrusive and insensitive toward Pueblo culture. Tourism did not appear to be a threat to their culture; instead, it enhanced appreciation of their lifestyle, culture

Tourism and Ethnic Communities

123

and beliefs among community members. However, tourism created a complex living environment, forcing them to close certain ceremonies and sections of the Pueblo to outsiders. Lew (1999) surveyed 31 Pueblo Indians in northern Arizona and New Mexico and revealed that most respondents felt that the tourism situation needed to be improved and they favored expanding visitor services and increasing signage to control visitors. Andereck and Vogt (2000) compared resident attitudes toward tourism and their support for 14 tourism development options across seven com­ munities in Arizona, including the Hualapai Indian Reservation. In general, resi­ dents in all communities perceived tourism positively and supported most types of development. However, residents of the Hualapai Reservation rated many of the development options lower than did other respondents, especially in the case of parks, events, retail stores and taverns. They suggested that the reservation needs economic development, but residents were hesitant to open it to tourists. Drawing upon data from surveys of attendees at American Indian wacipis (pow­ wows) in South Dakota, USA, Spencer and Glover (2011) compared event attend­ ees’ attitudes toward tourism on reservations and reported that native respondents were generally less sanguine about tourism on reservations than non-native people. Native respondents generally supported tourism on their reservations, but also had misgivings about it. Their attitudes toward tourism were weakly related to demo­ graphic characteristics. Inter-tribal differences in such attitudes existed even among ethnically related Siouan tribes. They concluded that “one-size-fits-all” plans for reservation tourism are unlikely to succeed and future development initiatives should involve public participation in the planning process and incorporate diverse views of reservation residents on a case-by-case basis. LaFever (2011) conducted an assessment of an ecotourism project for a Navajo community in Gallup, New Mexico. Ecotourism projects have been used as the economic development initia­ tive to replace exploitation of the land and aboriginal communities with ecologi­ cally friendly tourism and Native American entrepreneurship. LaFever analyzed the Pyramid Peak trail project and highlighted the importance of finding ways to meet the participatory needs of the marginalized community, instituting specialized communication practices, and fostering an environment that would better engage the community. He also suggested the need for continued development of two-way information-sharing practices, and for closer ties among communication and plan­ ning scholars. Mehrotra (2018) examined the impact of tourism on the lives of Native Ameri­ can communities in four Pueblos in Northern New Mexico’s Taos region and ana­ lyzed the benefits tourists bring to these communities, through observation and interviews with 16 of their members. New Mexico is home to some of the largest settlements of Pueblo peoples in North America. The study revealed that the Pueb­ los generally welcome tourists to come and learn about their culture and to visit their unique ancestral buildings and sacred sites. Pride, unease, hope and frustra­ tion are frequently cited by the Pueblo interviewees to describe their experiences

124

Tourism and Ethnic Communities

of tourism. They expressed both pride on their patrimony and unique culture that draws visitors from thousands of miles away and unease at the disrespectful behav­ iors of visitors and their ignorance of tribal codes and customs, such as taking unauthorized pictures, touching monuments and climbing on artifacts, which are strictly prohibited by tribal codes. For some interviewees, respecting their patri­ mony was more important than tourist dollars. Many were anxious regarding the perceived disrespect of outsiders for the archaeological and spiritual patrimony of the Pueblos. They stressed the importance of educating tourists on Pueblo norms and customs as a way of addressing disrespect and promoting understanding. The construction of tourist centers and the enhancement of community museums were recommended as strategies for promoting respect and understanding, but lack of funds was often identified as an obstacle to the improvement of such centers and enhancing the tourism revenue they might be capable of generating. In general, the majority of interviewees considered the presence of international visitors and their interactions with Pueblos as positive and mutually enriching results of tourism although a few held conservative attitudes that were cautious about the outsiders’ presence in the community. The research participants held varying views regarding the distribution of tour­ ism revenues and the worth of the tourism industry in general. Some described tourism as being of marginal economic value, secondary to the socio-economic vitality of the community, and sparsely promoted in existing touristic institutions. Others considered the tourism economy as important, and described it as sustain­ able, important and beneficial to artisans, but also as seasonal, leading to depend­ ency and sometimes invasive. However, many did not view tourism being a key driver of their economy outside of the art market and casinos, with artists as direct economic beneficiaries of tourism. They expressed frustration with existing tour­ istic and economic structures that are either insufficient promoters of economic development or ineffective guides to tribal norms and culture to visitors. Some thought that the state government had neglected the tribe as a possible target for economic improvement through tourism. Despite some dissatisfaction, the par­ ticipants suggested a variety of strategies for improving tourism to address the needs of the local population and advance economic growth. For instance, more and better-organized group tours, and better marketing and/or partnership with the state government were raised as possible strategies to make the area a target for tourists. Attitudes toward the tourist–host relationship varied in different locations but, tourists are generally perceived to be a positive means of promoting cultural interchange, with a minority holding more conservative views about the pres­ ence of international visitors. The views on the economic relationship between the tourists and Pueblos are complex, with casino and their employees and artists profiting from their presence, but with many others not directly benefitting from tourism. In general, the Pueblos do not see themselves as culturally threatened by the diversity of tourists visiting them, but they wish not to be misunderstood and disrespected.

Tourism and Ethnic Communities

125

Discussion and Conclusions

It has been revealed that tourism development has various social and economic implications for Native Americans who live on reservations. Large regional vari­ ations exist in the development of tourism on these reservation lands (Lew, 1996, 1998). Eastern tribes are more business-oriented and have stronger community sup­ port for tourism in comparison with Western tribes who hold ambivalent attitudes toward reservation-based tourism in their communities. The economic motive for developing or maintaining a reservation tourism industry tends to be strong (Browne & Nolan, 1989). Many tribes welcome tourism as a means of increasing understanding and appreciation of their culture and take complete control of their tourism enterprises. For these tribes, tourism has not only offered great potential for economic development and has generated additional income but also has led to increased self-esteem, self-determination and economic independence. However, tribe members also held mixed feelings on the distribution of tourism revenues and the worth of the tourism industry in general. Some did not see tourism being a key driver of their economy since, if casinos and artists were the main beneficiaries, others were left behind. Although there are some similarities in attitudes toward tourism, perceptions of tourist–host relationships are usually mixed, with some who perceive tourism as necessary to their economic well-being and who have, accordingly, learned to accommodate tourists in their daily life, while others hold more conservative views on tourism income and are concerned about the disrespectful behaviors of some visitors. Respect for tribal culture and patrimony may be more important than tour­ ism income for them. Indeed, these views are not contradictory and may be held by the same individual. Inter-tribal differences in such attitudes also exist among ethni­ cally related tribes on the same reservation (Spencer & Glover, 2011). Although the residents of the Hualapai Reservation desired economic development, they were hesitant to open the reservation to tourists (Andereck & Vogt, 2000). Here, tourism did not seem to be a threat to native culture; instead, it enhanced an appreciation of traditional lifestyle, culture and beliefs in the community. However, tourism also created a complex living environment, forcing some communities to close certain ceremonies to outsiders (Lujan, 1993). Reservation tourism is not always success­ ful due to the diversity of cultural and political norms found in tribes (Maxwell, 1978), derived in part from marked differences in the tribes’ aboriginal governmen­ tal forms (Cornell & Kalt, 1995) and in the extent to which tribes have acculturated into mainstream American life (Spencer & Glover, 2011). Reservations hold considerable opportunities for visitors interested in native culture. Yet tourism development, to succeed in the long term, requires effective tourism planning and wider inclusivity of indigenous communities to derive mutu­ ally beneficial goals. Public participation in tourism planning can minimize the risks of commodifying cultural expressions, losing traditional practices and/or adapting traditions to meet tourists’ preferences (Ryan & Aicken, 2005). It can

126

Tourism and Ethnic Communities

also increase the likelihood that the subsequent developments are appropriately tailored to the particular customs, traditions, preferences and circumstances on a given reservation (Spencer & Glover, 2011). As Lew (1996) suggested, much more could be done in tribal tourism management and planning, both from a develop­ ment perspective and a cultural protection orientation. 3.6

Case Study: Ecotourism in Shanmei, Taiwan

Sustainable development and its derivative, sustainable tourism, have both concep­ tual and practical deficiencies that have frustrated their application. Accordingly, Tao and Wall (2009a, 2009b) adopted a sustainable livelihoods approach as being more practical. When tourism is introduced into a community, it is important that it complements rather than displaces existing activities. A case study is presented of a Cou (Tsou) community in Taiwan to illustrate the links between tourism and other livelihood strategies. Sustainable Livelihoods (SL)

Livelihood, although not without complexities, is an easier concept to understand and use than development. In contrast to the environment and development thinking of sustainable development, SL is a people-centered paradigm which emphasizes people’s inherent capacities and knowledge and is focused on community-level actions (Chambers, 1986; Scoones, 1998; UNDP & Wanmali, 1999). With an emphasis on livelihood security, it recognizes that it is necessary to begin by focus­ ing on people, with the resources that they currently control, and the knowledge and skills that they already have (Chambers, 1988). According to Chambers and Conway (1992, cited in Scoones, 1998, p. 5), A livelihood comprises the capabilities, assets (including both material and social resources) and activities required to make a living. A livelihood is sustainable when it can cope with and recover from stresses and shocks, main­ tain or enhance its capabilities and assets, while not undermining the natural resource base. Many people in minority communities sustain themselves and their families by undertaking multiple subsistence and paid activities, rather by doing a specific job. An SL approach inherently reveals the multi-sectoral character of real life, inte­ grating environmental, social and economic issues into a holistic framework, and providing the sort of cross-sectoral and cross-thematic approach that should be the hallmark of sustainability (Helmore & Singh, 2001; UNDP & Wanmali, 1999). An SL approach is directed toward the ways in which local people can seek to meet basic and ongoing needs for food and shelter, as well as security and dignity, through meaningful work, while simultaneously striving to minimize environmental

Tourism and Ethnic Communities

127

degradation, accomplish rehabilitation and address concerns about social justice (Walker et al., 2001) by focusing on their assets, strategies and strengths rather than needs alone. More details on a sustainable livelihoods approach can be found in the references that have been cited and a thorough and fair critique of such applications is also available (Newsham et al., 2022). Shanmei, Taiwan

Shanmei is a poor, marginalized, indigenous, Cou community in a postcolonial situation. It is located in the mountainous interior of Taiwan. In 2005, it had 189 households and the population was 668. The social and economic vicissitudes of Shanmei began with the introduction of a market economy during the Japanese colonial period from 1895 to 1945. More dramatic change came from 1945 to the present from the Nationalist Chinese government’s policies to “make the mountain like the plains” (shandi pindihua) and “make the mountain modernized” (Shandi shianndaihua). The improvement of transportation and the introduction of a market economy resulted in a shift in Shanmei Cou economic activities from slash-and-burn agriculture and hunting, to a sedentary agricultural and forest industry and, more recently, toward tourism. For approximately 30 years, Shanmei villagers have applied Cou traditional knowledge to restore the fish population in the Danayigu River and have used their natural resources as attractions to develop tourism in pursuit of economic develop­ ment (Tao et al., 2010). The idea of using natural resources to develop a tourism economy was that of a local leader (Wang, 2001). In 1967, he went to South Africa as a church representative. When he visited an ecological park in South Africa, he immediately thought of Danayigu in Shanmei. He thought that if Danayigu could be restored, the combination of an ecological park and Cou traditional culture could be a good basis on which to build tourism. The Danayigu River, as with other riv­ ers in the region, is the habitat of the Gu fish (Varicorhinus barbatulus) which is treasured by the Cou. The glitter of the silver bellies of the fish as they flip to eat moss on the rocks is an unusual sight. The former village head thought that if these unusual natural scenes could be restored and managed as sustainable resources, not only would Han Chinese come to watch, but local residents could take advantage of the opportunity to sell them local specialties. The first step was to convince those who owned the fishing grounds on the Danayigu River to turn their rights over to the community. However, the idea of reviving the Danayigu River and managing its fish was not easily comprehended and accepted by all Shanmei residents. Even though the Danayigu River and its surroundings are state-owned and the majority of Han people do not acknowledge the Cou’s system of property rights (right of use) to the traditional fishing grounds, Shanmei had maintained such a system. In 1988, a local committee was established to hold neighborhood meetings and explain the leader’s plan. It took about one year to explain, communicate and convince the elders to relinquish their fishing rights.

128

Tourism and Ethnic Communities

After almost two years of explanation and communication to reach a consensus of the whole village, the Shanmei Cou convened the village assembly and passed the “Bylaws for the Danayigu Self-Administered Conservation District”. This was the first set of bylaws for indigenous self-administration in Taiwan (Gau, 2005). The purpose of the bylaws was to develop the tourism industry and promote economic growth by means of the establishment of Danayigu as a natural ecologi­ cal park owned collectively by the Shanmei Cou. The highest authority of the park is the village assembly that authorizes, develops, operates and manages Danayigu. The bylaws also regulate both Shanmei Cou’s and visitors’ use of park resources and provide penalties if the regulations are violated. The statement was essentially a declaration of Shanmei autonomy. The Shanmei Cou had made Danayigu their communal homeland and property and, by way of communal resource manage­ ment, it became a potential tourism destination. The Danayigu Ecological Park was established and formally opened to the pub­ lic in 1995 based on a combination of natural and cultural attractions. The main tourist activities are walking the trails along the river, viewing the fish and expo­ sure to Cou culture, particularly local foods and cultural performances. The park has attracted a large number of visitors and has created a number of opportunities for local employment and cash earnings. Income is derived from an entrance fee and, during certain periods of the year, the area is also open to the public for fish­ ing and a fishing fee is charged. Other sources of income are selling fried fish, fish food, soft drinks and spring water, meals, and providing services, such as tour guiding and cultural performances. The Shanmei Community Development Asso­ ciation has used income generated from the park effectively and has enabled the majority of residents to benefit from tourism to some extent. For example, local people are employed as gatekeepers, wardens, in the restaurants, and as cultural performers. Pensions are provided to seniors and scholarships are made available to young people. Almost every household in Shanmei has a connection with the park and an increasing number of local livelihood activities are directly or indi­ rectly related to tourism. The park has been important in increasing the range of livelihood options. Many tourism activities require part-time or casual labor which fits in with cur­ rent lifestyles. The new, supplementary, livelihood opportunities to gain cash earn­ ings generated inside the park are close to home and are particularly beneficial for mothers and single parents with young children, the disabled, the unemployed, the elderly and women. The presence of the park attracts visitors of the surrounding area, enabling some residents to operate their own businesses in the community. Tourism links with other economic sectors, particularly agriculture, for locally pro­ duced foodstuffs are now consumed by visitors rather than sent to urban markets, increasing the proportion of revenue retained in the community. The tourism prod­ ucts build on, and help to preserve, natural resources and culture. These are assets that many people can access, even though they may lack financial resources. Even though not every villager in Shanmei is involved in tourism business, the majority

Tourism and Ethnic Communities

129

have links to tourism in one way or the other, whether directly or indirectly, so it enhances their well-being. But it is a fragile component of the economy because of its seasonality and susceptibility to hazards. In 2009, Shanmei experienced the ravages of typhoon Morakot, the deadliest typhoon in Taiwan’s history, and much of the park was destroyed. Roads and some bridges in the mountains were impassable until they were repaired. Tourism ceased for it was difficult to get into or out of Shanmei. Many men gained temporary employment in the construction industry to restore access. Others worked to repair the damage to the trails and bridges in the park so that it could reopen once access was restored. Lessons

Danayigu Ecological Park was an extremely successful tourism attraction that was created from local natural and cultural resources with minimal external inputs of expertise or investment. The traditional cultural ways supported mutual support and the sharing of benefits. However, the importance of enlightened and persistent leadership should not be underestimated. Iorio and Wall (2012), in a study of a village in Sardinia, identified the important role played by cosmopolitan locals: people from the community who were familiar with the place, its resources and culture, but who had left and been exposed to new ideas and ways of thinking, only to return to stimulate and organize the community to reassess resources and opportunities and move in a novel direction. Shanmei is both a success story and a cautionary tale. While Shanmei was suc­ cessful for many years, it also demonstrates that tourism is a risky business and it is dangerous to put all of one’s eggs into the tourism basket. Summary

The ethnic tourism industry produces a great range of socio-economic and envi­ ronmental impacts that are complex and interrelated. Although tourism can pro­ vide regenerative economic and social wealth, its adverse impacts often lead to diminished community interest and support for the industry, particularly at local levels. Ethnic communities, particularly those located in less-developed countries, are continuously faced with various social and environmental problems in the pro­ cess of tourism development. As ethnic minorities tend to be marginalized and economically/politically disadvantaged (Cohen, 1989, 2016), they usually have limited control over tourism resources and activities (Yang & Wall, 2009). The roles of the government and entrepreneurs as well as tourists’ perceptions are often emphasized in the tourism planning process to the relative neglect of local voices (Yun & Zhang, 2017). Many ethnic attractions are mostly owned by outside entre­ preneurs, rather than by minority people (Sun & Zhang, 2014; Yang & Wall, 2008). Tourism employment for local residents tends to be seasonal and lowly paid in

130

Tourism and Ethnic Communities

contrast to the profits accruing to investors and operators. The consequent adverse impact has precipitated strong protests by a few groups who have actively opposed large-scale tourism developments for their locality. However, currently, there is limited effort to protect minority groups or indigenous communities, their land and environment from negative impacts of developmental changes. Supportive host communities and their cultural assets are the important foundations of a successful ethnic tourism industry. Neglect of conservation and negative local attitudes can threaten the future of tourism. In summary, numerous studies have discussed the impacts of ethnic tourism on host communities, such as economic benefits, social concerns, environmental sustainability, and their associations with residents’ attitudes toward tourism in the host community. Despite this rich body of research, few have paid much attention to the perspectives of ethnic minority groups concerning indigenous values and collective culture. Relevant research to date is fragmented, limited in scope and lacks a consistent methodological development. The Shanmei case demonstrates that ethnic communities can develop tourism successfully with minimal external inputs, given favorable resources and strong leadership, but that even when things are going well, tourism can be a risky business. Local attitudes are a key predictor of supportive actions toward tourism development. There is the need to investigate this dimension in ethnic areas where tourism is under development. More longitu­ dinal ethnographic studies are needed to ensure greater understanding of tourism’s impacts on ethnic communities, so that inherent costs are minimized and benefits are increased. More research is also needed that investigates the types of tourism products and cultural displays that are of more or less benefit to various groups and individuals in host communities. Comparative studies across different cultures, communities, regions and countries regarding the social and cultural consequences of ethnic tourism development would also enrich this area of research and practice. References Adams, K.M. (2003). Cultural displays and tourism in Africa and the Americas. Ethnohis­ tory, 50(3), 567–573. Akyeampong, O.A. (2011). Pro-poor tourism: Residents’ expectations, experiences and per­ ceptions in the Kakum National Park Area of Ghana. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 19(2), 197–213. Altman, J.C. (1988). Aboriginals, Tourism and Development: The Northern Territory Expe­ rience. Darwin: Australian National University, North Australia Research Unit. Andereck, K., & Jurowski, C. (2006). Tourism and quality of life. In Jennings, G., & Nickerson, N.P. (Eds.). Quality tourism experiences (pp. 136–154). Oxford: Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann. Andereck, K., & Nyaupane, G. (2011). Development of a tourism and quality-of-life instru­ ment. In Quality-of-Life Community Indicators for Parks, Recreation and Tourism Man­ agement (pp. 95–113). Thousand Oaks, CA: Springer. Andereck, K., & Vogt, C. (2000). The relationship between residents’ attitudes toward tour­ ism and tourism development options. Journal of Travel Research, 39(1), 27–36.

Tourism and Ethnic Communities

131

Aref, F., Redzuan, M., Emby, Z., & Gill, S.S. (2009). Barriers of tourism industry through community capacity building. International Review of Business Research Papers, 5(4), 399–408. Ashley, C., Roe, D., & Goodwin, H. (2001). Pro-Poor Tourism Strategies: Making Tourism Work for the Poor: A Review of Experience. London: Overseas Development Institute. Balaguer, J., & Cantavella-Jord´a, M. (2002). Tourism as a long-run economic growth fac­ tor: The Spanish case. Applied Economics, 34(7), 877–884. Bianchi, R.V. (2009). The ‘critical turn’ in tourism studies: A radical critique. Tourism Geog­ raphies, 11(4), 484–504. Biddulph, R. (2015). Limits to mass tourism’s effects in rural peripheries. Annals of Tourism Research, 50, 98–112. Blake, A. (2008). Tourism and income distribution in East Africa. International Journal of Tourism Research, 10(6), 511–524. Blake, A., Arbache, J., Sinclair, T., & Teles, V. (2008). Tourism and poverty relief. Annals of Tourism Research, 35(1), 107–126. Boissevain, J. (1996). Ritual, tourism and cultural commoditization in Malta: Culture by the pound? In Selwyn, T. (Ed.). The Tourist Image: Myth and Myth Making in Tourism (pp. 105–120). Chichester: John Wiley. Bresner, K. (2010). Othering, power relations, and indigenous tourism: Experiences in Aus­ tralia’s Northern Territory. PlatForum, 11, 10–26. Browne, R.J., & Nolan, M.L. (1989). Western Indian reservation tourism development. Annals of Tourism Research, 16(3), 360–376. Bunten, A.C. (2010). More like ourselves: Indigenous capitalism through tourism. American Indian Quarterly, 34(3), 285–311. Bunten, A.C., & Graburn, N. (2009). Guest editorial: Current themes in indigenous tourism. London Journal of Tourism, Sport and Creative Industries, 2(1), 2–11. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2019). Labor Force Characteristics by Race and Ethnicity, 2018. www.bls.gov/opub/reports/race-and-ethnicity/2018/home.htm. Butler, R., & Hinch, T. (Eds.). (2007). Tourism and Indigenous Peoples: Issues and Implica­ tions. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann. Buzinde, C.N., Kalavar, J.M., & Melubo, K. (2014). Tourism and community well-being: The case of the Maasai in Tanzania. Annals of Tourism Research, 44, 20–35. Caglayan, E., Sak, N., & Karymshakov, K. (2012). Relationship between tourism and eco­ nomic growth: A panel Granger causality approach. Asian Economic and Financial Review, 2(5), 591–602. Carr, A., Ruhanen, L., & Whitford, M. (2016). Indigenous peoples and tourism: The chal­ lenges for sustainable tourism. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 24(8–9), 1067–1079. Cassel, S.H., & Maureira, T.M. (2017). Performing identity and culture in Indigenous tour­ ism – A study of Indigenous communities in Québec, Canada. Journal of Tourism and Cultural Change, 15(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/14766825.2015.1125910 Chambers, R. (1986). Sustainable Livelihood Thinking: An Approach to Poverty. Brighton: Institute of Development Studies, University of Sussex. Chambers, R. (1988). Sustainable rural livelihoods: A key strategy for people, environment and development. In Conroy, C., & Litvinoff, M. (Eds.). The Greening of Aid (pp. 1–17). London: Earthscan Publications/IIED. Chambers, R., & Conway, G. (1992). Sustainable Rural Livelihoods: Practical Concepts for the 21st Century. IDS Discussion Paper 296. Brighton: Institute of Development Studies, University of Sussex.

132

Tourism and Ethnic Communities

Chen, Z., Li, L., & Li, T. (2016). The organizational evolution, systematic construction and empowerment of Langde Miao’s community tourism. Tourism Management, 58(6), 75–86. Cho, J. (2011). Poverty Alleviation through Ecotourism in the Three Parallel Rivers World Heritage Site, Yunnan, China. Master’s thesis, Department of Culture Studies and Orien­ tal Languages, University of Oslo. Chow, C. (2005). Cultural diversity and tourism development in Yunnan Province, China. Geography, 90(3), 294–303. Cohen, E. (1988). Authenticity and commoditization in tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 15(3), 371–386. Cohen, E. (1989). Primitive and remote: Hill tribe trekking in Thailand. Annals of Tourism Research, 16(1), 30–61. Cohen, E. (2016). Ethnic tourism in mainland Southeast Asia: The state of the art. Tourism Recreation Research, 41(3), 232–245. Cole, S. (2007). Beyond authenticity and commodification. Annals of Tourism Research, 34(4), 943–960. Colton, J. (2005). Indigenous tourism development in Northern Canada: Beyond economic incentives. The Canadian Journal of Native Studies, 25(1), 85–206. Coria, J., & Calfucura, E. (2012). Ecotourism and the development of indigenous communi­ ties: The good, the bad, and the ugly. Ecological Economics, 73, 47–55. Cornell, S., & Kalt, J.P. (1995). Where does economic development really come from? con­ stitutional rule among the contemporary Sioux and Apache. Economic Inquiry, 33(3), 402–426. Croes, R. (2014). The role of tourism in poverty reduction: An empirical assessment. Tour­ ism Economics, 20(2), 207–226. https://doi.org/10.5367/te.2013.0275. Croes, R., & Rivera, M. (2015). Poverty Alleviation Through Tourism Development: A Com­ prehensive and Integrated Approach. London: Routledge. Crystal, E. (1989). Tourism in Toraja (Sulawesi, Indonesia). In Smith, V.J. (Ed.). Hosts and Guests: The Anthropology of Tourism (pp. 139–168). Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press. Cuong, V.M. (2020). Alienation of ethnic minorities in community-based tourism. Current Issues in Tourism, 23(21), 2649–2665. https://doi.org/10.1080/13683500.2020.1733942 Curtis, C. (2012). Québec has most Aboriginal Language Speakers. The Gazette, Octo­ ber 25, 2012, p. A10. Esman, M. (1984). Tourism as ethnic preservation: The Cajuns of Louisiana. The Annals of Tourism Research, 11, 451–467. Falak, S., Chiun, L.M., & Wee, A.Y. (2016). Sustainable rural tourism: An indigenous com­ munity perspective on positioning rural tourism. Tourism, 64(3), 311–327. Feng, X. (2008). Who benefits? Tourism development in Fenghuang County, China. Human Organization, 207–220. Ferriss, A.L. (2004). The quality of life concept in sociology. The American Sociologist, 35(3), 37–51. Fiji Islands Bureau of Statistics. (2017). 2017 Population and Housing Census. www.statsfiji.gov.fj/ (accessed August 2021). Fiskesjö, M. (2015). Wa grotesque: Headhunting theme parks and the Chinese nostalgia for primitive contemporaries. Ethnos, 80(4), 497–523. Fleischer, A., & Felsenstein, D. (2000). Support for rural tourism: Does it make a difference? Annals of Tourism Research, 27(4), 1007–1024.

Tourism and Ethnic Communities

133

García, F.A., Vázquez, A.B., & Macías, R.C. (2015). Resident’s attitudes towards the impacts of tourism. Tourism Management Perspectives, 13, 33–40. Gau, J.-S. (2005). Passing the Shady Valley: Danayigu Legend (in Chinese). Taipei: The Presbyterian Church in Taiwan. Gibson, D. (2014). Green tourism alleviating poverty community-based ecotourism in Fiji. In DeLacy, T., Jiang, M., Lipman, G., & Vorster, S. (Eds.). Green Growth and Travelism: Concept, Policy and Practice for Sustainable Tourism (pp. 159–173). London: Routledge. Glanville, J.L., & Bienenstock, E.J. (2009). A typology for understanding the connections among different forms of capital. American Behavioural Scientist, 52(11), 1507–1530. Goering, P.G. (1990). The response to tourism in Ladakh. Cultural Survival Quarterly, 14(1), 20–25. Goodwin, H. (2007). Indigenous tourism and poverty reduction. In Butler, R., & Hinch, T. (Eds.). Tourism and Indigenous Peoples (pp. 84–94). Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann. Graburn, N. (1976). Ethnic and Tourists Arts: Cultural Expressions from the Fourth World. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. Greenwood, D.J. (1989). Culture by the pound: An anthropological perspective on tourism as cultural commoditization. In Smith, V. (Ed.). Host and Guests: The Anthropology of Tourism (pp. 171–185). Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press. Greiner, R., Larson, S., Herr, A., & Bligh, V. (2005). Wellbeing of Nywaigi Traditional Own­ ers: The Contribution of Country to Wellbeing and the Role of Natural Resource Man­ agement: Report for the Burdekin Dry Tropics Board. Townsville: CSIRO. Grünewald, R.D.A. (2002). Tourism and cultural revival. Annals of Tourism Research, 29(4), 1004–1021. Gursoy, D., Chi, C.G., & Dyer, P. (2010). Locals’ attitudes toward mass and alternative tour­ ism: The case of sunshine coast, Australia. Journal of Travel Research, 49(3), 381–394. Gustafson, P. (2001). Meanings of place: Everyday experience theoretical conceptualiza­ tions. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 21(1), 5–16. Hall, C.M. (2007). Pro-poor Tourism: Who Benefits?: Perspectives on Tourism and Poverty Reduction. Bristol: Channel View Publications. Hall, M.C., & Page, S.J. (2002). The Geography of Tourism and Recreation: Space, Place and Environment (2nd ed.). London: Routledge. Hampton, M.P. (2005). Heritage, local communities and economic development. Annals of Tourism Research, 32(3), 735–759. Han, W. (2011). Participatory poverty reduction in China. In Zheng, Y. (Ed.). Poverty Reduc­ tion and Sustainable Development in Rural China (pp. 177–218). Leiden: Brill. Harrison, D., & Pratt, S. (2013). Tourism in Pacific Island countries In C. Cooper (Ed.). Contemporary Tourism Reviews (pp. 1–24). Oxford: Goodfellows Publishers. Harrison, D., & Schipani, S. (2007). Lao tourism and poverty alleviation: Community-based tourism in the private sector. Current Issues in Tourism, 10(2&3), 194–230. Harron, S., & Weiler, B. (1992). Review: Ethnic tourism. In Weiler, B., & Hall, C.M. (Eds.). Special Interest Tourism (pp. 83–92). London: Belhaven. Helmore, K., & Singh, N. (2001). Sustainable Livelihoods – Building on the Wealth of the Poor. Bloomfield: Kumarian Press. Henderson, J. (2003). Ethnic heritage as a tourist attraction: The Peranakans of Singapore. International Journal of Heritage Studies, 9(1), 27–44. Higgins-Desbiolles, F. (2006). Reconciliation Tourism: On Crossing Bridges and Fund­ ing Ferries. In Burns, P. M., & Novelli, M. (Eds.). Tourism and Social Identities: Local Frameworks and Local Realities (pp. 137–155). Elsevier.

134

Tourism and Ethnic Communities

Hillman, B. (2003). Paradise under construction: Minorities, Myths and modernity in North­ west Yunnan. Asian Ethnicity, 4(2), 175–188. Hillman, B. (2009). Ethnic tourism and ethnic politics in Tibetan China. Harvard Asia Pacific Review, 10(1), 3–6. Hitchcock, M. (1999). Tourism and ethnicity: Situational perspectives. International Jour­ nal of Tourism Research, 1, 17–32. Hitchcock, M. (2000). Ethnicity and tourism entrepreneurship in Java and Bali. Current Issues in Tourism, 3(3), 204–225. Holden, A., Sonne, J., & Novelli, M. (2011). Tourism and poverty reduction: An interpreta­ tion by the poor of Elmina, Ghana. Tourism Planning & Development, 8(3), 317–334. Hung, C.H. (2017). A study of how Indigenous peoples perceive the impact of tourism and support these attitudes in their tribes. Asian Journal of Environment & Ecology, 5(4), 1–11. Indigenous Tourism Association of Canada. (2015). Indigenous Tourism Research Project. https://indigenoustourism.ca/corporate/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/REPORT-ATAC­ Ntl-Ab-Tsm-Research-2015-April-FINAL.pdf. Indigenous Tourism Association of Canada. (2019). Annual Report (2018–2019). https://indigenoustourism.ca/corporate/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/ITAC-Annual­ Report-2018-19.Pdf. Iorio, M., & Wall, G. (2012). Behind the masks: Tourism and community in Sardinia. Tourism Management, 33(6), 1440–1449. Ishii, K. (2012). The impact of ethnic tourism on hill tribes in Thailand. Annals of Tourism Research, 39(1), 290–310. Jamieson, W., Goodwin, H., & Edmunds, C. (2004). Contributions of Tourism to Poverty Alleviation: Pro-poor Tourism and the Challenge of Measuring Impacts. Paper prepared for the Transport Policy and Tourism Section, Transport and Tourism Division. Bangkok: United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific. Jim, C.Y. (2000). Environmental changes associated with mass urban tourism and nature tourism development in Hongkong. Environmentalist, 20(3), 233–247. Job, H., & Paesler, F. (2013). Links between nature-based tourism, protected areas, poverty alleviation and crises – the example of Wasini Island (Kenya). Journal of Outdoor Rec­ reation and Tourism, 1–2, 18–28. Jutla, R.S., & Scherle, D.C.N. (2006). Ethnic identity, heritage and tourism. Tourism Geog­ raphies, 8(3), 310–321. Kerstetter, D., & Bricker, K. (2009). Exploring Fijian’s sense of place after exposure to tour­ ism development. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 17(6), 691–708. Kim, K., Uysal, M., & Sirgy, M.J. (2013). How does tourism in a community impact the quality of life of community residents? Tourism Management, 36, 527–540. Kim, N., Song, H., & Pyun, J.H. (2016). The relationship among tourism, poverty, and eco­ nomic development in developing countries: A panel data regression analysis. Tourism Economics, 22(6), 1174–1190. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354816616669038. King, V.T. (1993). Tourism and culture in Malaysia. In Hitchcock, M., King, V.T., & Parnwell, M. (Eds.) Tourism in South-East Asia (pp. 99–116). London and New York: Routledge. Klieger, P.C. (1990). Close encounters: “intimate” tourism in Tibet. Cultural Survival Quar­ terly, 14(2), 38–42. Kolås, Å. (2004). Tourism and the making of place in Shangri-La. Tourism Geographies, 6(3), 262–278.

Tourism and Ethnic Communities

135

Kunasekaran, P., Gill, S.S., Ramachandran, S., Shuib, A., Baum, T., & Herman Mohammad Afandi, S. (2017). Measuring sustainable indigenous tourism indicators: A case of Mah Meri ethnic group in Carey island, Malaysia. Sustainability, 9(7), 1256. LaFever, M. (2011). Empowering Native Americans: Communication, planning, and dia­ logue for eco-tourism in Gallup, New Mexico. Journal of International and Intercultural Communication, 4(2), 127–145. Latip, N.A., Rasoolimanesh, S.M., Jaafar, M., Marzuki, A., & Umar, M.U. (2018). Indig­ enous residents’ perceptions towards tourism development: A case of Sabah, Malaysia. Journal of Place Management and Development, 11(4), 391–410. Lee, J., Kyle, G., & Scott, D. (2012). The mediating effect of place attachment on the rela­ tionship between festival satisfaction and loyalty to the festival hosting destination. Jour­ nal of Travel Research, 51(6), 754–767. Lee, T.H. (2013). Influence analysis of community resident support for sustainable tourism development. Tourism Management, 34, 37–46. Lemelin, R.H., Johnston, M., Dawson, J., Stewart, E., & Mattina, C. (2012). From hunting and fishing to ecotourism: Examining the transitioning tourism industry in Nunavik. The Polar Journal, 2(1), 39–60. Lepage, P. (2005). Aboriginal Peoples: Fact and Fiction. Québec: Affaires indigenes et du Nord Canada, Government du Québec. Lew, A. (1996). Tourism management on American Indian lands in the USA. Tourism Man­ agement, 17(5), 355–365. Lew, A. (1998). American Indian reservation tourism: A survey of resources and practices. In Lew, A., & Van Otten, G. (Eds.). Tourism and Gaming on American Indian Lands (pp. 59–81). New York: Cognizant Communication Corporation. Lew, A. (1999). Managing tourism-induced acculturation through environmental design on Pueblo Indian villages in the US. In Singh, T., & Singh, S. (Eds.). Tourism Develop­ ment in Critical Environments (pp. 120–136). New York: Cognizant Communication Corporation. Li, J. (2004). Molding Dai-ness on China’s Periphery: Ethnic Tourism and the Politics of Identity Construction in Contemporary Xishuang Banna. PhD Dissertation, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA. Li, J. (2012). The folkloric, the spectacular, and the institutionalized: Touristifying ethnic minority dances on China’s southwest frontiers. Journal of Tourism and Social Change, 10(1), 65–83. Li, W.J.C. (2006). Community decisionmaking: Participation in development. Annals of Tourism Research, 33(1), 132–143. Li, Y., Yu, H., Chen, T., Hu, J., & Cui, H. (2016). Livelihood changes and evolution of upland ethnic communities driven by tourism: A case study in Guizhou province, South­ west China. Journal of Mountain Science, 13(7), 1313–1332. Liang, Z.X., & Hui, T.K. (2016). Residents’ quality of life and attitudes toward tourism development in China. Tourism Management, 57, 56–67. Liu, J. (2009). Study of the protection of traditional culture in minority villages in three par­ allel rivers area: The case of Zhongding Village. Tourism Research, 1(2), 51–55. Lo, K., Li, J., Wang, M., Li, C., Li, S., & Li, Y. (2018). A comparative analysis of participating and non-participating households in pro-poor tourism in southern Shaanxi, China. Tour­ ism Planning & Development, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/21568316.2018.1490340. Lor, J., Kwa, S., & Donaldson, J. (2019). Making ethnic tourism good for the poor. Annals of Tourism Research, 76, 140–152.

136

Tourism and Ethnic Communities

Lucero, N.M. (2014). ‘It’s not About Place, it’s About What’s Inside’: American Indian Women Negotiating Cultural Connectedness and Identity in Urban Spaces. Women’s Studies International Forum, 42, 9–18. Lujan, C. (1993). A sociological view of tourism in an American Indian community: Main­ taining cultural integrity at Taos Pueblo. American Indian Culture and Research Journal, 17(3), 101–120. Manning, F. (1979). Tourism and Bermuda’s black clubs: A case of cultural revitalization. In de Kadt, E. (Ed.) Tourism: Passport to development? (pp. 157–176). New York: Oxford University Press. Markwick, M.C. (2001). Tourism and the development of handicraft production in the Maltese islands. Tourism Geographies, 3(1), 29–51. Martinez, J. (2003). Authenticity in the Context of Ethnic Tourism: The Local Perspective. PhD Dissertation, University of Calgary, Calgary. Maruyama, N.U., Yen, T.H., & Stronza, A. (2008). Perception of authenticity of tourist art among native American artists in Santa Fe, New Mexico. International Journal of Tour­ ism Research, 10(5), 453–466. Matatolu, I. (2020).Acritical examination of indigenous people, tourism and quality of life. Journal of Heritage Tourism, 15(3), 267–278. https://doi.org/10.1080/1743873X.2019.1597101 Maureira, T.M., & Stenbacka, S. (2015). Indigenous tourism and processes of resilience – about communicative strategies among tourism workers in Québec. Acta Borealia, 32(2), 148–170. https://doi.org/10.1080/08003831.2015.1090204 Maxwell, J. (1978). America’s Fascinating Indian Heritage. Pleasantville, NY: The Read­ er’s Digest Association. McCubbin, L.D., McCubbin, H.I., Zhang, W., Kehl, L., & Strom, I. (2013). Relational well­ being: An indigenous perspective and measure. Family Relations, 62(2), 354–365. McKean, P. (1989). Towards a theoretical analysis of tourism, economic dualism and cultural involution in Bali. In Hosts and Guests: The Anthropology of Tourism (pp. 119–138). Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press. Mehrotra, A. (2018). Tourism’s impact on Native Americans – the case of Pueblos of the Taos Region. Academy of Business Research Journal, Gulfport, 4, 7–19. Mensah, E.A., & Amuquandoh, F.E. (2010). Poverty reduction through tourism: residents’ perspectives. Journal of Travel and Tourism Research (online), Spring, 77–96. Miral, C., Kaygalak, S., & Ersoy, R. (2013). A Case Study of Ethnic Minorities as Tour­ ism Entrepreneurs: Their Involvement in Sustainable Tourism Development. TURIZAM, 17(3), 131–144. Mitchell, J. (2012). Value chain approaches to assessing the impact of tourism on low-income households in developing countries. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 20(3), 457–475. Mitchell, J., & Ashley, C. (2010). Tourism and Poverty Reduction: Pathways to Prosperity. London: ODI & Earthscan. Morais, D.B. (2006). The ethnic tourism expansion cycle: The case of Yunnan province, China. Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, 11(2), 189–204. Moscardo, G. (2009). Tourism and quality of life: Toward a more critical approach. Tourism and Hospitality Research, 9(2), 159–170. Movono, A. (2012). Tourism’s Impact on Communal Development in Fiji: A Case Study of the Socio-Economic Impacts of the Warwick Resort and Spa and the Naviti Resort on the Indigenous Fijian villages of Votua and Vatuolalai. Unpublished Masters, University of the South Pacific, Suva, Fiji. Movono, A., & Becken, S. (2018). Solesolevaki as social capital: A tale of a village, two tribes, and a resort in Fiji. Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, 23(2), 146–157.

Tourism and Ethnic Communities

137

Movono, A., Pratt, S., & Harrison, D. (2015). Adapting and reacting to tourism develop­ ment: A tale of two villages on Fiji’s Coral Coast. In Pratt, S., & Harrison, D. (Eds.). Tourism in Pacific Islands: Current Issues and Future Challenges (pp. 101–117). Abing­ don: Routledge. Mowforth, M., & Munt, I. (1998). Tourism and Sustainability: New Tourism in the Third World. London: Routledge. Muganda, M., Sahli, M., & Smith, K. (2010). Tourism’s contribution to poverty alleviation: A community perspective from Tanzania. Development Southern Africa, 27(5), 629–646. Muhammad,D.A.,Tec,R.,&Ramirez,K.(2019).RacialWealthSnapshot:AmericanIndians/Native Americans. https://ncrc.org/racial-wealth-snapshot-american-indians-native-americans/. Mura, P. (2015). Perceptions of authenticity in a Malaysian homestay – A narrative analysis. Tourism Management, 51, 225–233. Ndivo, R.M., & Cantoni, L. (2016). Rethinking local community involvement in tour­ ism development. Annals of Tourism Research, 57, 275–278. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. annals.2015.11.014. Neal, J.D., Uysal, M., & Sirgy, M.J. (2007). The effect of tourism services on travelers’ qual­ ity of life. Journal of Travel Research, 46(2), 154–163. Nelson, F. (2012). Blessing or curse? The political economy of tourism development in Tanzania. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 20(3), 359–375. Newsham, A.J., Rigg J., & Suhardiman, D. (2022). A sustainable livelihoods framework for the 21st Century. World Development, 155, 105898. https://doi.org/10.10.16/ j.worlddevel.2022.105898. Nielsen, N.R. (2010). Strengths, Support and Self-determination: Indigenous Tourism Plan­ ning and the Biamie Dreaming Cooperative. PhD thesis, Southern Cross University, Lismore, NSW. Notzke, C. (2004). Indigenous Tourism Development in Southern Alberta, Canada: Tenta­ tive Engagement. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 12(1), 29–54. Nunkoo, R., & Gursoy, D. (2012). Residents’ support for tourism: An identity perspective. Annals of Tourism Research, 39(1), 243–268. Nunkoo, R., & Ramkissoon, H. (2011). Developing a community support model for tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 38(3), 964–988. Nunkoo, R., & Smith, S.L. (2013). Political economy of tourism: Trust in government actors, political support, and their determinants. Tourism Management, 36, 120–132. Nyaupane, G.P., Morais, D.B., & Dowler, L. (2006). The role of community involvement and number/type of visitors on tourism impacts: A controlled comparison of Annapurna, Nepal and Northwest Yunnan, China. Tourism Management, 27(6), 1373–1385. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2005.12.013. Oakes, T. (1992). Cultural geography and Chinese ethnic tourism. Journal of Cultural Geog­ raphy, 12(2), 2–17. Oakes, T. (1997). Ethnic tourism in rural Guizhou. In Picard, M., & Wood, R. (Eds.). Tour­ ism, Ethnicity, and the State in Asian and Pacific Societies. Honolulu, HI: University of Hawaii Press. Oakes, T. (1998). Tourism and Modernity in China. London: Routledge. Olya, H.G.T., & Gavilyan, Y. (2017). Configurational models to predict residents’ support for tourism development. Journal of Travel Research, 56(7), 893–912. Panyik, E., Costa, C., & Rátz, T. (2011). Implementing integrated rural tourism: An eventbased approach. Tourism Management, 32(6), 1352–1363. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. tourman.2011.01.009.

138

Tourism and Ethnic Communities

Phommavong, S., & Sörensson, E. (2014). Ethnic tourism in Lao PDR: Gendered divisions of labour in community-based tourism for poverty reduction. Current Issues in Tourism, 17(4), 350–362. Pitchford, S. (1995). Ethnic tourism and nationalism in Wales. Annals of Tourism Research, 22(1), 35–52. Pleumarom, A. (2012). The Politics of Tourism, Poverty Alleviation and Sustainable Devel­ opment. Penang: Third World Network. Po, W., & Huang, B. (2008). Tourism development and economic growth: A nonlinear approach. Physica A, 387, 5535–5542. Poverty USA. (2018). The Population of Poverty USA. www.povertyusa.org/facts. Pratt, S., McCabe, S., & Movono, A. (2016). Gross happiness of a tourism’ village in Fiji. Journal of Destination Marketing & Management, 5(1), 26–35. Qu, C., Timothy, D.J., & Zhang, C. (2019). Does tourism erode or prosper culture? Evidence from the Tibetan ethnic area of Sichuan Province, China. Journal of Tourism and Cul­ tural Change, 17(4), 526–543. https://doi.org/10.1080/14766825.2019.1600867 Quebec Indigenous Tourism. (2019). The Tourism Ecosystem. https://indigenousquebec.com/ corporate-space/statistics-and-links (accessed July 2021). Rasoolimanesh, S.M., Ringle, C.M., Jaafar, M., & Ramayah, T. (2017). Urban vs. rural destinations: Residents’ perceptions, community participation and support for tourism development. Tourism Management, 60, 147–158. Ravuvu, A.D. (1987). The Fijian Ethos. Suva: Institute for Pacific Studies, University of the South Pacific. Roosens, E.E. (1989). Creating Ethnicity: The Process of Ethnogenesis. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications. Ryan, C., & Aicken, M. (Eds.). (2005). Indigenous Tourism: The Commodification and Management of Culture. Oxford: Elsevier Ltd. Saxena, S., Orley, J., & WHOQOL Group. (1997). Quality of life assessment: The World Health Organization perspective. European Psychiatry, 12, 263s–266s. Scheyvens, R. (2002). Backpacker tourism and third world development. Annals of Tourism Research, 29(1), 144–164. Scheyvens, R. (2009). Pro-poor tourism: Is there value beyond the rhetoric? Tourism Rec­ reation Research, 34(2), 191–196. Scheyvens, R., & Russell, M. (2012). Tourism and poverty alleviation in Fiji: Comparing the impacts of small- and large-scale tourism enterprises. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 20(3), 417–436. Schilcher, D. (2007). Growth versus equity: The continuum of pro-poor tourism and neolib­ eral governance. Current Issues in Tourism, 10(2–3), 166–193. https://doi.org/10.2167/ cit304.0. Scoones, I. (1998). Sustainable Rural Livelihoods: A Framework for Analysis. Brighton: Institute of Development Studies, University of Sussex. Selwyn, T. (1996). The Tourist Image: Myths and Myth Making in Tourism. Chichester: Wiley. Seruvakula, S. (2000). Bula Vakavanua. Suva, FI: Institute of Pacific Studies. Sharpley, R. (2014). Host perceptions of tourism: A review of the research. Tourism Man­ agement, 42, 37–49. Sharpley, R., & Naidoo, P. (2010). Tourism and poverty reduction: The case of Mauritius. Tourism and Hospitality Planning & Development, 7(2), 145–162. Sharpley, R., & Telfer, D.J. (2014). Tourism and Development: Concepts and Issues. Bristol: Channel View Publications.

Tourism and Ethnic Communities

139

Shepherd, R. (2006). UNESCO and the politics of cultural heritage in Tibet. Journal of Contemporary Asia, 36(2), 243–257. Simpson, M. (1996). Making Representations: Museums in the Post-Colonial Era. London: Routledge. Smith, V. (1977). Hosts and Guests: The Anthropology of Tourism. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press. Snyman, S. L. (2012). The role of tourism employment in poverty reduction and community perceptions of conservation and tourism in southern Africa. Journal of Sustainable Tour­ ism, 20(3), 395–416. South Pacific Tourism Organisation. (2018). 2018 Annual Visitor Arrivals Report. https://pic.or.jp/ja/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/2018-Annual-Visitor-Arrivals-ReportF. pdf (accessed August 2021). Spenceley, A., & Goodwin, H. (2007). Nature-based tourism and poverty alleviation: Impacts of private sector and Parastatal enterprises in and around Kruger National Park, South Africa. Current Issues in Tourism, 10(2&3), 255–277. Spencer, D.M., & Glover, J.H. (2011). An exploratory study of attitudes toward tourism on American Indian reservations. International Journal of Tourism Anthropology, 1(2), 154–172. Sroypetch, S., Carr, N., & Duncan, T. (2016). Host and backpacker perceptions of environ­ mental impacts of backpacker tourism: A case study of the Yasawa Islands, Fiji. Tourism and Hospitality Research, 18(2), 203–213. Statistics Canada. (2017a). Aboriginal Peoples in Canada: Key Results from the 2016 Census. Component of Statistics Canada catalogue no. 11–001-X. https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/ n1/daily-quotidien/171025/dq171025a-eng.htm (accessed August 2021). Statistics Canada. (2017b). Focus on Geography Series, 2016 Census, Province of Quebec. Statistics Canada Catalogue no. 98–404-X2016001. Ottawa, ON: Data products, 2016 Census. https://www12.statcan.gc.ca/census-recensement/2016/as-sa/fogs-spg/Facts-PR­ Eng.cfm?TOPIC=9&LANG=Eng&GK=PR&GC=24 (accessed August 2021). Strzelecka, M., Boley, B.B., & Strzelecka, C. (2017). Empowerment and resident support for tourism in rural central and eastern Europe (CEE): The case of Pomerania, Poland. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 25(4), 554–572. Stylidis, D., Biran, A., Sit, J., & Szivas, E.M. (2014). Residents’ support for tourism devel­ opment: The role of resident’ place image and perceived tourism impacts. Tourism Man­ agement, 45, 260–274. Su, J. (2019). Understanding the changing Intangible Cultural Heritage in tourism commodification: The music players’ perspective from Lijiang, China. Journal of Tourism and Cultural Change, 17(3), 247–268. https://doi.org/10.1080/14766825.2018.1427102 Su, X., & Teo, P. (2008). Tourism politics in Lijiang, China: An analysis of state and local interaction in tourism development. Tourism Geographies, 10(2), 150–168. Sun, J., & Zhang, X. (2014). Interactions between economic and social capitals in tour­ ist communities: A case study of Dai Park in Xishuangbanna. Anthropologist, 18(3), 1029–1039. Sun, J.X., Wang, X.R., & Ma, T. (2018). De-localization and re-localization of ethnic cultures: What is the role of tourism? Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, 23(11), 1034–1046. Swaikoski, D. (2020). Leisure in the time of coronavirus: Indigenous tourism in Canada and the impacts of COVID-19. World Leisure Journal, 62(4), 311–314. https://doi.org/10.10 80/16078055.2020.1825266 Swain, M.B. (2014). Developing ethnic tourism in Yunnan, China: Shilin Sani. Tourism Recreation Research, 14(1), 33–39.

140

Tourism and Ethnic Communities

Tao, T., & Wall, G. (2009a). Tourism as a sustainable livelihood strategy, Tourism Manage­ ment, 30(1), 90–98. Tao, T., & Wall, G. (2009b). A livelihood approach to sustainability, Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, 14(2), 137–152. Tao, T., Wall, G., & Wismer, S. (2010). Culture and sustainable livelihoods. Human Ecol­ ogy, 29(1), 1–21. Telfer, D., & Sharpley, R. (2008). Tourism and Development in the Developing World. Abingdon: Routledge. Tham, A., Ruhanen, L., & Raciti, M. (2020). Tourism with and by Indigenous and ethnic com­ munities in the Asia Pacific region: A bricolage of people, places and partnerships. Journal of Heritage Tourism, 15(3), 243–248. https://doi.org/10.1080/1743873X.2020.1751647 Theerapappisit, P. (2009). Pro-poor ethnic tourism in the Mekong: Astudy of three approaches in northern Thailand. Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, 14(2), 201–221. Truong, V.D. (2013). Tourism policy development in Vietnam: A pro-poor perspective. Journal of Policy Research in Tourism, Leisure and Events, 5(1), 28–45. Truong, V.D. (2014). Pro-poor tourism: Looking backward as we move forward. Tourism Planning & Development, 11(2), 228–242. Truong, V.D., Hall, C.M., & Garry, T. (2014). Tourism and poverty alleviation: Perceptions and experiences of poor people in Sapa, Vietnam. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 22(7), 1071–1089. Trupp, A., & Sunanta, S. (2017). Gendered practices in urban ethnic tourism in Thailand. Annals of Tourism Research, 64, 76–86. Tu, J., & Zhang, D. (2020). Does tourism promote economic growth in Chinese ethnic minority areas? A nonlinear perspective. Journal of Destination Marketing & Manage­ ment, 18, 100473. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdmm.2020.100473. UNDP & Wanmali, S. (1999). Participatory Assessment and Planning for Sustainable Live­ lihoods. United Nations Development Programme – Sustainable livelihoods Documents. Unpublished. Usher, L.E., & Kerstetter, D. (2014). Residents’ perceptions of quality of life in a surf tour­ ism destination: A case study of Las Salinas, Nicaragua. Progress in Development Stud­ ies, 14(4), 321–333. van den Berghe, P. (1992). Tourism and the ethnic division of labor. Annals of Tourism Research, 19(2), 234–249. van den Berghe, P. (1995). The quest for the other: Ethnic tourism in San Cristóbal, Mexico. American Anthropologist, 97(3), 615–616. Verheijen, B., & Putra, I. (2020). Balinese cultural identity and global tourism: The Garuda Wisnu Kencana Cultural Park. Asian Ethnicity, 21(3), 425–442. Vogt, C., Jordan, E., Grewe, N., & Kruger, L. (2016). Collaborative tourism planning and subjective well-being in a small island destination. Journal of Destination Marketing & Management, 5(1), 36–43. Walker, J., Mitchell, B., & Wismer, S. (2001). Livelihood strategy approach to communitybased planning and assessment: A case study of Molas, Indonesia. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 19(4). 297–309. Walsh, E.R., & Swain, M.B. (2004). Creating modernity by touring paradise: Domestic eth­ nic tourism in Yunnan, China. Tourism Recreation Research, 29(2), 59–68. Wang,M.-H.(2001).鄒族之民族發展 – 一個台灣原住民族主體性建構的社會、空間歷史 [Ethno-development of Cou: The Society, Space, and History Constructed under Selfgovernance of an Indigenous People in Taiwan]. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Department of Geography, National Taiwan Normal University, Taipei.

Tourism and Ethnic Communities

141

Wang, X. (2011). The West and the challenges of market-oriented reform. In Zheng, Y. (Ed.). Poverty Reduction and Sustainable Development in Rural China (pp. 99–126). Leiden: Brill. Wang, Y., Shen, H., Yea, S., & Zhou, L. (2020). Being rational and emotional: An integrated model of residents’ support of ethnic tourism development. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, 44(2), 112–121. Warry, W. (2007). Ending Denial: Understanding Aboriginal Issues. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. Wheeler, M. (1992). Applying ethics to the tourism industry. Business Ethics: A European Review, 1(4), 227–235. Williams, P.W., & O’Neil, B. (2007). Building a triangulated research foundation for indig­ enous tourism in BC, Canada. In Butler, R., & Hinch, T. (Eds.). Tourism and Indigenous Peoples: Issues and Implications (pp. 40–57). Oxford: Elsevier. Winters, P., Corral, L., & Mora, A.M. (2013). Assessing the role of tourism in poverty alle­ viation: A research agenda. Development Policy Review, 31(2), 177–202. Wood, R. (1993). Tourism, culture and the sociology of development. In Hitchcock, M., King, V.T., & Parnwell, M. (Eds.). Tourism in Southeast Asia (pp. 48–70). London: Routledge. Wood, R. (1997). Tourism and the state. In Picard, M., & Wood, R. (Eds.). Tourism, Eth­ nicity, and the State in Asian and Pacific Societies (pp. 1–34). Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press. Wood, R. (1998). Touristic ethnicity: A brief itinerary. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 21(2), 218–241. Woosnam, K.M. (2012). Using emotional solidarity to explain residents’ attitudes about tourism and tourism development. Journal of Travel Research, 51(3), 315–327. Woosnam, K.M., Maruyama, N.U., Ribeiro, M.A., & Joo, D. (2019). Explaining minor­ ity residents’ attitudes of ethnic enclave tourism from general perceptions of tourism impacts. Journal of Tourism and Cultural Change, 17(4), 467–484. https://doi.org/10.10 80/14766825.2019.1601407 World Bank. (2016). Tourism. Pacific Possible Background Paper Number 4. https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/524541503688261330/pdf/106504-REVISED-ADD­ SERIES-NO-4-PUBLIC-P154324-Tourismbackgroundfinal.pdf (accessed August 2021). Wu, Y., Xu, H., & Eaglen, A. (2011). Tourism-dependent development: The case of Lijiang, Yunnan province, China. Journal of Policy Research in Tourism, Leisure & Events, 3(1), 63–86. Xie, P.F. (2011). Authenticating Ethnic Tourism. Bristol: Channel View Press. Yang, J., Ryan, C., & Zhang, L. (2016). Impersonation in ethnic tourism – The presentation of culture by other ethnic groups. Annals of Tourism Research, 56, 16–31. Yang, L. (2013). Ethnic tourism and minority identity: Lugu Lake, Yunnan, China. Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, 18(7), 712–730. Yang, L. (2015). Rural tourism and poverty alleviation: The case of Nujiang. International Journal of Tourism Anthropology, 4(4), 343–366. Yang, L., & Wall, G. (2008). Ethnic tourism and entrepreneurship: Xishuangbanna, Yunnan, China. Tourism Geographies, 10(4), 522–544. Yang, L., & Wall, G. (2009). Authenticity in ethnic tourism: Domestic tourists’ perspectives. Current Issues in Tourism, 12(3), 235–254. Yang, L., & Wall, G. (2014). Planning for Ethnic Tourism. Aldershot: Ashgate. Ying, T., & Zhou, Y. (2007). Community, governments and external capitals in China’s rural cultural tourism: A comparative study of two adjacent villages. Tourism Management, 28(1), 96–107.

142

Tourism and Ethnic Communities

Ypeij, A. (2012). The intersection of gender and ethnic identities in the Cuzco – Machu Pic­ chu tourism industry: Sácamefotos, tour guides, and women weavers. Latin American Perspectives, 39(6), 17–35. Yun, H.J., & Zhang, X. (2017). Cultural conservation and residents’ attitudes about ethnic minority tourism. Tourism and Hospitality Research, 17(2), 165–175. Zeng, B., & Ryan, C. (2012). Assisting the poor in China through tourism development: A review of research. Tourism Management, 33(2), 239–248. Zeppel, H. (2006). Indigenous Ecotourism: Sustainable Development and Management. Wallingford, CT: CAB International. Zhao, W. (2009). The nature and roles of small tourism businesses in poverty alleviation: evi­ dence from Guangxi, China. Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, 14(2), 169–182. Zhao, W., & Ritchie, J.R.B. (2007). Tourism and poverty alleviation: An integrative research framework. Current Issues in Tourism, 10(2–3), 119–143. https://doi.org/10.2167/ cit296.0. Zhu, X.Y., & He, Y.H. (2019). Does tourism promote economic growth in the ethnic areas of China? Emerging Markets Finance and Trade, 1–14. Zhu, Y. (2012). Performing heritage. Rethinking authenticity in tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 39(3), 1495–1513.

4 TOURISM ENTREPRENEURSHIP

Tourism has long been seen as a fertile field for entrepreneurial initiatives due to the predominance of small- and micro-sized firms in tourism and relatively low entry barriers for local entrepreneurs. Recognition of economic and sociocultural contributions made by tourism enterprises has led to a rapid growth in tourism entrepreneurship research in recent years. Much research underlines the important role of entrepreneurship in creating socio-economic values in the tourism sector and suggests that the success of tourism destination development is highly depend­ ent on the crucial role played by entrepreneurs. As one of the key stakeholders in ethnic tourism, minority entrepreneurs play an important role in developing ethnic tourism in many destinations and they are crucial to the commodification and mar­ keting of ethnic culture. A better understanding of their practices will assist policy­ makers to identify strategies for promoting and supporting ethnic entrepreneurship locally and across borders. Although various attempts to study entrepreneurship in the tourism context have appeared in the literature, limited academic attention has been given to ethnic minority entrepreneurs and, especially, to their views on gender roles, social capital and community development. There is a need for more research on minority entre­ preneurship in ethnic tourism. This chapter explores the roles of tourism entre­ preneurs and their perspectives on ethnic tourism development. The chapter first critically reviews research on tourism entrepreneurship and then provides three case studies in various locations. A case study is presented to reveal the percep­ tions of tourism managers of an ethnic theme park in China. Gendered practices are explored in an empirical study of urban ethnic tourism in Thailand. Another case study examines ethnic entrepreneurship in South African township tourism. Finally, brief comments are made concerning marketing and a summary of the chapter is provided. DOI: 10.4324/9781003373964-5

144

Tourism Entrepreneurship

4.1

Entrepreneurship and Tourism

Entrepreneurship is a multidisciplinary subject that has been studied by many scholars from varied methodological traditions using a diversity of theoretical frameworks (Cornelius et al., 2006). The first usage of entrepreneurship is attrib­ uted to the French economist, Richard Cantillon, in about 1730, who described an entrepreneur as an individual with alertness for opportunity and a bearer of risk (Rumball, 1989). Harper (1996) defined entrepreneurship as “a profit-seeking activity aimed at identifying and solving ill-specified problems in structurally uncertain and complex situations” (p. 3). Over time, the perspectives on entrepre­ neurship have been expanded from a predominantly economic emphasis to encom­ pass insights from sociology, anthropology and other disciplines. In more recent literature, attempts have been made to define entrepreneurship from a variety of aspects, such as economic function, ownership structure, degrees of entrepre­ neurship and the size and life cycle of the firm (Morrison, 2006). Entrepreneurial behavior generally includes initiative-taking, leadership and innovation, organ­ izing and reorganizing social and economic mechanisms, and acceptance of risk (Lordkipanidze, 2002). Entrepreneurs are often driven by both economic and psy­ chological motives (Basu & Altinay, 2002). In the context of sustainable devel­ opment, entrepreneurship is increasingly recognized as a means for transforming strictly economic-driven goals to include social and environmental matters, and it can be used to create simultaneously economic wealth, advance environmental objectives and improve social conditions (Hall et al., 2010). Although the notion of entrepreneurship has been articulated widely within eco­ nomic literature, most of the attention has been given to entrepreneurial activities in manufacturing and technology, rather than in the provision of services (Rus­ sell & Faulkner, 2004). Less academic attention has been paid to the role of entre­ preneurial activity in tourism (Li, 2008; Shaw & Williams, 2002). However, as tourism has become one of the world’s major economic forces (Milne & Ateljevic, 2001), researcher interest in examining entrepreneurship’s contribution to tour­ ism development is growing from developed countries to emerging economies (Alhammad, 2020; Echtner 1995; Fu et al., 2019; Koh & Hatten, 2002; Lordki­ panidze et al., 2005; Sheldon & Daniele, 2017; Beeton, 2002; McGehee & Kim, 2004). Tourism has been perceived as a fertile field for entrepreneurial initiatives (Crnogaj et al., 2014; Li, 2008; Nikraftar & Hosseini, 2016) due to the predomi­ nance of small firms and relatively low entry barriers (Shaw & Williams, 1998a, 1998b). Entrepreneurship has been identified as playing a critical role in shap­ ing destination development (Butler & McDonnell, 2011; Hernandez-Maestro & Gonzalez-Benito, 2004; Jóhannesson et al., 2010; Kensbock & Jennings, 2011; Kline et al., 2013; Lemmetyinen, 2010; Lundberg et al., 2014; Russell & Faulkner, 2004; Xu & Ma, 2014). It affects the productivity of the tourism industry and influences the rise and fall of a destination’s life cycle (Ryan et al., 2012). Entre­ preneurs can make significant contributions to tourism development, especially

Tourism Entrepreneurship

145

in developing areas (Echtner, 1995). Entrepreneurship also plays a vital role in the early stages of tourism development, particularly in rural ethnic communities where multinational firms are less likely to invest in light of the relatively small size of the potential market (Chang, 2011). Tourism entrepreneurs have been classified based on their motivations as growth- or lifestyle-oriented (Ahmad et al., 2014; Bosworth & Farrell, 2011; Getz & Petersen, 2005; Iorio & Corsale, 2010; Zhang et al., 2021). Growth-oriented entrepreneurs are more concerned with economic benefits and they have a high inclination to take risks (Getz & Petersen, 2005). In contrast, lifestyle-oriented entrepreneurs consider more the quality of life by living in a place that they enjoy, building social networks or being part of a community rather than maximizing prof­ its (Ahmad et al., 2014; Bosworth & Farrell, 2011; Carlbäck, 2012; Chang et al., 2010; Lashley & Rowson, 2010). They launch touristic enterprises to support their desired lifestyles and hobbies with limited intention to economic growth (Szivas, 2001). Of course, financial returns cannot be ignored entirely if a business is to endure. Particularly in the developing world, marginal entrepreneurs exist in the informal sector of tourism, such as hawkers, unlicensed tour guides, and street ven­ dors (Koh & Hatten, 2002; Gantner, 2011). Some have migrated to a destination to establish a new venture and a different lifestyle. There is evidence that these entrepreneurs play an essential role in the destinations’ sustainability, innovation and competitiveness (Dias et al., 2021; Yachin, 2019). They may be better than many formal businesses at providing innovative products or services (Shaw & Wil­ liams, 2004), responding to or creating niche markets (Koh & Hatten, 2002) and promoting diversified destination development (Bosworth & Farrell, 2011). Life­ style influences entrepreneurial activities through the entrepreneur’s cognition and behavior (Bredvold & Skålén, 2016; Wang & Hu, 2019). Community attachment has a positive influence on entrepreneurial self-efficacy, innovation and willing­ ness to stay (Dias et al., 2021). The role of lifestyle in a tourism enterprise has been changing from an entrepreneurial motivation to customer satisfaction and then to the accumulation of enterprise capital (Zhang et al., 2021). Tomassini et al. (2021) argued that the dichotomy between growth and lifestyle does not easily accommo­ date “atypical” values-based entrepreneurs and they revealed three prominent entre­ preneurial identities among values-based Italian entrepreneurs: the intellectual and educational, the professional and entrepreneurial, and the empathic “truth tellers”. The antecedents and outcomes of entrepreneurship in the tourism industry have been investigated (Fu et al., 2019; Ratten, 2020). Entrepreneurial activities influence both the objective and subjective well-being of the entrepreneurs, their families and broader society (Alrawadieh et al., 2021). Personal aspects, including personality traits, education, industry experience and motivations, have been iden­ tified as influential antecedents in business start-ups (Altinay et al., 2012; Wang et al., 2019). The most important entrepreneurial characteristics have been rec­ ognized as self-confidence, independence and ability to learn from failure (Jaafar et al., 2011). Self-confidence and interest are push factors that drive tourism

146

Tourism Entrepreneurship

owners/managers to start a business. Also, numerous external factors that influence the entrepreneurship process have been identified in various studies. The destina­ tion environment, such as economic conditions, sociocultural factors, government policies and technological advancement, have been proposed as important factors influencing entrepreneurial activities (Alhammad, 2020; Kaaristo, 2014; Lerner & Haber, 2001; Xu & Ma, 2014; Zhao et al., 2011). Sound economic conditions are essential to venture creation, especially for entrepreneurs that are short of start-up funds (Xu & Ma, 2014). Some studies have suggested that developed countries offer more incentives for business start-ups than developing countries (Haber & Reichel, 2007; Lerner & Haber, 2001; Lordkipanidze et al., 2005), but others have argued that less developed countries might have more opportunities for potential entrepreneurs due to the low level of entry requirements and high income inequal­ ity (Kelley et al., 2011; Smallbone & Welter, 2006). The sociocultural environ­ ment may constrain or facilitate entrepreneurial behaviors (Jóhannesson, 2012; Lugosi & Bray, 2008). Place identity affects self-efficacy, community support and entrepreneurial performance (Einarsen & Mykletun, 2009; Hallak et al., 2012). Government and public initiatives play a crucial role in creating an entrepre­ neurial climate that facilitates the development of new ventures. (Koh & Hatten, 2002; Lerner & Haber, 2001; Qin et al., 2011; Strobl & Peters, 2013). Burnett and Danson (2017) provided evidence of the state’s support for new tourism business development in remote Scottish islands. Bottema and Bush (2012) found that while tourism entrepreneurs in Indonesia were able to increase awareness of conservation and generate income and financial support, they also required support from state institutions to be successful. Government policies and programs are particularly important for enterprises in developing countries, which usually face a multitude of risks due to strict government regulation and interference in business operations (Wilks et al., 2006). When the state takes an active role in tourism development, there are still issues to resolve regarding how entrepreneurs can engage effectively with policies (Booth et al., 2020). Pongponrat (2011) documented that local tour­ ism entrepreneurs on the Thai island of Samui were not engaged in state-led tour­ ism development because of a lack of interest in participation. This was primarily because of a lack of consultation in the development of the strategies. In addition, technological advancement has influenced tourism entrepreneurs’ strategies and the industry’s structure (Ho & Lee, 2007; Karanasios & Burgess, 2008; Ratten, 2018) as new technologies facilitate information sharing and opportunity identifi­ cation, leading to the creation of more options for new products and services and, ultimately, more opportunities for consumers (Spencer et al., 2012). Flexibility, strategic agility, creativity and continuous innovation are important for the success of tourism entrepreneurs (Fu et al., 2019). A number of studies have discussed the entrepreneurship issues that confront the tourism industry in developing countries specifically (Jaafar et al., 2011). Tour­ ism enterprises in developing countries commonly range from large transnational corporations (usually foreign-owned and managed), to medium-sized enterprises

Tourism Entrepreneurship

147

(either state or locally owned), to small-scale businesses (usually locally owned) (Echtner, 1995). A common criticism in the tourism literature concerns the nega­ tive impacts of foreign or nonlocally owned and/or managed large-scale tourism projects (Echtner 1995). Rodenburg (1989) noted that, due to economic leakage, transnational enterprises were not as effective as originally believed in increas­ ing foreign exchange revenue and employment opportunities. It has been widely observed that most tourism benefits are usually gained by entrepreneurs from outside of the region rather than by the destination communities (Goering, 1990; Oakes, 1998; Li, 2004). Economic leakage is a risk of tourism development, espe­ cially in the early stages when necessary raw materials and skills may not be avail­ able locally and have to be brought in from elsewhere (Oakes, 1998) although, over time, as the local economy develops, leakages can be reduced. It is a problem that in many developing countries the private sector is small and entrepreneurial experience in many areas, including tourism, is lacking (Xie, 2001). Many small business owners lack knowledge and skills in running the business (Jaafar et al., 2011). External factors, such as lack of funding and a supportive environment, also often constrain the growth of tourism enterprises. The provision of assistance in marketing and finance, and intensive promotion and support services from the public sector can increase significantly the competitive advantages of small- and medium-sized businesses (Jaafar et al., 2011). Although large, often multinational, companies capture much attention, most tourism businesses are actually small- and medium-sized enterprises (Morrison, 1998; Bastakis et al., 2004). The tourism industry is dominated by micro and small businesses in many destinations (Williams & Peters, 2008). These small enter­ prises have their ownership and organizational structures, strategic objectives and priorities, and management processes that differ from their larger counterparts (Bannock, 2005). They play a prominent role in the supply of tourist services, job creation, economic activity and the image-building and balanced development of destinations (Carlisle et al., 2013; Gurel et al., 2010; Hallak et al., 2015). However, due to their small economies of scale and scope, such enterprises often encoun­ ter entrepreneurial challenges, such as constrained marketing/advertising budg­ ets, human resources challenges, and inexperienced entrepreneurial leadership capacities (Fitzsimmons et al., 2008). Instead of desiring to maximize profit, they may be largely motivated by the inner drive to utilize organizational slack (e.g., incompletely used financial or human resources) to compensate for such economic dilemmas as seasonality (Dawson et al., 2011). Early entrepreneurship research largely focused on the personal traits of indi­ vidual entrepreneurs, while more recent research has shifted attention to the influ­ ence of the destination environment on entrepreneurship activities (Fu et al., 2019) and social entrepreneurship (Saebi et al., 2018; Rawhouser et al., 2017; de Lange & Dodds, 2017). Tourism social entrepreneurship has been defined as “a process that uses tourism to create innovative solutions to immediate social, environmental and economic problems in destinations by mobilizing the ideas, capacities, resources

148

Tourism Entrepreneurship

and social agreements, from within or outside the destination, required for its sustainable social transformation” (Sheldon & Daniele, 2017, p. 7). Mody et al. (2016) examined the dynamic interplay between formal and substantive ration­ alities that motivate the social behavior of entrepreneurs. Zebryte and Jorquera (2017) explored the practices by which entrepreneurs implement their aspirations of balancing profit and social impact obligations within their business models. Power et al. (2017) examined the motivations underpinning the new trend toward socially responsible business models and suggested that socially responsible entre­ preneurship in tourism is based on some key virtues, such as “intuitionism”, rela­ tionships, humility and benevolence. Tourism scholars have mainly focused on the link between social entrepreneurship and community development. They have found that tourism social entrepreneurship may contribute positively to community development by increasing job opportunities, income and use of local suppliers, improving livelihoods, developing local skills and enhancing community pride (Aquino et al., 2018; Laeis & Lemke, 2016; Stenvall et al., 2017). Ormiston and Seymour (2011) criticized that the research has been too concerned with who social entrepreneurs are, and the motivations, goals and impacts of social entrepreneur­ ship, rather than on “how social entrepreneurs and enterprises act and create social value” (Sigala, 2016, p. 1248). Jørgensen et al. (2021) suggested that there is a need for more studies on what tourism social enterprises or entrepreneurs do rather than of what or who they are. A growing number of studies have explored the challenges facing indigenous or ethnic entrepreneurs in the tourism sector (Hikido, 2018; Kawharu et al., 2017; Lee-Ross & Mitchell, 2007; MacPherson, 2019; Ona & Solis, 2017; Yang & Wall, 2008). Lee-Ross and Mitchell (2007) studied the relationship between culture and entrepreneurship in the Torres Strait Islands and found that entrepreneurial activity exists at high levels in the indigenous community, but indigenous entrepreneurial culture is different to that of Western entrepreneurs based on key entrepreneurial traits. Williams and Peters (2008) found that aboriginal tourism entrepreneurs in British Columbia, Canada, had similar behavioral traits and management chal­ lenges to those of other small- and medium-sized business operators; however, their responses to these challenges were often shaped by the unique institutional and cultural realities in which they operate. Ona and Solis (2017) reported that the indigenous entrepreneurs in Ibaloy, northern Philippines, provided tourism products through effective use of resources and timely government and institu­ tional intervention, despite the many challenges facing them. Kawharu et al. (2017) explored the links between resilience, sustainability and entrepreneurship from an indigenous perspective and highlighted the role of sociocultural values in dealing with exogenous challenges and crises in an entrepreneurship context. Giminiani (2018) documented the political significance of entrepreneurship and empower­ ment among Mapuche rural residents in Chile when entrepreneurship was consoli­ dated as a key feature of community development agendas and antipoverty state intervention. Many Mapuche people saw micro-entrepreneurship as an integral

Tourism Entrepreneurship

149

part of their lucha (fight) for more autonomy. In case studies of indigenous tourism among small- and medium-sized enterprises in Fiji, Australia and Aotearoa New Zealand, Scheyvens et al. (2021) revealed that indigenous tourism enterprises oper­ ated in a spirit that was congruent with many of the United Nations’ sustainable development goals, although they actually had low awareness of these goals. Some studies have highlighted the tension between aboriginal cultural expecta­ tions and business demands (Peredo & Anderson, 2006), and have suggested that indigenous entrepreneurship could lead to the loss of traditional culture and the assimilation of indigenous people (Peredo et al., 2004). On the other hand, others have argued that entrepreneurship is an important economic mechanism for the advancement of indigenous people and that there is no inherent incompatibility between entrepreneurship and indigenous identity (Hindle & Lansdowne, 2005; Hindle & Moroz, 2009; Peredo & Anderson, 2006). Entrepreneurship does not nec­ essarily weaken and, instead, can strengthen the cultural connections and identities of indigenous entrepreneurs (Gallagher & Lawrence, 2012) and can empower indig­ enous populations (Eichler, 2017; Mendoza-Ramos & Prideaux, 2018), empower women (Ratten & Dana, 2017; Zapalska & Brozik, 2017), protect and promote indigenous culture (Henry, 2017), preserve the environment (Eichler, 2017; Whitford & Ruhanen, 2016), and promote economic prosperity and political stability in both indigenous and mainstream societies (MacPherson et al., 2021). Indigenous entrepreneurs often consider how their entrepreneurship can support indigenous self-determination and sustainable development (Dana, 2015). However, they often find themselves limited in the scope of their tourism activity to small-scale enter­ prises to supplement household incomes due to restricted access to resources and markets, or limited governmental and civic support (Carr et al., 2017). Yang and Wall (2008) revealed that minority entrepreneurs play a powerful role in developing ethnic tourism in Xishuangbanna, China, and they are crucial to the commodification and marketing of ethnic culture. However, most entrepreneurs in tourism businesses are not members of ethnic minorities; instead, they exploit minority resources for their own benefits. Chili and Mabaso (2016) studied the development opportunities for black-owned tourism enterprises in South Africa and claimed that the local tourism industry is highly dominated by a small elite group of nonblack-owned tourism organizations. Hikido (2018) investigated the involve­ ment of entrepreneurial black women and interracial social capital in black town­ ship tourism enterprises in Cape Town, South Africa, and found that black women who run home-based bed and breakfasts have developed ties with white Europeans and South Africans to acquire social, economic, cultural and symbolic forms of capital that have been otherwise denied to them as black South African women. She argued that the interracial transformation of tourism resources highlights the deep inequalities between blacks and whites, but also the agency of marginalized entrepreneurs to attain assets in constricting social structures. In an empirical study with first- and second-generation South Asian Sikh, Hindu and Pakistani Muslim entrepreneurs within Greater London, MacPherson (2019) observed that many

150

Tourism Entrepreneurship

ethnic entrepreneurs lack the resources, the motivation, the ability and/or inten­ tion to break out from their local ethnic customer base to service a wider majority customer base. He concluded that entrepreneurial intention, ability and opportunity facilitate or inhibit small business growth and development. Souvenirs are an important tourism topic, and their creation and sale provide opportunities for many ethnic entrepreneurs. Souvenirs represent the image of a destination for visitors, both actual and potential, and are an important item of visi­ tor expenditure that is limited only by the offerings and the tourists’ budgets (Cave et al., 2013). Of course, this is a matter that concerns most tourism destinations and is not confined to ethnic tourism, although it may be of special interest in this context. This is because there is considerable evidence that many visitors like to purchase items as mementos or presents that are made of local materials, by local people, with distinctive designs that display craftsmanship. Furthermore, if there is an opportunity to interact with the maker, observe the product being made and even join in the creative process, this further enhances values, both psychological and economic. Many ethnic tourism destinations are in a good position to create and sell such products and experiences. Graburn (1976) was among the first to explore this topic and he demonstrated that the form and meaning of local products can change over time as their makers respond to the tourism marketplace. Indeed, products originally made for local use or with special meanings can become trinkets that are mass-produced in response to the expanding tourism market. In the past, valuable artifacts were expropriated, especially in colonial situations, and transported to and displayed in the museums of the colonists where they remain to this day. Repatriation of relics is a slow, uncertain and expensive process. Even today, the creations of minority peoples are extremely difficult to protect through copyright legislation, and are stolen, dupli­ cated and sold to unsuspecting and uninformed purchasers, who may have little understanding of the origins and meanings of the products and designs that they take home or wear. Meanwhile, little of the tourists’ expenditures may remain in the destination community. Thus, there is a risk in the commercialization of cultural production. Certainly, some ethnic artists and craft makers compete successfully in the marketplace, but many struggle. A vibrant culture is not static and innova­ tion is a desirable attribute, but it is no easy task to be successful in the market, while retaining one’s cultural perspective and competing with the mass production of outsiders. At the same time, tourism provides the opportunity for some artists and artisans to gain an income while demonstrating and extending their traditional skills (Wu et al., 2021). Indigenous or ethnic entrepreneurs generally face challenges similar to other entrepreneurs (Chan et al., 2016; Whitford & Ruhanen, 2014, Sloan et al., 2014), such as a lack of legitimacy, and difficulties in attracting qualified human capi­ tal and obtaining funding (Hyytinen et al., 2015). Many studies have emphasized the need to assist marginalized or disadvantaged entrepreneurs in developing the skills, products and services required to deliver competitive tourism experiences in

Tourism Entrepreneurship

151

a professional manner (Williams & Peters, 2008). Indigenous entrepreneurs tend to operate in environments of discriminatory practice and marginal empowerment (Whitford & Ruhanen, 2016). Tourism education for entrepreneurial development is necessary to cultivate an indigenous business sector (Echtner, 1995; Lordkipan­ idze et al., 2005). Government support programs may be key drivers of profitable and sustainable indigenous enterprises (Curry et al., 2016; Erdmann, 2016; Spen­ cer et al., 2016; Zapalska & Brozik, 2017), and more so when designed to address the specific concerns of indigenous communities (Pinto & Blue, 2017). A few studies have investigated gender differences in entrepreneurial motiva­ tions and behaviors (Costa et al., 2016; Figueroa-Domecq et al., 2020a; McGehee et al., 2007; Pettersson & Cassel, 2014). Tourism is often seen as a potential means to empower women due to the low barriers to entry (Peeters & Ateljevic, 2009). Such a conception has, however, been questioned by feminist tourism scholars who highlight that despite tourism’s depiction as being flexible, diverse and dynamic, it remains a highly gendered activity that reinforces traditional gendered perfor­ mances through temporary and part-time employment in normatively gendered skills (Martinez Caparros, 2018). Tourism entrepreneurship has been identified in many studies as both reinforcing and challenging traditional female roles (Cole, 2018). Costa et al. (2016) stated that gender roles influence entrepreneurial con­ ceptualizations of what constitute motivations and barriers. McGehee et al. (2007) found that women generally have higher motivation for agritourism entrepreneur­ ship than men, and women are more focused on expense reduction rather than the income-inducing activities preferred by their male counterparts. Pettersson and Cassel (2014) reported that farm women were motivated by the image of rural domesticity to become tourism entrepreneurs and that they present themselves as traditional farm women in their businesses. Nevertheless, it has been suggested that destinations emerging from crises (e.g., a global financial crisis) may offer new opportunities for female entrepreneurship (Bakas, 2017; Favre, 2017). Tajeddini et al. (2017) identified six factors that influenced women’s decisions to engage in tourism entrepreneurship in Bali, Indonesia: self-esteem, the specific circumstances and reactiveness of individual women, networking and marketing, the status of women in the tourism industry, availability of suitable markets, and the degree to which individuals and communities were concerned about the nega­ tive impacts of tourism. Movono and Dahles (2017) reported that the empower­ ment that took place as part of the growth of female entrepreneurship in patriarchal and embedded indigenous communities in Fiji had a positive impact on women’s social and political status. Surangi (2018) studied the factors influencing female entrepreneurship in Sri Lanka and suggested that the competing demands of fam­ ily relationships (especially motherhood and marriage) and business had a signifi­ cant influence. Figueroa-Domecq et al. (2020b) observed broad gender differences in approaches to risk, but fewer differences regarding behavioral control. They found that sustainability was an important motivator for women entrepreneurs, and that it was linked strongly to the potentials of their entrepreneurship to create

152

Tourism Entrepreneurship

environmental products. In contrast, men were more likely to see sustainability as providing business opportunities. Cole (2018) cautioned that rhetoric positioning tourism as empowering for women is overstated. She suggested that there is a need to reframe conceptualiza­ tions of tourism entrepreneurship for women beyond the economic and masculinist framings which were regarded as being artificial. It was argued that women’s entre­ preneurship in Ghana is undervalued because it is perceived as being an avenue for less educated women; meanwhile, women entrepreneurs often attempt to uphold strict familial practices and traditions, which limit their ability to grow and expand their enterprises (Adom & Anambane, 2019). Entrepreneurial performances and leadership were found to be gendered, fluid and constantly being negotiated among tourism entrepreneurs in Ghana and Nigeria (Kimbu et al., 2021). Women were often perceived to have less human capital and to be less competent in their entre­ preneurial behavior (Ploum et al., 2018), reflecting deep gender inequalities in power and status that are embedded in society and are widely accepted as “normal and inevitable” (Ahl, 2006; Ahl & Marlow, 2012). Figueroa-Domecq et al. (2020a) argued that dominant discourses of tourism entrepreneurship often position suc­ cessful entrepreneurial performance as masculine and economically informed, and undervalue gendered difference in approaches to entrepreneurship. Thus, future research on entrepreneurship and gender should be undertaken in a greater diver­ sity of locations, and it should also engage more with and be more critical of policy. The studies that have been reviewed undoubtedly make a significant contribution to the understanding of tourism entrepreneurship by identifying and analyzing the antecedents and outcomes of entrepreneurship. However, the majority of studies have emphasized the economic and financial outcomes of entrepreneurship, while paying less attention to social outcomes (Alrawadieh et al., 2021). In addition, the existing research focuses mainly on small-scale tourism entrepreneurs and neglects large tourism providers in terms of corporate and international entrepreneurship (Reinhold et al., 2017). Although the roles of female entrepreneurs and ethnic minor­ ity entrepreneurs have increasingly appeared as research areas in generic entrepre­ neurship research, knowledge concerning the nature and extent of entrepreneurial activity among different minority groups is very limited, especially in the tourism sector. There have been profound changes in thinking about the linking of heritage and culture in tourism entrepreneurship and the provision of tourism experiences in recent years (Jeffrey, 2019). Women and ethnic minority entrepreneurs have increas­ ingly become driving forces in the tourism industry, whether measured by the num­ ber of businesses owned, the revenues generated or the number of people employed (Li, 2008). Although ethnic entrepreneurship is important in local and regional economic development (Anderson, 2002), there is limited empirical research that explores the operating characteristics and development challenges confronting eth­ nic entrepreneurs. Thus, ethnic entrepreneurship in tourism remains understudied and more theoretical work is needed to develop and study ethnic entrepreneurship from different perspectives, such as culture, personal characteristics, motivations,

Tourism Entrepreneurship

153

organizational behavior and performance, and to provide conceptual frameworks to position the growing number of empirical studies and guide those that are to come. 4.2 Case Study: Managerial Perceptions of an Ethnic Theme Park, Yunnan Ethnic Folk Villages, China Introduction: Ethnic Theme Parks

Ethnic theme parks are commercial parks where the ethnic diversity of a nation or region is represented for visitors in a single locality in one panoptic sweep (Bruner, 2005). Such parks differ from most other amusement parks in that they are rarely developed with the sole intention of providing a leisure setting (Yang, 2011). A major goal of these parks is to display, preserve or restore some aspects of a nation or region’s ethnicity, cultural diversity and heritage. They not only act as cultural showcases or “living museums” and reenact or stage past or present cultural diversity but also reflect the trend for modern societies to attempt to pre­ serve and fossilize the traditional customs of “ancient cultures”, and to construct or reconstruct aspects of lifestyles that are vanishing or have disappeared (Bruner, 2005). They serve as convenient settings for visitors to view diverse cultures in a day without the necessity of traveling to remote tribal areas. The prototype of ethnic parks is probably the Polynesian Cultural Center in Hawaii, which serves as a model culture that selectively attempts to portray those tangible, believable aspects of indigenous culture with which the tourist can iden­ tify (Stanton, 1989). In the last three decades, with the rapid development of ethnic tourism, the construction of extravagant ethnic theme parks has become a strat­ egy for destination countries to promote tourism, reinforce identity and assert their presence on the world’s economic and cultural stages. Native US cultural cent­ ers have been developed throughout North America, providing spaces for exhibi­ tions, performances and demonstrations of indigenous culture. As more countries, especially in Asia, have embraced industrialization and modernization, many parks have been created to celebrate threatened lifestyles based on ethnic and heritage themes (Hoffstaedter, 2008). These parks offer a landscape within a secure envi­ ronment that is coherent and standardized so as to soothe the visitor’s gaze by eras­ ing the chaotic differences that render the myths of national identity and tradition problematic (Pemberton, 1994). They exert a powerful influence in shaping the images of ethnic groups and also provide tourists with an opportunity to redefine their own cultural identity. Many such parks have become important destinations for domestic and international travelers (Bruner, 2005). Managerial Perceptions of Yunnan Ethnic Folk Villages

In the Asia-Pacific area, China stands out as possessing numerous examples of reconstructed cultural landscapes with a large number of ethnic theme parks. As

154

Tourism Entrepreneurship

the world becomes increasingly interested in Chinese heritage and ethnic culture, an “ethnic culture boom” has emerged in China. The success of Splendid China and the Chinese Folk Cultural Village resulted in a “theme park fever” and the crea­ tion of numerous massive theme parks based on Chinese history and ethnic culture themes. However, few of the theme parks which were built in the 1980s and 1990s exist today. Yang (2011) examined a surviving ethnic theme park that was created in the period of “theme park fever” and discussed tensions and issues that are per­ tinent to the management and development of the park. A nationally well-known ethnic theme park, Yunnan Ethnic Folk Villages (YEFV) in Kunming, China, was examined in her study. YEFV was created in 1992 under a government initiative to use rich ethnic culture as a resource for attracting tourists and investments and, at the same time, for promoting cultural development, ethnic diversity and national unity. The park provides displays of ethnic diversity through cultural performances, exhibitions of minority arts, crafts, costumes and agricultural tools, and 25 replica villages built in traditional ways. A variety of activities are presented to visitors, including walking tours of villages, staged dance shows, musical performances, ethnic festivals and ceremonies, tasting of minority foods and elephant shows. The park has emerged as one of the most popular tourist attractions in Kunming with a paid gate attendance of over 15 million guests in 2007 (Yang, 2011). According to park managers, YEFV selectively portrays the best of those tangi­ ble, popular and exotic aspects of minority culture that tourists can identify with and appreciate in a one-day visit. The emphasis is on the cultural materials (old-style houses, traditional costumes, arts and handcrafts), the performing arts (singing and dancing), and cultural events and festivals. Tourists can walk through the “villages”, look over the shoulder of an ethnic worker making crafts, taste minority food, watch cultural shows and even briefly participate in a simple dance or celebration. Although the park is recreational, it is also political. The managers emphasized that the central theme of the YEFV is to present the “healthy and progressive” aspects of minority culture, which is a guiding principle of the central govern­ ment’s cultural policy. Historically, minority people and their culture were con­ sidered as primitive and backward by the majority Han people. Today, minority culture is no longer branded as “feudal superstition”, but has become a marketable tourism product and an opportunity for economic growth. Although minorities are encouraged to revive their culture and to maintain ethnic characteristics as mem­ bers of a multinational country (Li, 2004), not all aspects of ethnic culture are accepted in the process of cultural revival and tourism development, and only the “healthy and progressive” elements are supported in the park. For instance, tradi­ tional ethnic architecture and bright minority clothing are positive expressions of ethnic identity, to be celebrated and promoted. Minority religious rituals, however, are considered joyless and superstitious and, as such, have been discouraged. Only officially recognized “original” buildings and acceptable parts of the traditional culture of the minority peoples are exhibited in the park.

Tourism Entrepreneurship

155

Cultural authenticity appears to be an ambiguous, fluid and flexible concept for managers, who state that the objective of the park is to portray minority cultures authentically, but who also indicate that modification and reconstruction are neces­ sary in tourist shows. Folk villages, songs, dances, minority dresses and customs are all modified and staged to suit commercial needs. A stereotypical presenta­ tion of minority culture is provided, featuring “exoticized” and “gendered” depic­ tions of locals engaging in cultural entertainment. The park management plays a vital role in the construction of an imagined “primitive” world of minority peoples in Yunnan. However, the majority of managers are Han people. At the time of research, there were only two educated minority persons involved in management, while most minority people were typically employed in low-paying jobs such as dancers, tour guides, cleaners and security guards. Not all aspects of minority cul­ ture are valued by Han managers; tourist needs and desires are their highest con­ cerns. They generally believe that exotic cultural images, spectacular dance shows and the quaint customs of minorities are the most marketable cultural experiences. YEFV is a state-owned, but financially independent enterprise. From its first days of operation, the park witnessed an up-and-down trend in its clientele. It drew over 16 million tourists in 1992 and it reached a peak of 18 million tourists in 1999 when the World Horticulture Exposition was held in Kunming. However, following the failure of hundreds of cultural theme parks in China, YEFV also faced many finan­ cial and market challenges due to the significant decline in visitor numbers since 2000. Park management has faced a dilemma between providing authentic experi­ ences and making available tourism goods and services that tourists will buy. On one hand, they have to fulfill the political missions of the park, which is to display, pre­ serve and revive minority cultures. On the other hand, they are required to be a busi­ ness success. Driven by the search for commercial profits, the operators prioritize tourists’ needs and desires, rather than cultural accuracy and education. Maintaining the optimum level of attendance is a critical task for the park’s operators. Attracting more patrons and enhancing the park revenue have become their highest concerns. Discussion

YEFV serves as a good example for understanding tourism and Chinese nationalism. Yunnan is the most ethnically diverse province in China. Strengthening unity among ethnic groups is the essential objective of China’s ethnic policy (Lee, 2001). Designed as a multicultural center, YEFV showcases an official version of minor­ ity heritage and embodies the government’s political ideals toward minorities. As a “living museum”, it concentrates on certain tangible and enjoyable aspects of minor­ ity culture and displays living people in native costume who are on stage perform­ ing for tourists. The park authority explicitly selects, markets and promotes those “healthy and progressive” aspects of minority culture perceived by the government. The indigenous practice and religious traditions of minorities are being overlooked, while ethnic dances and festivals are becoming increasingly commercialized. Folk

156

Tourism Entrepreneurship

songs, dances, costumes and minority cultures are all modified and staged to suit a political agenda and commercial needs. YEFV demonstrates ethnic harmony by portraying minorities as “happy” groups united in a socialist “harmonious” society. Here, there is a clear link between power and the promotion of ethnic heritage for the purposes of tourism. Culture and ethnicity are manipulated by the government and park authorities to influence the wider public and to attract potential visitors. The significance of the YEFV in national identity building is considerable. The multiple goals and functions of the YEFV make management a difficult task. On the one hand, as a center of representation, preservation and inheritance of minority cultures, the park is a Chinese-style ethnic museum functioning as a socialist institution. It acts as an important venue of ethnic cultural expression, thereby playing an important role in the display, preservation and revival of cer­ tain aspects of minority culture and is a place where cross-cultural education is facilitated. On the other hand, as a relatively new product of tourism development, the park is a tourism enterprise, which should be operated according to market demand. Although it has undergone a series of enterprise reforms since the late 1990s and a privatization plan has been proposed, it is still not a fully independent enterprise, but is closely attached to the government. Government intervention and bureaucracy hinder its operation in a market economy. Therefore, further enterprise reforms are needed if these issues are to be avoided. Tourism is often used by governments as the savior of struggling economies. Traditional cultural forms provide a unique selling proposition for the marketing of tourist attractions. Ethnic theme parks construct simplified and standardized ver­ sions of ethnic culture to satisfy metropolitan tourists’ yearning for the entertain­ ing, unusual and exotic (Oakes, 1998). “Staged authenticity”, as a “substitute” for the “original”, may help to protect a fragile toured culture from being disturbed (Yang, 2019). As illustrated by this study, tourism has enhanced the opportunities for cultural expression through public performance and has promoted minorities’ awareness of their cultural heritage; however, tourism has also raised questions of cultural authenticity and insincerity. Many researchers call for a balance between the preservation of authenticity and commercial interests (Teo & Li, 2003). Commer­ cial interests should not compromise education and preservation objectives. Ethnic attractions will benefit from greater minority participation in decision-making as tensions between the management and minority workers will likely be reduced, and misrepresentation and misinterpretation can be more readily avoided. 4.3 Case Study: Gendered Practices of Akha Microentrepreneurs in Urban Ethnic Tourism in Thailand Introduction: Akha Minority Group and Ethnic Tourism in Thailand

The Akha are a Tibeto-Burmese ethnic minority group who moved in and settled in Northern Thailand more than 100 years ago (Alting von Geusau, 1983). However,

Tourism Entrepreneurship

157

the Akha and other highland ethnic minority groups are considered non-Thai by the Thai authorities and are ascribed multiple layers of marginality: geographically they live in remote hill regions or borderlands; politically they lack citizenship and are excluded from political participation; socioculturally they are regarded as the “backward others” by the mainstream society; and economically they have dis­ tinct livelihoods and agricultural methods (McCaskill et al., 2008; Rigg, 1997). The Akha society follows a patriarchal kinship system, where Akha men see the village and the world outside, while women are subordinate to men and bound to household work (Hanks, 1988) such as spinning cotton, sewing and weaving (Choopah & Naess, 1997). In the past decades, the Akha have experienced rapid economic and sociocul­ tural changes. Increasing numbers of Akha people have migrated to tourist hotspots to engage in urban souvenir vending (Trupp, 2014a). The migration of minority groups into lowland urban tourist areas is part of a larger socio-economic tran­ sition and urbanization in Southeast Asia in general and Thailand in particular. The restructuring of the Thai economy has made it difficult to sustain a living solely through agriculture and, thus, migration to big cities and other economically developed areas has become a necessity for highland minority populations from the north and northeastern provinces (Rigg, 1997; Rigg & Salamanca, 2011). In addition, various factors, including quests for higher education, search for nona­ gricultural jobs, the temptations of an urban and more modern lifestyle, and the opening of trade routes between Thailand and its neighboring countries, have fur­ ther accelerated urban-directed migration (Trupp, 2017). Women have dominated the migration pattern of the Akha due to a variety of reasons, including economic pressures, to avoid unwanted marriages (Toyota, 1998), to access opportunities for education in the cities (Buadaeng et al., 2002), and because of the desire to experi­ ence something new. The local Buddhist schooling system provided educational opportunities only for ethnic minority boys (Toyota, 1998), while many young eth­ nic minority women were left inexperienced and uneducated resulting in a high percentage of these women working in the sex industry (Buadaeng et al., 2002). Self-employment as souvenir sellers can offer an alternative to sex work. Thailand has become one of the leading tourism destinations in Asia and received more than 20 million international tourists and around 35 billion US dol­ lars in revenues in 2012 (Trupp, 2014b). The main destinations were the capital of Bangkok, coastal areas in the south and the mountainous northern region which is home to nine officially recognized ethnic minorities called “chao khao” in the Thai language, or “hill tribes” in English (Trupp, 2014b). The minorities are ethni­ cally, linguistically and culturally distinct from mainstream Thai society. With the increase of international visitors in the 1970s, large tour operators began including hill tribe excursions in their programs. Since then, ethnic minorities have been heavily promoted as the exotic other and have become a major tourist attraction in the national and international development programs. The Akha are one of the most visible highland ethnic minority groups and images of Akha women wearing black

158

Tourism Entrepreneurship

miniskirts, colorful embroidered shirts and unique headgear have been frequently used for tourism promotion (Cohen, 1992; Flacke-Neudorfer, 2007). Gendered Practices of Akha Ethnic Micro-entrepreneurs

Trupp and Sunanta (2017) examined the development of urban ethnic tourism in Thailand by analyzing gendered practices of ethnic minority souvenir vending in urban and coastal tourist areas (Chiang Mai, Bangkok, Koh Samui, Phuket, Pattaya and Hua Hin). Many studies have noted that the ethnic minority souvenir busi­ ness in Southeast Asia is largely conducted by females (Ishii, 2012; Trupp, 2017). Thailand is not an exception. Trupp and Sunanta (2017) found that urban Akha souvenir businesses, from production to distribution, are highly gendered. These tourism microenterprises are feminized in terms of the number of operators and the nature of the work. More than 90% of souvenir sellers and producers are women. The souvenirs that they sell range from self-made products such as bags, hats or wristbands to mass-manufactured items such as wooden frogs, bracelets, wallets or necklaces imported from China or Myanmar. The majority of these souvenirs do not reflect traditional Akha designs or symbolism. The majority of street vendors come from marginalized regions in the north and northeast of the country or from neighboring Myanmar. The Akha gendered division of labor associates souvenir business with wom­ en’s work. Both Akha men and women perceive souvenir producing and selling as women’s work that is not suitable for men. The production of Akha souvenirs, such as wristbands, bags or headgear, requires basic skills in sewing, stitching or embroidery. These have traditionally been the skills acquired by women and consti­ tute cultural capital that Akha girls are socialized to gain from a young age (Alting von Geusau, 2000; Choopah & Naess, 1997). As income from tourism has become an important source of livelihood for Akha families, some younger Akha men have started to engage in souvenir vending. However, they are teased for doing what is perceived to be women’s work by fellow villagers when home in the village, and their urban economic activity does not gain them social respect. Nevertheless, women tend to occupy the lowest reputational rung of street vending – mobile selling – while men and couples are more likely to sell at fixed or semi-mobile premises (Nirathron, 2006; Smith & Henderson, 2008). The few men involved in the urban souvenir business seldom work as mobile sellers like their female coun­ terparts, but work as semi-mobile or permanent vendors from stalls or footpaths. Mobile vending requires hard physical labor as vendors walk long distances carry­ ing heavy baskets of souvenirs. Mobile vendors often work in harsh environments, such as in busy, crowded, polluted tourist centers, where they frequently have to deal with drunken customers. Most of the main vending areas are characterized by controls through fines and bribes executed by municipal inspectors. Thus, mobile vendors have higher risks of getting fined or may have to pay monthly bribes. Their economic returns are modest and opportunities for career advancement are

Tourism Entrepreneurship

159

very limited. Many female vendors described their work as “exhausting” and “tire­ some” and wished to have their own shop or permanent stall, but could not afford it due to lack of economic resources (to pay for a fixed premise and a larger stock of souvenirs) and lack of social capital (knowing the right people at the market place) which blocked them from advancing their business. The feminine nature of the work, as constructed and perceived in the eyes of vendors and their foreign customers, makes Akha women better sellers than their male counterparts. Among female vendors, the more successful ones were those who were friendly, easy-going and skillful in communicating with prospective cus­ tomers. These female Akha vendors, as charming, friendly and approachable exotic others, were deemed to be more suitable for the requirements of tourism service work. Akha women with an easy-going personality adjusted with relative ease to urban mobile vending. In addition, Akha women’s traditional dress and silver head­ gear were more attractive to tourists than the men’s clothing. Akha women, more than their male counterparts, were willing to embrace the entry level of souvenir street vending and employed their feminine and ethnic attributes to sell, while Akha men felt ashamed to be carrying out such low-status work: it was considered to be a disgrace for men to take part in practices that had a feminine connotation. In addition, souvenir peddling by ethnic minorities in urban areas is sometimes thought to be akin to begging, which is looked down upon by members of Thai mainstream society. Thus, Akha villagers with better options would be unlikely to choose this option. Akha men’s alleged inability or unwilling­ ness to peddle is also explained by their natural “shyness” that makes them unfit for the job. Akha men would rather opt for other work arrangements, including letting their female partners migrate to become urban mobile vendors while they remain in the village to look after the farm and the family. Having limited choices, Akha women ventured into the job with the lowest status in the tourism economy, plying their trade in informal urban spaces to become the breadwinners of the household by sending back remittances to children, parents and husbands left behind. How­ ever, household gender division of labor is not completely changed by women’s income earning ability. Many Akha migrants still considered men to be the paternal authority and master of the household. Akha women predominantly continued to do women’s work as defined by the conventional Akha society. They also con­ tributed glimpses of minority women’s femininity, which has become a feature of much ethnic tourism. Traditional gender predispositions legitimate inequality in Akha urban tourism business. Discussion

Ethnic minority women’s involvement in the provision of tourism services has both challenged and reproduced traditional gender relations and the division of labor within the household and in wider society (Bourdieu, 2001; Ishii, 2012; Swain, 1993, 1995; Tucker & Boonabaana, 2012). As revealed by Trupp and Sunanta’s

160

Tourism Entrepreneurship

(2017) study, ethnic tourism reproduces gender asymmetry in the division of work, and it is not easy to reconfigure gender roles. Structural transformation of the Thai economy and socio-economic changes in the remote less-developed highland areas (Rigg, 1997; Tooker, 2004) have contributed to Akha women’s migration to urban tourist areas in search of livelihood opportunities. However, minority women pre­ dominantly occupy low-status tourism jobs, such as street vending, because they are one of the few options available to them. Street vending in Asia is commonly labor-intensive, highly competitive, highly risky and insecure, poorly remunerated and often entails conflict with authorities, but has east entry because of low for­ mal education and other requirements (Bhowmik, 2005; Endres, 2013; Batréau & Bonnet, 2016). Although minority women’s involvement in tourism has improved their eco­ nomic status and opened up new horizons, the impacts of ethnic tourism on the social status of minority women are ambiguous. In the case of Thailand, mobile street vending enables Akha women to become the main household income pro­ viders but, simultaneously, reinforces gender inequality. Akha women’s increased participation in self-employment does not necessarily empower them but per­ petuates their marginalized position. Changes in gender relations as a result of women’s economic contribution to the household are not easily accepted by all. Akha migrants still recognize men as the head of the household. Different from patriarchal systems in other sociocultural contexts where women’s work and spa­ tial mobility bind them to household tasks (Tucker, 2007), Akha women’s strong participation in tourism allows them to enter new socio-economic settings outside of the classical village or domestic spheres. This enables them to forge and mobi­ lize relationships with outsiders, largely international tourists, but also members of Thai mainstream society (Trupp, 2017). A number of studies have argued that the economic status of ethnic minority women in Asia can be advanced through ethnic tourism (Flacke-Neudorfer, 2007; Phommavong & Sörensson, 2014; Tran & Wal­ ter, 2014). However, economic mobility does not necessarily result in changes in gender roles and norms in the wider society. The relationship between tourism work and women’s empowerment is complicated. Economic participation alone does not straightforwardly attest to the higher status of women in the household nor in the wider society. Su et al. (2023), in an investigation of the commercial production of Hui embroidery in Ningxia in Western China, noted that participating women gained substantially and in a variety of ways from their involvement but cautioned that the gendered expectations of majority society were not changed by their local initiatives. As a minority, ethnic people must negotiate the expectations of their own society, as well as the sometimes different expectations of the larger society of which they are a part. Further research is required to explore gendered practices of minority entrepreneurs across different cultures and regions. More comparative studies are needed to analyze how tourism-related ethnic entrepreneurship trans­ forms gender relations in remote minority villages and urban tourist areas.

Tourism Entrepreneurship

161

4.4 Case Study: Ethnic Entrepreneurship in South African Township Tourism Township Tourism and Black Women in South Africa

The tourism industry in South Africa has grown rapidly since the 1990s and, prior to the global pandemic, attracted millions of international tourists (Hikido, 2018). Township tourism, a popular cultural activity for overseas visitors, is a niche mar­ ket within the nation’s tourism industry. In Cape Town, nearly 25% of international tourists visited the townships (George & Booyens, 2014), contributing to about 300,000 tourists annually (Rolfes, 2010). Popular tourist attractions included town­ ship bed and breakfasts (B&Bs), a market driven by black South African women who turned their homes into accommodations for visitors. In South Africa, as in other developing countries, infrastructure, education, health care and jobs are mainly concentrated in the cities, while many former reserves and black townships remain underdeveloped. The regional disparity has driven black urban migration and township expansion. Many black townships pose daily challenges to living with high rates of crime and civil unrest due to lack of adequate housing and basic services (Jürgens et al., 2013). Yet these townships have become popular tourist attractions within South Africa’s tour­ ism industry that expanded rapidly after the 1990s (Pirie, 2007). These periph­ eral black settlements offer tourists a glimpse of what is touted as “real life in South Africa” (Rolfes, 2010). Large white-owned companies that dominate tourism markets primarily operate township tours, while black residents estab­ lish walking tours, craft markets and B&Bs. Although such small-scale entre­ preneurship does not provide significant income to black microenterprise, these self-employment endeavors offer alternatives to precarious low-wage work or unemployment. Historically, South African black women did not have job access, and most remained in the underdeveloped hinterlands (Ramphele, 1989). Their institution­ alized exclusion from formal labor markets dates back to the nineteenth-century migrant labor system, whereby black men traveled between the rural interior and the cities to supply cheap labor for white capital (Burawoy, 1976). Patterns of racial segregation, labor stratification and gendered racism still exist (Hikido, 2018). Many black women struggle to secure paid work given their exclusion from educational and employment opportunities, along with their unpaid household labor (Floro & Komatsu, 2011; Valodia, 2001). Low-wage service jobs, especially domestic work, are one of their few paying options (Ally, 2011; Fish, 2006). With the increasing market demand for tourist accommodations, many black women have turned their homes into township B&Bs. Tourism entrepreneurship provides an economic alternative for these women who face structural barriers to their entry into formal labor markets.

162

Tourism Entrepreneurship

Ethnic Entrepreneurship and Social Capital

Hikido (2018) examined interracial social capital in black township tourism enter­ prise in South Africa. Drawing from ethnographic studies of three establishments (Kopanong B&B, Lungi’s B&B and Minnie’s B&B) in two black townships in Cape Town, she discussed how entrepreneurial black women develop ties with whites to acquire social, economic, cultural and symbolic forms of capital that have been systemically denied to them as black South African women. These ethnic entre­ preneurs have established home-based B&Bs and formed connections with white Europeans and South Africans during their entrepreneurial endeavors. Township B&Bs are primarily gendered enterprises. Black women occupy this accommo­ dation market and operate these microenterprises by providing maternal caretak­ ing and personalized services. The home-based entrepreneurship also allows these women to generate income while managing household tasks, which eliminates the commute between the township and a city job (Bezuidenhout & Fakier, 2006). Township B&B providers face challenges, often including inadequate marketing and networking, short of signage or direction boards, lack of Internet advertise­ ment exposure and brochures, lack of financial support to upgrade facilities, and weak financial and business acumen (Rogerson, 2008). Hikido (2018) observed that many black B&B owners who have developed connections with whites have uti­ lized the newly gained resources to improve and expand their businesses. Tourists’ “word of mouth” is essential for successful B&B businesses since they rely heavily on customer networks for advertisement. Many visitors help the owners to penetrate white social networks and grow their customer base. The well-established owners usually treat their visitors as personal contacts and actively maintain relationships with them. Doing so strengthens their ties, inspiring tourists not only to return but also to invite their friends, which effectively advertises their business and attracts future clients. Owners are also motivated to provide good service and try to ensure that their guests’ enjoyable stay as tourists is shared on social media, blogs and review websites, thereby providing informal advertising for the B&Bs. Moreover, a few successful black owners have attracted the attention of white-owned South African tourism companies and organizations as well as universities and consulting groups, which has created a pathway into the predominantly white tourism industry. As mentioned earlier, most black women have been excluded from educational opportunities and formal job markets, and few B&B owners initially possess busi­ ness skills to competitively manage an independent small tourism enterprise. When these owners partner with whites, they can acquire business acumen and marketing assistance, which help them to conduct their businesses more effectively. The strong ties with whites yield valuable online resources that enhance the owners’ marketing, and also bridge the gap between black entrepreneurs and white social networks. This allows them to convert white social capital into economic and cultural capital. With the support of their white social networks through start-up loans, donations or in other ways, many owners have been able to advance their businesses.

Tourism Entrepreneurship

163

B&B owners who develop strong ties with whites also gain white recommenda­ tions, which not only advertise their businesses to the target clientele but also serve as credible refutations against racialized discourses that depict black townships as dangerous. Conventional international perspectives of South Africa as unsafe have discouraged overseas tourists from visiting, denting the growth of the nation’s tourism industry (Ferreira & Harmse, 2000; George, 2003). Black townships are especially regarded as being dangerous and high-crime areas (George & Booyens, 2014). The negative perception of the townships is a big challenge for all B&B owners to overcome (Rogerson, 2004). As such, when white tourists recommend township B&Bs and affirm that these accommodations promise a safe experi­ ence for visitors, their endorsements constitute an indispensable form of symbolic capital as they legitimate black businesses. Their positive recommendations effec­ tively combat the widespread misconceptions about township violence, opening the door for other tourists to visit. Ironically, these women are enabled to develop interracial ties by the depth of South Africa’s racial inequality, as the allure of township tourism for overseas tourists lies within the township’s blackness and underdevelopment. Discussion

As revealed by Hikido’s study (2018), black townships are racially constructed spaces, and the appeal of township tourism for international tourists lies in its racial opposition and contrast to the white South African city. In other words, the black­ ness and impoverishment of townships substantiate the “authenticity” that tour­ ists seek (Urry, 2002), as many Westerners envision the “real Africa” to be black and poor (Rolfes, 2010). Like disadvantaged ethnic minorities in other developing countries, most black women cannot readily establish independent businesses due to their lack of economic and human capital. This is a direct consequence of the systemic gendered racism that was rooted in South African’s economy, which pre­ cluded black women from acquiring education and entering formal job markets. White supremacy, patriarchy and capitalism structure the circulation of multiple forms of capital within groups stratified by race, gender and class, maintaining the inequitable distribution of resources. But marginalized entrepreneurs can develop social capital across these boundaries and subsequently attain additional forms of capital from these connections. Although tourism entrepreneurship does not radi­ cally challenge these inequalities, it brings middle-class whites to these periph­ eral communities, creating space for disadvantaged black entrepreneurs to develop interracial connections and acquire external sponsorship and resources historically hoarded by whites. These exchanges do not necessarily transform the power imbal­ ance between B&B owners and middle-class whites as the latter remain the pri­ mary producers and consumers in South Africa’s local and global tourism industry. Nevertheless, black women’s development of interracial ties through the tour­ ism market demonstrates their capacity to create avenues for attaining resources

164

Tourism Entrepreneurship

that were previously systematically barred from them. The interracial transference of these opportunities highlights the deep inequalities between blacks and whites and also the agency of marginalized entrepreneurs to attain assets within rigid social structures. Such exemplification of agency and the implications of interra­ cial social capital deserve further attention in the studies of minority entrepreneurs in the context of ethnic tourism. Future studies need to compare the differences between black South African women and other marginalized groups when devel­ oping social and economic capitals across racial, ethnicity, class and geographic locations. 4.5

Case Study: Marketing of Ethnic Tourism

Although visitors may go to ethnic communities and patronize minority and busi­ nesses without an explicit invitation, like other tourism destinations and attractions, success in attracting a clientele may be achieved with the assistance of marketing. The ways in which aboriginal products are packaged and promoted have become an important issue for aboriginal stakeholders. Advertising is an important part of the promotional mix and is a key marketing tool: potential consumers must base buying decisions upon mental images of products and services, rather than being able to sample alternative options physically (Morgan & Pritchard, 2002). Two questions immediately arise: what messages should be sent to prospec­ tive customers and will recommendations by endorsers increase the likelihood of potential visitors actually coming to the site. Initially with a sample of student respondents and later with a sample of actual tourists who were visiting an abo­ riginal theme park in Taiwan (Chang et al., 2005a, 2005b), using an experimental approach, Chang et al. explored the nature of messages and endorsers who would be effective in attracting visitors to such places. They designed an attractive brochure that might be used to attract visitors. The basic brochure was used as a control and other versions of the brochure were modi­ fied with the inclusion of a rational appeal or an emotional appeal picture of an endorser. A rational appeal is comprised primarily of factual information whereas an emotional appeal is comprised of persuasive statements. Endorsers are individu­ als who are recognized as opinion leaders, who might draw audiences’ attention and affection, thereby stimulating purchase intentions (Mowen & Brown, 1981). The choice of an appropriate endorser is likely to influence advertising effective­ ness (Kahle & Homer, 1985). After considering a variety of possibilities, a celeb­ rity (a well-known aboriginal pop singer from Taiwan who had been used in actual advertisements by Taiwan Tourism Bureau) and a female aboriginal employee (a dancer) of the theme park were selected as endorsers. A two-factor experimental design was adopted, whereby participants in the study were exposed to types of endorsers and types of advertising appeals in exper­ imental manipulations in different combinations, enabling the effects of type of appeal and type of endorser to be assessed, as well as their interactive effects.

Tourism Entrepreneurship

165

It was found that a persuasive message gained a better response than a rational message. Also, advertising effectiveness was stronger when using the employee as an endorser compared to the celebrity endorser. This finding is compatible with Stephens and Faranda’s (1993) findings that employee endorsers, in particular front-line employees, elicit better responses regarding advertising effectiveness than celebrity endorsers, probably because of the impression of authenticity that the aboriginal dancer represents, regardless of whether it is considered to be genu­ ine or staged authenticity. It is not claimed that these findings will apply to all aboriginal offerings for the type of advertising must be tailored to the nature of the product. Furthermore, bro­ chures have become less important as the widespread use of electronic information technology and social media constitute other ways of disseminating information. Nevertheless, attention is drawn by such studies to the need for great care in the promotion of products both to attract visitors and to avoid stereotyping, and for the types of information that are required to support promotional initiatives. Summary

Entrepreneurship, as an important topic in tourism research, has recently received increased scholarly attention. Entrepreneurship is a critical factor in tourism desti­ nation development. Many studies suggest that the tourism sector is suitable for new minority entre­ preneurship because of the relatively low entry barriers and because it values the competitive strengths and product diversification provided by distinctive minority groups (Pechlaner et al., 2012). However, many minority people cannot readily launch independent businesses due to lack of economic and human capital. More­ over, minority entrepreneurs’ economic gains have often been found to be nei­ ther significant nor communally widespread (Koens & Thomas, 2015; Rogerson, 2008). Researchers have emphasized the need for governmental policy support and education and training of ethnic tourism entrepreneurs so that they can be competi­ tive in the marketplace (Peters & Buhalis, 2004). Nevertheless, although tourism entrepreneurship does not often radically chal­ lenge the inequalities within and between groups stratified by race, ethnicity, gen­ der and class, it brings mainstream tourists to these marginalized communities, creating a new space and opportunity for disadvantaged minority entrepreneurs to develop interracial connections and acquire external sponsorship and resources historically hoarded by other groups. As such, tourism entrepreneurship can reduce social exclusion and facilitate the integration of minorities into mainstream socie­ ties (Pechlaner et al., 2012). Complicated gender differences have been observed in ethnic tourism entre­ preneurship. Minority women’s involvement in tourism has both challenged and reproduced traditional gender relations and the division of labor within the house­ hold and in wider society. Female entrepreneurs tend to be at the bottom of the

166

Tourism Entrepreneurship

informal tourism economy and contestation of gender roles is difficult in many destination countries. Although tourism entrepreneurship enables minority women to improve their economic status and/or obtain new social capital through inter­ racial connections, the impacts of ethnic tourism on the social status of minority women are ambiguous. Changes in gender relations as a result of women’s eco­ nomic contribution to the household are not easily accepted in traditional socie­ ties (Trupp & Sunanta, 2017). Yet, research on this topic remains limited despite consensus among researchers about the complex role that gender plays in different phases of the entrepreneurial process as well as in entrepreneurial performance. Further research is needed to explore the tourism practices of ethnic minority entre­ preneurs across gender, cultures and regions. Entrepreneurs will need to market their products if they are to be successful. In this respect, they do not differ from other tourism entrepreneurs but they should give careful thought concerning how their ethnicity is incorporated (or not) into their products and how this is communicated to potential customers. References Adom, K., & Anambane, G. (2019). Understanding the role of culture and gender stereo­ types in women entrepreneurs through the lens of the stereotype threat theory. Journal of Entrepreneurship in Emerging Economies, 12(1), 100–124. Ahl, H. (2006). Why research on women entrepreneurs needs new directions. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 30(5), 595–621. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2006.00138.x Ahl, H., & Marlow, S. (2012). Exploring the dynamics of gender, feminism, and entrepreneur­ ship: Advancing debate to escape a dead end? Organization, 19(5), 543–562. https://doi.org/ 10.1177/1350508412448695 Ahmad, S.Z., Jabeen, F., & Khan, M. (2014). Entrepreneurs’ choice in business venture: Motivations for choosing home-stay accommodation businesses in Peninsular Malaysia. International Journal of Hospital Management, 36, 31–40. Alhammad, F.A. (2020). Trends in tourism entrepreneurship research: A systematic review. Jordan Journal of Business Administration, 16(Supplement 1), 307–330. Ally, S. (2011). From Servants to Workers: South African Domestic Workers and the Demo­ cratic State. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press. Alrawadieh, Z., Altinay, L., Cetin, G., & Simsek, D. (2021). The interface between hospital­ ity and tourism entrepreneurship, integration, and well-being: A study of refugee entre­ preneurs. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 97, 103013. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.ijhm.2021.103013 Altinay, L., Madanoglu, M., Daniele, R., & Lashley, C. (2012). The influence of family tradition and psychological traits on entrepreneurial intention. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 31(2), 489–499. Alting von Geusau, L. (1983). Dialects of Akhazang: The interiorizations of a perennial minority group. In McKinnon, J., & Bhrukasri, W. (Eds.). Highlanders of Thailand (pp. 243–277). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Alting von Geusau, L. (2000). Akha Internal history: Marginalisation and the ethnic alli­ ance system. In Turton, A. (Ed.). Civility and Savagery. Social Identity in Tai States (pp. 122–158). Richmond: Curzon.

Tourism Entrepreneurship

167

Anderson, R.B. (2002). Entrepreneurship and aboriginal Canadians: A case study in eco­ nomic development. Journal of Developmental Entrepreneurship, 7(1), 45–65. Aquino, R.S., Lück, M., & Schänzel, H.A. (2018). A conceptual framework of tourism social entrepreneurship for sustainable community development. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, 37(1), 23–32. Bakas, F.E. (2017). A beautiful mess: Reciprocity and positionality in gender and tourism research. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 33, 126–133. Bannock, G. (2005). The Economics and Management of Small Business: An International Perspective. London: Routledge. Bastakis, C., Buhalis, D., & Butler, R. (2004). The perception of small and medium sized tourism accommodation providers on the impacts of the tour operators’ power in Eastern Mediterranean. Tourism Management, 25, 151–170. Basu, A., & Altinay, E. (2002). The interaction between culture and entrepreneurship in London’s immigrant businesses. International Small Business Journal, 20(4), 371–393. Batréau, Q., & Bonnet, F. (2016). Managed informality: Regulating street vendors in Bang­ kok. City & Community, 15(1), 29–43. Beeton, S. (2002). Entrepreneurship in rural tourism: Australian Landcare programs as a destination marketing tool. Journal of Travel Research, 41, 206–209. Bezuidenhout, A., & Fakier, K. (2006). “Maria’s burden: Contract cleaning and the crisis of social reproduction in post-apartheid South Africa.” Antipode, 38(3) 462–485. Bhowmik, S.K. (2005). Street vendors in Asia: A review. Economic and Political Weekly, 40(22), 2256–2264. Booth, P., Chaperon, S.A., Kennell, J.S., & Morrison, A.M. (2020). Entrepreneurship in island contexts: A systematic review of the tourism and hospitality literature. Inter­ national Journal of Hospitality Management, 85, 102438. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. ijhm.2019.102438 Bosworth, G., & Farrell, H. (2011). Tourism entrepreneurs in Northumberland. Annals of Tourism Research, 38(4), 1474–1494. Bottema, M.J., & Bush, S.R. (2012). The durability of private sector-led marine conserva­ tion: A case study of two entrepreneurial marine protected areas in Indonesia. Ocean Coast Management. 61, 38–48. Bourdieu, P. (2001). Masculine Domination. Redwood City, CA: Stanford University Press. Bredvold, R., & Skålén, P. (2016). Lifestyle entrepreneurs and their identity construction: A study of the tourism industry. Tourism Management, 56, 96–105. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.tourman.2016.03.023 Bruner, E.M. (2005). Culture on Tour. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Buadaeng, K., Boonyasaranai, P., & Leepreecha, P. (2002). A Study of the Socio-Economic Vulnerability of Urban-Based Tribal Peoples in Chiang Mai and Chiang Rai, Thailand. Chiang Mai: Social Research Institute, Chiang Mai University. Burawoy, M. (1976). The functions and reproduction of migrant labor: Comparative mate­ rial from Southern Africa and the United States. American Journal of Sociology, 81(5), 1050–1087. Burnett, K.A., & Danson, M. (2017). Enterprise and entrepreneurship on islands and remote rural environments. International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation, 18 (1), 25–35. Butler, R.W., & McDonnell, I.G. (2011). One man and his boat (and hotel and pier . . .): Henry Gilbert Smith and the establishment of manly, Australia. Tourism Geographies, 13, 343–359.

168

Tourism Entrepreneurship

Caparros, B.M. (2018). Trekking to women’s empowerment: A case study of a femaleoperated travel company in Ladakh. In Cole, S. (Ed.). Gender Equality and Tourism: Beyond Empowerment (pp. 57–66). Wallingford: CABI. Carlbäck, M. (2012). Strategic entrepreneurship in the hotel industry: The role of chain affiliation. Scandinavian Journal of Hospitality and Tourism, 12 (4), 349–372. Carlisle, S., Kunc, M., Jones, E., & Tiffin, S. (2013). Supporting innovation for tourism development through multi-stakeholder approaches: Experiences from Africa. Tourism Management, 35, 59–69. Carr, A., Ruhanen, L., Whitford, M., & Lane, B. (2017). Sustainable tourism: Its evolution and its future. In Sustainable Tourism and Indigenous Peoples. London: Routledge. Cave, J., Jolliffe, L., & Baum, T. (2013). Tourism and Souvenirs: Glocal Perspectives from the Margins. Bristol: Channel View Publications. Chan, J.H., Iankova, K., Zhang, Y., McDonald, T., & Qi, X. (2016). The role of selfgentrification in sustainable tourism: Indigenous entrepreneurship at Honghe Hani Rice Terraces World Heritage Site, China. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 24(8–9), 1262–1279. Chang, J.C. (2011). Introduction: Entrepreneurship in tourism and hospitality: The role of SMEs. Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, 16(5), 467–469. Chang, J.C., Wall, G., & Lai, C.Y.A. (2005a).The advertising effectiveness of aboriginal endorsers: An example from Taiwan, Tourism Analysis, 10 (3), 247–255. Chang, J.C., Wall, G., & Tsai, C.-T. (2005b). Endorsement advertising in aboriginal tourism: An experiment in Taiwan. International Journal of Tourism Research, 7(6), 347–356. Chang, J.C., Tsai, C.-T., & Chen, Y.-H. (2010). Motivations and management objectives for operating micro-businesses in aboriginal communities. African Journal of Business Management, 4(14), 2824–2835. Chili, N.S., & Mabaso, S.L. (2016). The challenges of developing small tourism enterprises in townships: Case of Umlazi, South Africa. Problems and Perspectives in Management, 14(1–1), 201–205. https://doi.org/10.21511/ppm.14(1-1).2016.08 Choopah, D., & Naess, M. (1997). Deleu: A life history of an Akha Woman. In McCaskill, D., & Kampe, K. (Eds.). Development or Domestication? Indigenous Peoples of South­ east Asia (pp. 183–204). Chiang Mai: Silkworm Books. Cohen, E. (1992). Who are the chao khao? Hill tribe postcards from northern Thailand. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 98(1), 101–126. Cole, S. (2018). Gender Equality and Tourism: Beyond Empowerment. Wallingford: CABI. Cornelius, B., Landstrom, H., & Persson, O. (2006). Entrepreneurship studies: The dynamic research front of a developing social science. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 30(3), 375–398. Costa, C., Breda, Z., Bakas, F.E., Durão, M., & Pinho, I. (2016). Through the gender looking glass: Brazilian tourism entrepreneurs. International Journal of Gender and Entrepre­ neurship, 8(3), 282–306. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJGE-07-2015-0023 Crnogaj, K., Rebernik, M., Hojnik, B.B., & Gomezelj, D.O. (2014). Building a model of researching the sustainable entrepreneurship in the tourism sector. Kybernetes, 43(3/4), 377–393. Curry, J.A., Donker, H., & Michel, P. (2016). Social entrepreneurship and Indigenous peo­ ple. Journal of Co-operative Organization and Management, 4(2), 108–115. Dana, L.P. (2015). Indigenous entrepreneurship: An emerging field of research. Interna­ tional Journal of Business and Globalization, 14(2), 158–169. Dawson, D., Fountain, J., & Cohen, D.A. (2011). Seasonality and the lifestyle “conundrum”: An analysis of lifestyle entrepreneurship in wine tourism regions. Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, 16(5), 551–572.

Tourism Entrepreneurship

169

De Lange, D., & Dodds, R. (2017). Increasing sustainable tourism through social entre­ preneurship. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 29(7), 1977–2002. Dias, A., González-Rodríguez, M.R., & Patuleia, M. (2021). Retaining tourism life­ style entrepreneurs for destination competitiveness. International Journal of Tourism Research, 23(4), 701–712. Echtner, C.M. (1995). Entrepreneurial training in developing countries. Annals of Tourism Research, 22(1), 119–134. Eichler, J. (2017). New responses to mining extractivism in the Bolivian lowlands: The role and potential of Indigenous cooperatives in self-managing mining resources. Interna­ tional Journal of Human Rights, 22(2), 1–24. Einarsen, K., & Mykletun, R.J. (2009). Exploring the success of the Gladmat festival (the Stavanger food festival). Scandinavian Journal of Hospitality and Tourism, 9(2–3), 225–248. Endres, K. (2013). Traders, markets, and the state in Vietnam: Anthropological perspectives. ASEAS – Austrian Journal of South-East Asian Studies, 6(2), 356–365. Erdmann, S.J. (2016). American Indian entrepreneurs’ perceptions of their success in estab­ lishing businesses on or near reservations in Wisconsin. Journal of Developmental Entre­ preneurship, 21(3), 1650017. Favre, C.C. (2017). The Small2Mighty tourism academy: Growing business to grow women as a transformative strategy for emerging destinations. Worldwide Hospitality and Tour­ ism Themes, 9 (5), 555–563. Ferreira, S.L.A., & Harmse, A.C. (2000). Crime and tourism in South Africa: International tourists’ perception and risk. South African Geographical Journal, 82(2), 80–85. Figueroa-Domecq, C., Jong, A.D., & Williams, A.M. (2020a). Gender, tourism & entrepre­ neurship: A critical review. Annals of Tourism Research, 84, 10298. Figueroa-Domecq, C., Kimbu A., Jong A.D., & Williams A.M. (2020b). Sustainability through the tourism entrepreneurship journey: A gender perspective. Journal of Sustain­ able Tourism, 30(7), 1562–1585. https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2020.1831001 Fish, J. (2006). Domestic Democracy: At Home in South Africa. New York: Routledge. Fitzsimmons, J.A., Fitzsimmons, M.J., & Bordoloi, S. (2008). Service Management: Opera­ tions, Strategy, and Information Technology (p. 4). New York: McGraw-Hill. Flacke-Neudorfer, C. (2007). Tourism, gender and development in the third world: A case study from northern Laos. Tourism and Hospitality Planning & Development, 4(2), 135–147. Floro, M.S., & Komatsu, H. (2011). Gender and work in South Africa: What can time-use data reveal? Feminist Economics, 17(4) 33–66. Fu, H., Okumus, F., Wu, K., & Köseoglu, M.A. (2019). The entrepreneurship research in hospitality and tourism. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 78, 1–12. Gallagher, B., & Lawrence, T.B. (2012). Entrepreneurship and indigenous identity: A study of identity work by indigenous entrepreneurs in British Columbia. International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Small Business, 17(4), 395–414. Gantner, B. (2011). Schattenwirtschaft unter Palmen: Der touristisch informelle Sektor im Urlaubsparadies Patong, Thailand. ASEAS – Austrian Journal of South-East Asian Stud­ ies, 4(1), 51–80. George, R. (2003) Tourist’s perception of safety and security while visiting Cape Town. Tourism Management, 24(5) 575–585. George, R., & Booyens, I. (2014). Township tourism demand: Tourists’ perceptions of safety and security. Urban Forum, 25(4), 449–467.

170

Tourism Entrepreneurship

Getz, D., & Petersen, T. (2005). Growth and profit-oriented entrepreneurship among family business owners in the tourism and hospitality industry. International Journal of Hospi­ tality Management, 24(2), 219–242. Giminiani, P.D. (2018). Entrepreneurs in the making: Indigenous entrepreneurship and the governance of hope in Chile. Latin American and Caribbean Ethnic Studies, 13(3), 259–281. https://doi.org/10.1080/17442222.2018.1463891 Goering, P.G. (1990). The response to tourism in Ladakh. Cultural Survival Quarterly, 14(1), 20–25. Graburn, N. (1976). Ethnic and Tourist Arts: Cultural Expressions from the Fourth World. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. Gurel, E., Altinay, L., & Daniele, R. (2010). Tourism students’ entrepreneurial intentions. Annals of Tourism Research, 37 (3), 646–669. Haber, S., & Reichel, A. (2007). The cumulative nature of the entrepreneurial process: The contribution of human capital, planning, and environment resources to small venture performance. Journal of Business Venturing, 22 (1), 119–145. Hall, J.K., Daneke, G.A., & Lenox, M.J. (2010). Sustainable development and entrepre­ neurship: Past contributions and future directions. Journal of Business Venturing, 25, 439–448. Hallak, R., Assaker, G., & Lee, C. (2015). Tourism entrepreneurship performance: The effects of place identity, self-efficacy, and gender. Journal of Travel Research, 54(1), 36–51. Hallak, R., Brown, G., & Lindsay, N.J. (2012). The Place Identity – performance rela­ tionship among tourism entrepreneurs: A structural equation modeling analysis. Tour­ ism Management, 33(1), 143–154. Hanks, J.R. (1988). The power of Akha women. In Eberhardt, N. (Ed.). Gender, Power and the Construction of the Moral Order: Studies from the Thai Periphery (pp. 13–31). Madison, WI: Southeast Asian Studies, University of Wisconsin. Harper, D.A. (1996). Entrepreneurship and the Market Process. London: Routledge. Henry, E. (2017). The creative spirit: Emancipatory Maori entrepreneurship in screen pro­ duction in New Zealand. Small Enterprise Research, 24(1), 23–35. Hernandez-Maestro, R.M., & Gonzalez-Benito, O. (2004). Objective quality and business performance in service environments: Moderating effects of entrepreneurs’ knowledge and involvement. The Service Industries Journal, 31(14), 2321–2354. Hikido, A. (2018). Entrepreneurship in South African township tourism: The impact of interracial social capital. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 41(14), 2580–2598. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/01419870.2017.1392026 Hindle, K., & Lansdowne, M. (2005). Brave spirits on new paths: Toward a globally rel­ evant paradigm of indigenous entrepreneurship research. Journal of Small Business & Entrepreneurship, 18(2), 131–141. https://doi.org/10.1080/08276331.2005.10593335 Hindle, K., & Moroz, P. (2009). Indigenous entrepreneurship as a research field: Develop­ ing a definitional framework from the emerging canon. International Entrepreneurship Management Journal, 6(4), 357–385. Ho, C.I., & Lee, Y.L. (2007). The development of an e-travel service quality scale. Tourism Management, 28(6), 1434–1449. Hoffstaedter, G. (2008). Representing culture in Malaysian cultural theme parks: Tensions and contradictions. Anthropological Forum, 18(2), 139–160. Hyytinen, A., Pajarinen, M., & Rouvinen, P. (2015). Does innovativeness reduce startup survival rates? Journal of Business Venturing, 30(4), 564–581. Iorio, M., & Corsale, A. (2010). Rural tourism and livelihood strategies in Romania. Journal of Rural Studies, 26(2), 152–162.

Tourism Entrepreneurship

171

Ishii, K. (2012). The impact of ethnic tourism on hill tribes in Thailand. Annals of Tourism Research, 39(1), 290–310. Jaafar, M., Abdul-Aziz, A.R., Maideen, S.A., & Mohd, S.Z. (2011). Entrepreneurship in the tourism industry: Issues in developing countries. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 30, 827–835. Jeffrey, H.L.(2019). Tourism and gendered hosts and guests. Tourism Review, 74(5), 1038–1046. https://doi.org/10.1108/TR-02-2017-0024 Jóhannesson, G.T. (2012). To get things done: A relational approach to entrepreneurship. Scandinavian Journal of Hospitality and Tourism, 12(2), 181–196. Jóhannesson, G.T., Huijbens, E.H., & Sharpley, R. (2010). Icelandic tourism: Past directions – future challenges. Tourism Geographies, 12 (2), 278–301. Jørgensen, M.T., Hansen, A.V., Sørensen, F., Fuglsang, L., Sundbo, J., & Jensen, J.F. (2021). Collective tourism social entrepreneurship: A means for community mobilization and social transformation. Annals of Tourism Research, 88, 103171. https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.annals.2021.10317 Jürgens, U., Donaldson, R., Rule, S., & Bähr, J. (2013). Townships in South African cities – Literature review and research perspectives. Habitat International, 39 256–260. Kaaristo, M. (2014). Value of silence: Mediating aural environments in Estonian rural tour­ ism. Journal of Tourism and Cultural Change, 12(3), 267–279. Kahle, L.R., & Homer, P.M. (1985). Physical attractiveness of the celebrity endorser: A social adaptation perspective. Journal of Consumer Research, 11(2), 954–961. Karanasios, S., & Burgess, S. (2008). Tourism and Internet adoption: A developing world perspective. International Journal of Tourism Research, 10(2), 169–182. Kawharu, M., Tapsell, P., & Woods, C. (2017). Indigenous entrepreneurship in Aotearoa New Zealand: The takarangi framework of resilience and innovation. Journal of Enterprising Communities: People and Places in the Global Economy, 11(1), 20–38. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEC-01-2015-0010 Kelley, D., Bosma, N.S., & Amorós, J.E. (2011). Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2010 Executive Report. Kensbock, S., & Jennings, G. (2011). Pursuing: A grounded theory of tourism entrepre­ neurs’ understanding and praxis of sustainable tourism. Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, 16(5), 489–504. Kimbu, A.N., Jong, A.D., Adamc, I., Ribeiroa, M.A., Afenyo-Agbe, E., Adeola, O., & Figueroa-Domecqa, C. (2021). Recontextualising gender in entrepreneurial leadership. Annals of Tourism Research, 88, 103176. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2021.103176 Kline, C., McGehee, N.G., Paterson, S., & Tsao, J. (2013). Using ecological systems theory and density of acquaintance to explore resident perception of entrepreneurial climate. Journal of Travel Research, 52(3), 294–309. Koens, K., & Thomas, R. (2015). Is small beautiful? Understanding the contribution of small businesses in township tourism to economic development. Development Southern Africa, 32(3), 320–332. Koh, K.Y., & Hatten, T.S. (2002). The tourism entrepreneur: The overlooked player in tour­ ism development studies. International Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Administra­ tion, 3(1), 21–48. Laeis, G.C.M., & Lemke, S. (2016). Social entrepreneurship in tourism: Applying sustain­ able livelihoods approaches. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Man­ agement, 28(6), 1076–1093. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCHM-05-2014-0235. Lashley, C., & Rowson, B. (2010). Lifestyle businesses: Insights into Blackpool’s hotel sec­ tor. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 29(3), 511–519.

172

Tourism Entrepreneurship

Lee, M.B. (2001). Ethnicity, Education and Empowerment: How Minority Students in Southwest China Construct Identities. Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing Limited. Lee-Ross, D., & Mitchell, B. (2007). Doing business in the Torres Straits: A study of the Relationship between culture and the nature of Indigenous entrepreneurs. Journal of Developmental Entrepreneurship, 12(2), 199–216. Lemmetyinen, A. (2010). The role of the DMO in creating value in EU-funded tourism pro­ jects. Scandinavian Journal of Hospitality and Tourism, 10(2), 129–152. Lerner, M., & Haber, S. (2001). Performance factors of small tourism ventures: The inter­ face of tourism, entrepreneurship, and the environment. Journal of Business Venturing, 16(1), 61–100. Li, J. (2004). Molding Dai-ness on China’s Periphery: Ethnic Tourism and the Politics of Identity Construction in Contemporary Xishuang Banna. PhD Dissertation, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA. https://repository.upenn.edu/dissertations/AAI3138046 Li, L. (2008). A review of entrepreneurship research published in the hospitality and tourism management journals. Tourism Management, 29(5), 1013–1022. Lordkipanidze, M. (2002). Enhancing entrepreneurship in rural tourism for sustainable regional development. In The case of Söderslätt region, Sweden, The International Insti­ tute for Industrial Environmental Economics (pp. 73–80). IIIEE, Lund University. Lordkipanidze, M., Brezetl, H., & Backman, M. (2005). The entrepreneurship factor in sus­ tainable tourism development. Journal of Cleaner Production, 13, 787–798. Lugosi, P., & Bray, J. (2008). Tour guiding, organisational culture and learning: Lessons from an entrepreneurial company. International Journal of Tourism Research, 10(5), 467–479. Lundberg, C., Fredman, P., & Wall-Reinius, S. (2014). Going for the green? The role of money among nature-based tourism entrepreneurs. Current Issues in Tourism, 17(4), 373–380. MacPherson, M. (2019). Think non-ethnic, but act ethnic: Perspectives from South Asian entrepreneurs. Journal of Entrepreneurship, Management and Innovation, 15(2), 117–152. MacPherson, W.G., Tretiakov, A., Mika, J.P., & Felzensztein, C. (2021). Indigenous entre­ preneurship: Insights from Chile and New Zealand. Journal of Business Research, 127, 77–84. McCaskill, D., Leepreecha, P., & Shaoying, H. (2008). Globalization, nationalism, regional­ ism, and ethnic minorities in the greater Mekong subregion: A comparative analysis. In McCaskill, D., Leepreecha, P., & Shaoying, H. (Eds.). Living in a Globalized World. Eth­ nic Minorities in the Greater Mekong Subregion (pp. 1–57). Chiang Mai: Mekong Press. McGehee, N.G., & Kim, K. (2004). Motivation for agri-tourism entrepreneurship. Journal of Travel Research, 43(2), 161–170. McGehee, N.G., Kim, K., & Jennings, G.R. (2007). Gender and motivation for agri-tourism entrepreneurship. Tourism Management, 28(1), 280–289. Mendoza-Ramos, A., & Prideaux, B. (2018). Assessing ecotourism in an Indigenous com­ munity: Using, testing and proving the wheel of empowerment framework as a measure­ ment tool. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 26(2), 277–291. Milne, S., & Ateljevic, I. (2001). Tourism, economic development and the global-local nexus: Theory embracing complexity. Tourism Geographies, 3(4), 369–393 Mody, M., Day, J., Sydnor, S., & Jaffe, W. (2016). Examining the motivations for social entrepreneurship using Max Weber’s typology of rationality. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 28(6), 1094–1114. Morgan, N., & Pritchard, A. (2002). Advertising in Tourism and Leisure. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann. Morrison, A. (1998). Small firm co-operative marketing in a peripheral tourism region. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 10(5), 191–197.

Tourism Entrepreneurship

173

Morrison, A. (2006). A contextualization of entrepreneurship. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior and Research, 12(4), 192–209. Movono, A., & Dahles, H. (2017). Female empowerment and tourism: A focus on tourism in a Fijian village. Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, 22(6), 681–692. Mowen, J.C., & Brown, S.W. (1981). On explaining and predicting the effectiveness of celebrity endorsers. In Monroe, K.B. (Ed.). Advances in Consumer Research, vol. 8 (pp. 437–441). Minnesota, MN: Association for Consumer Research. Nikraftar, T., & Hosseini, E. (2016). Factors affecting entrepreneurial opportunities recogni­ tion in tourism small and medium sized enterprises. Tourism Review, 71(1), 6–17. Nirathron, N. (2006). Fighting Poverty from the Street. A Survey of Street Food Vendors in Bangkok. Bangkok: International Labour Organization. Oakes, T. (1998). Tourism and Modernity in China. London: Routledge. Ona, J.G., & Solis, L.S.L. (2017). Challenges and opportunities for the development and promotion of Ibaloy crafts as tourism products. International Journal of Culture, Tour­ ism and Hospitality Research, 11(4), 593–607. Ormiston, J., & Seymour, R. (2011). Understanding value creation in social entrepreneur­ ship: The importance of aligning mission, strategy and impact measurement. Journal of Social Entrepreneurship, 2(2), 125–150. https://doi.org/10.1080/19420676.2011.606331. Pechlaner, H., Bo, G.D., & Volgger, M. (2012). What makes tourism an attractive industry for new minority entrepreneurs: Results from an exploratory qualitative study. Tourism Review, 67(1), 11–22. Peeters, L.W.J., & Ateljevic, I. (2009). Women empowerment entrepreneurship nexus in tourism: Processes of social innovation. In Page, S., & Ateljevic, J. (Eds.). Tourism and Entrepreneurship: International Perspectives (pp. 75–89). Oxford: Routledge. Pemberton, J. (1994). Recollections from ‘beautiful Indonesia’ (somewhere beyond the postmodern). Public Culture, 6(2), 241–262. Peredo, A.M., & Anderson, R.B. (2006). Indigenous entrepreneurship research: Themes and variations. In Galbraith, C., & Stiles, C. (Eds.). Developmental Entrepreneurship: Adver­ sity, Risk, and Isolation (pp. 253–273). Oxford: Elsevier. Peredo, A.M., Anderson, R.B., Galbraith, C.S., Honig, B., & Dana, L.P. (2004). Towards a theory of indigenous entrepreneurship. International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Small Business, 1(1–2), 1–20. Peters, M., & Buhalis, D. (2004). Small family hotel businesses: The need for education and training. Education + Training, 46(8/9), 406–416. Pettersson, K., & Cassel, S.H. (2014). Women tourism entrepreneurs: Doing gender on farms in Sweden. Gender in Management: An International Journal, 29(8), 487–504. https://doi.org/10.1108/GM-02-2014-0016 Phommavong, S., & Sörensson, E. (2014). Ethnic tourism in Lao PDR: Gendered divisions of labour in community-based tourism for poverty reduction. Current Issues in Tourism, 17(4), 350–362. Pinto, L.E., & Blue, L.E. (2017). Aboriginal entrepreneurship financing in Canada: Walking the fine line between self-determination and colonization. Journal of Entrepreneurship in Emerging Economies, 9(1), 2–20. Pirie, G. (2007). Urban tourism in Cape Town. In Rogerson, C., & Visser, G. (Eds.). Urban Tourism in the Developing World (pp. 223–244). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction. Ploum, L., Blok, V., Lans, T., & Omta, O. (2018). Toward a validated competence frame­ work for sustainable entrepreneurship. Organization & Environment, 31(2), 113–132. https://doi.org/10.1177/1086026617697039

174

Tourism Entrepreneurship

Pongponrat, K. (2011). Participatory management process in local tourism development: A case study on fisherman village on Samui Island, Thailand. Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, 16(1), 57–73. https://doi.org/10.1080/10941665.2011.539391 Power, S., Di Domenico, M., & Miller, G. (2017). The nature of ethical entrepreneurship in tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 65, 36–48. Qin, Q., Wall, G., & Liu, X. (2011). Government roles in stimulating tourism develop­ ment: A case from Guangxi, China. Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, 16(5), 471–487. Ramphele, M. (1989). The dynamics of gender politics in the hostels of Cape Town: Another legacy of the South African migrant labour system. Journal of Southern African Studies 15(3), 393–414. Ratten, V. (2018). Entrepreneurial intentions of surf tourists. Tourism Review, 73(2), 262–276. Ratten, V. (2020). Tourism entrepreneurship research: A perspective article. Tourism Review, 75(1), 122–125 Ratten, V., & Dana, L.P. (2017). Gendered perspective of indigenous entrepreneurship. Small Enterprise Research, 24(1), 62–72. Rawhouser, H., Cummings, M., & Newbert, S.L. (2017). Social impact measurement: Cur­ rent approaches and future directions for social entrepreneurship research. Entrepreneur­ ship Theory and Practice. https://doi.org/1042258717727718. Reinhold, S., Zach, F.J., & Krizaj, D. (2017). Business models in tourism: A review and research agenda. Tourism Review, 72(4), 462–482. Rigg, J. (1997). Southeast Asia: The Human Landscape of Modernization and Development. London: Routledge. Rigg, J., & Salamanca, A. (2011). Connecting lives, living, and location. Critical Asian Studies, 43(4), 551–575. Rodenburg, E. (1989). The effects of scale in economic development: Tourism in Bali. In Singh, T., & Rumball, D. (Ed.). The Entrepreneurial Edge: Canada’s Top Entrepreneurs Reveal the Secrets of Their Success. Toronto: Key Porter. Rogerson, C. (2004). Transforming the South African tourism industry: The emerging blackowned bed and breakfast economy. GeoJournal, 60(3), 273–281. Rogerson, C. (2008). Shared growth and tourism small firm development in South Africa. Tourism Recreation Research, 33(3), 333–338. Rolfes, M. (2010). Poverty tourism: Theoretical reflections and empirical findings regarding an extraordinary form of tourism. GeoJournal, 7(5), 421–442. Rumball, D. (1989). The Entrepreneurial Edge: Canada’s Top Entrepreneurs Reveal the Secrets of Their Success. Toronto: Key Porter. Russell, R., & Faulkner, B. (2004). Entrepreneurship, chaos and the tourism area lifecy­ cle. Annals of Tourism Research, 31(3), 556–579. Ryan, T., Mottiar, Z., & Quinn, B. (2012). The dynamic role of entrepreneurs in destination development. Tourism Planning & Development, 9(2), 119–131. Saebi, T., Foss, N.J., & Linder, S. (2018). Social entrepreneurship research: Past achieve­ ments and future promises. Journal of Management, 45(1), 70–95. Scheyvens, R., Carr, A., Movono, A., Hughes, E., Higgins-Desbiolles, F., & Mika, J.P. (2021). Indigenous tourism and the sustainable development goals. Annals of Tourism Research, 90, 103260. Shaw, G., & Williams, A.M. (1998a). Entrepreneurship and tourism development. In Ioan­ nides, D., & Debbage, K.G. (Eds.). The economic geography of the tourist industry (pp. 235–255). London: Routledge.

Tourism Entrepreneurship

175

Shaw, G., & Williams, A.M. (1998b). Entrepreneurship, small business culture and tourism development. In Ioannides, D., & Debbages, K.G. (Eds.). The Economic Geography of the Tourist Industry (pp. 235–255). London: Routledge. Shaw, G., & Williams, A.M. (2002). Critical Issues in Tourism: A Geographical Perspec­ tive. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers. Shaw, G., & Williams, A.M. (2004). From lifestyle consumption to lifestyle production: Changing patterns of tourism entrepreneurship. I: Thomas, R. (Ed.). Small Firms in Tourism (pp. 99–113). Sheldon, P.J., & Daniele, R. (2017). Social Entrepreneurship and Tourism. Cham: Springer International Publishing. Sigala, M. (2016). Learning with the market: A market approach and framework for devel­ oping social entrepreneurship in tourism and hospitality. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 28(6), 1245–1286. https://doi.org/10.1108/ IJCHM-06-2014-0285. Sloan, P., Legrand, W., & Simons-Kaufmann, C. (2014). A survey of social entrepreneurial community-based hospitality and tourism initiatives in developing economies: A new business approach for industry. Worldwide Hospitality and Tourism Themes; Bingley, 6(1), 51–61. http://dx.doi.org.ep.fjernadgang.kb.dk/10.1108/WHATT-11–2013–0045 Smallbone, D., & Welter, F. (2006). Conceptualising entrepreneurship in a transition con­ text. International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Small Business, 3(2), 190–206. Smith, R.A., & Henderson, J.C. (2008). Integrated beach resorts, informal tourism com­ merce and the 2004 tsunami: Laguna Phuket in Thailand. International Journal of Tour­ ism Research, 10(3), 271–282. Spencer, A.J., Buhalis, D., & Moital, M. (2012). A hierarchical model of technology adop­ tion for small owner-managed travel firms: An organizational decision-making and lead­ ership perspective. Tourism Management, 33(5), 1195–1208. Spencer, R., Brueckner, M., Wise, G., & Marika, B. (2016). Australian Indigenous social enterprise: Measuring performance. Journal of Enterprising Communities: People and Places in the Global Economy, 10(4), 397–424. Stanton, M.E. (1989). The Polynesian cultural center: A multi-ethnic model of seven pacific cultures. In Smith, V.L. (Ed.). Hosts and Guests: The Anthropology of Tourism (pp. 247– 262). Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press. Stenvall, A., Laven, D., & Gelbman, A. (2017). The influence of social entrepreneurship in tourism on an Arab village in Israel. In Sheldon, P.J., & Daniele, R. (Eds.). Social Entre­ preneurship and Tourism: Philosophy and Practice (pp. 279–293). New York: Springer. Stephens, N., & Faranda, W.T. (1993). Using employees as advertising spokespersons. Jour­ nal of Services Marketing, 7(2), 36–46. Strobl, A., & Peters, M. (2013). Entrepreneurial reputation in destination networks. Annals of Tourism Research, 40, 59–82. Su, M.M., Wall, G., Ma, J., Notarianni, M., & Wang, S. (2023). Empowerment of women through cultural tourism: Perspectives of Hui minority embroiderers in Ningxia, China. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 31(2), 307–328. Surangi, H.A.K.N.S. (2018). What influences the networking behaviours of female entre­ preneurs? A case for the small business tourism sector in Sri Lanka. International Jour­ nal of Gender and Entrepreneurship, 10(2), 116–133. Swain, M.B. (1993). Women producers of ethnic arts. Annals of Tourism Research, 20(1), 32–51. Swain, M.B. (1995). Gender in tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 22(2), 247–266.

176

Tourism Entrepreneurship

Szivas, E. (2001). Entrance into tourism entrepreneurship: A UK case study. Tourism and Hospitality Research, 3(2), 163–172. Tajeddini, K., Ratten, V., & Denisa, M. (2017). Female tourism entrepreneurs in Bali, Indo­ nesia. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, 31, 52–58. Teo, P., & Li, L.H. (2003). Global and local interactions in tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 30(2), 287–306. Tomassini, L., Font, X., & Thomas, R. (2021). Narrating values-based entrepreneurs in tour­ ism, Journal of Tourism and Cultural Change, 19(4), 477–493. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 14766825.2020.1793991 Tooker, D.E. (2004). Modular modern: Shifting forms of collective identity among the Akha of Northern Thailand. Anthropological Quarterly, 77(2), 243–288. Toyota, M. (1998). Urban migration and cross-border networks: A deconstruction of Akha­ identity in Chiang Mai. Southeast Asian Studies, 35(4), 197–223. Tran, L., & Walter, P. (2014). Ecotourism, gender and development in northern Vietnam. Annals of Tourism Research, 44, 116–130. Trupp, A. (2014a). Rural-urban migration and ethnic minority enterprise. In Liamput­ tong, P. (Ed.). Contemporary Socio-Cultural and Political Perspectives in Thailand (pp. 285–302). Dordrecht: Springer. Trupp, A. (2014b). Ethnic Tourism in Northern Thailand: Viewpoints of the Akha and the Karen. In Husa, K., Trupp, A., & Wohlschlägl, H. (Eds.). Southeast Asian Mobility Tran­ sitions. Issues and Trends in Tourism and Migration (pp. 346–376). Vienna: Department of Geography and Regional research, University of Vienna. Trupp, A. (2017). Migration, Micro-Business and Tourism in Thailand. London: Routledge. Trupp, A., & Sunanta, S. (2017). Gendered practices in urban ethnic tourism in Thailand. Annals of Tourism Research, 64, 76–86. Tucker, H. (2007). Undoing shame: Tourism and women’s work in Turkey. Journal of Tour­ ism and Cultural Change, 5(2), 87–105. Tucker, H., & Boonabaana, B. (2012). A critical analysis of tourism, gender and poverty reduction. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 20(3), 437–455. Urry, J. (2002). The Tourist Gaze: Leisure and Travel in Contemporary Societies. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Valodia, I. (2001). Economic policy and women’s informal work in South Africa. Develop­ ment and Change, 32, 871–892. Wang, G., & Hu, J. (2019). A study on the impacts of urbanization on industrial transfor­ mation in three major metropolitan agglomerations in eastern China. Journal of Social Development, 6(1), 33–48. Wang, S., Hung, K., & Huang, W.J. (2019). Motivations for entrepreneurship in the tourism and hospitality sector: A social cognitive theory perspective. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 78, 78–88. Whitford, M., & Ruhanen, L. (2014). Indigenous tourism businesses: An exploratory study of business owners’ perceptions of drivers and inhibitors. Tourism Recreation Research, 39(2), 149–168. Whitford, M., & Ruhanen, L. (2016). Indigenous tourism research, past and present: Where to from here? Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 24(8–9), 1080–1099. Wilks, J., Pendergast, D., & Leggat, P. (2006). Tourism in Turbulent Times: Towards Safe Experiences for Visitors (Advances in Tourism Research). Oxford: Elsevier. Williams, P.W., & Peters, M. (2008). Entrepreneurial performance and challenges for abo­ riginal small tourism businesses: A Canadian case. Tourism Recreation Research, 33(3), 277–287. https://doi.org/10.1080/02508281.2008.11081551

Tourism Entrepreneurship

177

Wu, M.-Y., Tong, Y., Wall, G., & Ying, T. (2021). Cultural production and transmission in museums: A social practice perspective, Annals of Tourism Research, 87, 103130. Xie, P. (2001). Authenticating Cultural Tourism: Folk Villages in Hainan, China. PhD dissertation, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, ON. Xu, H., & Ma, S. (2014). Regional environment of destination and the entrepreneurship of small tourism businesses: A case study of Dali and Lijiang of Yunnan province. Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, 19(2), 144–161. Yachin, J.M. (2019). The entrepreneur – opportunity nexus: Discovering the forces that promote product innovations in rural micro-tourism firms. Scandinavian Journal of Hos­ pitality and Tourism, 19(1), 47–65. Yang, L. (2011). Cultural tourism in an ethnic theme park: Tourists’ views. Journal of Tour­ ism and Cultural Change, 9(4), 320–340. Yang, L. (2019). Cultural tourism in a replicated old town: Tourists’ views. Tourism Plan­ ning & Development, 16(1), 93–111. Yang, L., & Wall, G. (2008). Ethnic tourism and entrepreneurship: Xishuangbanna, Yunnan, China. Tourism Geographies, 10(4), 522–544. Zapalska, A., & Brozik, D. (2017). Maori female entrepreneurship in tourism industry. Tour­ ism: An International Interdisciplinary Journal, 65(2), 156–172. Zebryte, I., & Jorquera, H. (2017). Chilean tourism sector “B Corporations”: Evidence of social entrepreneurship and innovation. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behav­ ior & Research, 23(6), 866–879. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEBR-07-2017-0218 Zhang, H., Lu, L., & Sun, F. (2021). Changing role of lifestyle in tourism entrepreneurship: Case study of Naked Retreats Enterprise. Tourism Management, 84, 104259 https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.tourman.2020.104259 Zhao, W., Ritchie, J.B., & Echtner, C.M. (2011). Social capital and tourism entrepreneur­ ship. Annals of Tourism Research, 38(4), 1570–1593.

5 GOVERNMENT POLICY AND PLANNING

Ethnic tourism has become a central platform in many countries’ development strategies. It is particularly attractive for governments in its potential in provid­ ing an alternative to other forms of economic development. Many governments in developing destination countries have adopted such tourism as a strategic tool for poverty alleviation. Government policy and public planning have significant con­ sequences for the tourism industry and destination communities. In many societies, ethnic tourism can be a useful policy tool to help governments to achieve social inclusion and cultural conservation. Government-led planning and policy, through its ability to enforce necessary regulations, sets broad industry standards and thus can assist in minimizing negative impacts. It has a major role to play in facilitating sustainable tourism practices. This chapter examines the role and impacts of government in ethnic tourism development. It analyzes why tourism is attractive for governments, particularly in its potential to provide an alternative to traditional industries such as agricul­ ture, forestry and mining. The main policy issues related to ethnic tourism are addressed in two case studies from China, and institutional prerequisites for plan­ ning and managing ethnic tourism are discussed. Ethnic tourism stakeholders’ participation in tourism planning is examined in a case study from Vietnam. Dif­ ferent tourism policy and planning approaches to and implementation of plans are examined in a case study from Ghana, Africa. Tourism policy and planning issues and challenges are also addressed. These challenges involve engaging with and sharing power with ethnic people. Co-management is discussed because it is frequently promoted and adopted as a management strategy, and suggestions for ways to engage with ethnic communities are provided because the way that things are done is likely to influence what can be achieved. Finally, a summary of the chapter is provided. DOI: 10.4324/9781003373964-6

Government Policy and Planning

5.1

179

Government Policy and Tourism Planning

The role of government in tourism and the influence of state policy and public plan­ ning on tourism development has long been of interest to scholars (Bramwell & Lane, 2000, 2011; Hall, 1994, 2005, 2011; Hall & Jenkins, 1995; Ruhanen, 2013). Tourism planning and policy research is multidisciplinary and draws from a variety of disciplines and fields, including political science, organizational studies, busi­ ness management, planning, policy studies, regional development, geography, eco­ nomics and sociology, resulting in a rich but fragmented landscape of theoretical and applied research (Dredge & Jamal, 2015). Dredge et al. (2011) categorized this field of study into five traditions reflecting transcendental shifts in social sciences thoughts, including the normative/prescriptive tradition that provides guidance on the content of policy for the development and management of tourism, the predictive tradition makes prognostications about the possible causes and conse­ quences of various policy actions on tourism, the procedural tradition that provides advice on how to plan and manage tourism, the descriptive/explanatory tradition that develops knowledge about how policy is made and explains how certain out­ comes emerge, and the evaluative tradition that assesses the dimensions of policy, including content, delivery, process, outcomes and impacts. These traditions are not mutually exclusive in practice, which actually requires a mix of these foci and, indeed, a blending of these approaches. In general, the government shapes the economic climate and sets the overall regulatory framework in which the tourism industry operates, and also plays an influential role in planning, managing and promoting tourism (Hall, 2005; Nun­ koo & Smith, 2013). Hall (2005) identified seven functions of government with regard to tourism development: “coordination, planning, legislation and regula­ tion, entrepreneur, stimulation, a social tourism role, and a broader role of interest protection” (p. 236). The role of government in tourism development in China has evolved from a primarily economic focus to include broader considerations of economic and sociocultural impacts, political responsibilities, power relationships and environmental sensitivity (Yang & Wall, 2008). Especially, the widespread call for sustainable development since the 1980s has propelled governments to embrace sustainability, at least rhetorically, in developing and managing tourism (Connell et al., 2009; Sharpley, 2005; Wight, 2002). Government intervention in tourism is perhaps most visible in developing econ­ omies where tourism planning and promotion tend to be controlled directly by governments. There are many case studies on the role of government in tourism planning and management in developing countries (Qu et al., 2019; Kamble & Bouchon, 2014; Liu et al., 2020). In these studies, concern is expressed concerning the effectiveness of policies in facilitating employment and wealth creation, their contribution to environmental quality, and the protection of cultural identities. In particular, inappropriate policies and inadequate planning may result in unintended negative consequences. Governments may have changing interests and priorities

180

Government Policy and Planning

which can lead to inconsistent or unfulfilled policies. Countries with unstable polit­ ical systems often do not provide a clear long-term vision and stability in policy and planning for tourism. Therefore, examinations of government perspectives and the impact of policies and planning on development are needed, particularly regarding sensitive subjects such as ethnic tourism. Governments at all levels have become increasingly involved in ethnic tour­ ism as it is valued as an important source of revenue, and it is usually deemed to be critical to the success of the industry. It is widely recognized that governments have the greatest potential to shape tourism development in terms of how it is pro­ moted, planned, managed and regulated (Wearing & Neil, 2009). They can provide long-term planning and management through legislative and juridical protection of culture and heritage for the benefit of future generations. Especially, governments play multiple roles in the minority settlements of underdeveloped countries. They perform crucial roles in tourism development and have the ability to influence the industry in many ways, such as promoting and supporting the construction of public infrastructure, regulating and legislating, fostering land planning, showing directions and providing guidelines, creating incentives to investment, preserving historical and cultural heritage, and promoting the destination image and marketing of tourism (Simão & Partidário, 2012). Government is also a patron of change, a protector of cultural and natural environments, and a legitimizer of business prac­ tices by bodies external to a given community to a greater degree than in Western countries (Yang et al., 2014). Government intervention is necessary for the protec­ tion of important common assets, such as environmental and cultural resources, as well as for the promotion of the economy and the well-being of the population. Tourism planning is an ordered sequence of operations and actions conceived by the public sector to organize and control development in destination areas based on established political objectives (Mason, 2008; Page, 2007). Tourism planning involves anticipating and regulating change to encourage appropriate development so as to increase the social, economic and environmental benefits from tourism (Murphy, 1985). It originated in the west in the 1950s in a time of rapid social, economic and urban developments (Burns, 1999). It has evolved from an initial era of unplanned development, through both approaches focused upon supply and demand, to the integrated comprehensive planning of the contemporary period (Tosun & Jenkins, 1998). The changing political and socio-economic environments and new technologies have shaped various approaches to planning, such as boosterism, economic, physi­ cal/spatial and community-oriented forms (Getz, 1987), as well as approaches to sustainability, which is characterized by stakeholder involvement and strategic tour­ ism planning (Hall, 2000). It occurs at a variety of scales, from the national, and even pan-national, to the planning of the construction of particular sites, such as resorts. In the 1950s, tourism planning was not a specialized and identifiable field; rather, it was subsumed under the broader umbrella of urban planning (Costa, 2001). The main objective was to build amenities and infrastructure, such as attractions, hotels,

Government Policy and Planning

181

restaurants and other tourist facilities. Governments were minimally involved in tourism, and planners were not much concerned with tourism. Specialized tourism planning was developed in response to the rapidly increasing tourism demands of the 1960s (Tosun & Jenkins, 1998). Spatial models for tourism planning and policy emerged in the 1960s and advanced in the 1970s, influenced by landscape architecture, and urban and regional planning (Getz, 1983; Gunn, 2002). Govern­ ments became more involved in tourism planning and many national, regional and resort plans were developed employing a rational comprehensive approach (Ins­ keep, 1991; Costa, 2001). Planning primarily followed an economic rationale and focused on investment incentives and industry operation and generally lacked criti­ cal analysis of the tourism sector (Burns, 1999; Harrill & Potts, 2003). Master planning for tourism approached its apex in the 1970s, but usually lacked local involvement and the political will to shape tourism to the destina­ tion’s needs and capabilities, as opposed to the investors’ and the tourists’ desires (Burns, 1999). Planning was essentially a process of matching products with market demands (Gunn, 2002). The absence of effective planning controls, the inadequacy of legislation and ineffective tourism organizations resulted in many planning failures during this period (Costa, 2001). Tourism planners began to rec­ ognize the need for a more participatory approach with the involvement of multiple stakeholders in the planning process (Gunn, 2002; Harrill & Potts, 2003). De Kadt (1979) advocated the need to consider noneconomic costs and benefits of tour­ ism and called for social planning for tourism. Various tools and frameworks also emerged and were used to assess the impact and effectiveness of tourism policies, plans and development projects, including techniques such as cost–benefit analy­ sis, multiplier analysis, input–output analysis, general equilibrium modelling and, later, tourism satellite accounting (Dwyer & Forsyth, 1993; Dwyer et al., 2004). Noting the social and environmental consequences of careless and myopic tour­ ism planning in the 1980s, an increasing number of governments and developmen­ tal agencies began to consider environmental, social and cultural issues in addition to economic returns (Tosun & Jenkins, 1998). Calls for more careful and inte­ grated planning, including the control of tourism development to mitigate unde­ sirable socio-economic and environmental impacts, began to appear (Baud-Bovy, 1982; Getz, 1986; Inskeep, 1991). Mill and Morrison (1985) suggested that the tourism planning emphasis should be shifted from “plan preparation” to “tourism policy-making” and “strategic planning”. As tourism’s impacts are most apparent at the level of the destination community, many researchers called for the decen­ tralization of planning and its integration into broader community development (Murphy, 1985; Simmons, 1994; Timothy, 1998). Researchers influenced by scien­ tific rationality tended to present normative models of how public participation or community engagement processes ought to be (Inskeep, 1991; Murphy, 1988) and developed frameworks, tools and assessment techniques to examine community participation (Reid et al., 2004; Tosun, 2005); or provided generic advice on how to manage engagement (Sautter & Leisen, 1999). The postmodern turn prompted

182

Government Policy and Planning

critical researchers to investigate institutional and social factors that shape and (dis)empower participation (Healey, 1997). Since the 1990s, tourism planning has evolved from a design orientation toward a more inclusive and sustainable community approach (Harrill & Potts, 2003). The advance of computer technology and information systems has provided new tools for tourism planning. More governments and agencies are becoming aware of the importance of tourism planning as globalization is driving tourism markets to become more competitive and diverse. Publications on networking, collabora­ tion, partnerships and public participation grew exponentially during the 1990s (Healey, 1997; Jamal & Getz, 1995; Hall, 1999) and since then sustainable devel­ opment has become the new paradigm shaping tourism policy and planning (Hall, 2000). However, there is a growing gap between sustainability doctrine and its “real-world” application (Dredge & Jamal, 2015; Simpson, 2001), that is, in spite of the widespread acceptance of the sustainability concept, particularly in the aca­ demic world, such an approach has been difficult to implement due to the lack of a clear identification of its principles (Baidal, 2004; Ruhanen, 2004). Sustainable tourism development (STD) raises difficulties at two levels: first, the interpretation of sustainability is far from being consensual (Sharpley, 2000; Hopwood et al., 2005) and, second, its implementation is complex and poses demanding chal­ lenges (Gladwin et al., 1995). Nevertheless, effective tourism planning can greatly enhance the sustainable development credentials of tourism. The significance of government policy and planning in supporting sustainable tourism lies in its ability to administer effectively appropriate guidelines and consistent standards, taking into account their possible effects. In summary, there has been marked growth in tourism planning and policy research in the past decades. Since the 1980s, neoliberalism, globalization and new forms of public management have prompted a downsizing and outsourcing of gov­ ernment functions and a move away from direct government involvement in eco­ nomic and social activities (Dredge & Jamal, 2015). As governments’ relationships with public interests have become increasingly blurred, planning and policy is no longer a sole function of government but has become a process of negotiation and compromise between public and private sectors (Dredge, 2006; Hodge & Greve, 2010; Xavier & Alfred, 2008). It is now widely held that policy and planning can­ not be understood independently from the influence of corporations, globalization, neoliberal public management, networked governance and public–private partner­ ships (Dredge & Jamal, 2015). Tourism planning and policy research has moved beyond an analysis of governments’ functions, to incorporate a much deeper appre­ ciation of broader geographical, sociological, political and economic shifts. However, tourism research has appeared to be primarily focused on eco­ nomic development and management at the strategic and destination level with a much smaller focus on the environment and sustainability dimension (Dredge & Jamal, 2015). Some scholars have suggested future research opportunities, such as e-government, digital citizenship and metagovernance (Jenkins et al., 2014),

Government Policy and Planning

183

mental modelling and sustainability (Farsari et al., 2011), environmental policy integration and sustainable planning (Brendehaug et al., 2017) and so on. In a review of the progress in tourism planning and policy knowledge in publica­ tions, Dredge and Jamal (2015) noted that multidisciplinary, mainstream subjects related to destination development and management dominate tourism research, while critical analysis of economic and political structures, interests and values is lagging. Emerging discourses with regard to revaluing tourism as a means of achieving a range of social, political and environmental objectives, not simply as a tool for economic development, have received much less attention in the literature. They identified an urgent need to progress tourism planning and policy toward greater visibility, legitimacy and importance in tourism studies through more criti­ cal engagement with tourism practice. Moreover, limited academic attention has been placed on understanding interests, roles and responsibilities of various stake­ holders such as governments, business and communities in tourism planning and policy, although there is a small growing awareness of diverse populations and gender roles in tourism research and practice (Jamal & McDonald, 2011; Yang & Wall, 2008). Research is needed to explore the existing and desired future roles of governments, business, communities, minority groups and women in tourism plan­ ning and policy and what their interests, goals and responsibilities are. 5.2

Changes in the Involvement of Ethnic Peoples

It is possible to recognize temporal changes in the governance of ethnic tourism reflecting alterations in the degree of power that ethnic people hold, and have held, over the development of tourism in their territories. While it may be pos­ sible to recognize gradual changes in the relationships between minority peoples, governments and other stakeholders, it is not suggested that the approaches that will be described constitute a sequence of stages. All of the identified approaches still exist in different places in the world. Furthermore, increased access to power rarely occurs in a linear fashion and there are usually losses as well as gains along the way, particularly among peoples who have experienced the depredations of colonialism. Crucially, the forms of governance of minority peoples often differ markedly from those of the modern corporate and state entities with which they are required to engage. It is necessary for many indigenous peoples to operate in both systems, drawing upon traditional decision-making processes that may require their traditional leaders to consider the implications of a decision for seven suc­ ceeding generations while, at the same time, responding to and participating in the initiatives and requirements of majority authorities. It is suggested that minority peoples, at various times and in many places, have been ignored, displaced, regarded as attractions, considered to be beneficiaries, incorporated into decision-making, and have become owners of tourism in their communities. As tourists, they may even be a distinctive market segment. Each of these possibilities will be considered in turn.

184

Government Policy and Planning

5.3 Case Study: Chinese Government Policy and Impacts on Ethnic Tourism Development Introduction: Governments’ Involvements in Ethnic Tourism in China

The role of government in tourism and state policy in China has drawn increas­ ing academic attention in recent years. A number of scholars have examined the roles of government, from local to national, and called for further study of China’s specific political environment and its influence on tourism development (Oakes, 1998; Sofield & Li, 2007; Yang et al., 2014; Yang & Wall, 2008). Governments at different levels have a crucial influence on tourism development at destinations, especially in the ethnic minority settlements of underdeveloped Western China. These minority regions are relatively poor in terms of level of economic develop­ ment, urbanization, provisions for health care and education, communication and transportation infrastructure, and living standards (Zeng & Ryan, 2012), but they have retained a rich diversity of cultures. The tourism industry in China has greatly expanded since the 1980s due to changes in the Chinese political and economic systems, improvements in transport and accommodation infrastructure, and the greater provision of tourism facilities and services. The central government has encouraged foreign investment since ini­ tiating the “Four Modernizations” policy to rapidly bring the country into the world economic system, an endeavor also embodied in local governments’ policies. Many local governments have fostered tourism as a new economic growth opportunity or have regarded the tourism sector as a leading or core industry. Especially, ethnic tourism has been identified as an effective way to promote local development for poor minority regions with harsh but scenic mountainous environments and socio­ cultural distance from modem Chinese economies and lifestyles since the 1980s. Such tourism is often used as an “enticement” by many local governments for external investment in local economic development (Oakes, 1998). Local govern­ ment policies have been largely influenced by outside commercial forces because the local governments largely depend on enterprises to bring in capital to develop tourism (Feng, 2008). In addition, ethnic tourism is also regarded as being a main vehicle for cultural development and national integration. To some extent, such policies overcome a long-standing oscillation in China’s ethnic policies between assimilation and integration, which is regarded as a major barrier to expanding minority autonomy, and economic development as tourism permits expressions of culture and heritage while aiding economic development (Sautman, 1999). Thus, paradoxically, minority people have been encouraged to act in traditional ways so that they can modernize through economic development. Government Roles and Impacts on Ethnic Tourism in Xishuangbanna, China

Yang and Wall (2008) examined the Chinese governmental perspectives on eth­ nic tourism development in Xishuangbanna Dai Autonomous Prefecture, Yunnan

Government Policy and Planning

185

Province in the southwest of China, and addressed tensions commonly experienced in ethnic tourism with a particular focus on local perspectives. Xishuangbanna is one of the first and best-known tourism destinations in China. Bordering Myan­ mar to the southwest, and Laos to the southeast, Xishuangbanna is both a buffer zone and gateway between China and Southeast Asia. It is well known for its sub­ tropical scenery, rich floral and faunal resources, and diverse ethnic cultures, all of which provide a basis for development. It is home to 13 officially recognized ethnic groups, including Dai, Hani, Lahu, Yi, Bulang, Jino and Yao. Thus, it is often called “the land of the minorities”. The local government has designated many minority villages as tourist spots since the 1990s. These villages constitute the major local tourist attractions and large numbers of package tourists have been brought to these villages by travel agencies. Four tensions that are pervasive in ethnic tourism are used as an analytical frame­ work to analyze the impacts of government actions. They are economic develop­ ment versus cultural preservation, authenticity versus cultural commodification, state regulation versus ethnic autonomy and cultural exoticism versus modernity. Emphasis was placed particularly on host–guest experiences, as well as reasons why minority status and autonomy may either improve or deteriorate over time. The study revealed that government, in a top-down system such as China’s, has multiple roles: developer, marketer, arbiter and protector of the public interest. Sig­ nificantly, these roles may be in conflict within the same level of government and between levels. These governments plan tourism development, regulate the market and arbitrate relations among producers, marketers and consumers. The state is the main authority in validating ethnic group legal rights and political status, and in developing tourism. State policies are vigorously enforced by regional/local gov­ ernments which hold a positive attitude toward tourism and play a critical role in promoting and developing ethnic tourism because of the economic importance of the sector. Government policies, plans and agendas, whether at the national or local level, are typically focused on expansion and their definition of success is based on ever-larger numbers of visitors and profits. Most tourism development projects fol­ low conventional paths in which mass tourism dominates. Achieving moderniza­ tion through economic development has become a key objective. Governments are actively involved in commoditization of ethnic culture by designating many minor­ ity villages as tourist sites to showcase “authentic” culture and lifestyles of minori­ ties. However, the adverse effects of ethnic cultural commoditization receive little attention. Different levels of government play key but different roles in development through regulation of production, consumption and investment. Their policies and decisions tend to create tensions when they promote tourism as a regional devel­ opment strategy as a result of contradictions in regulations, ethnic rights and rela­ tionships with entrepreneurs. Minority people have limited control over resources and development, and tensions rise when governments seek to transform their cul­ ture into marketable products. The government encourages both development and

186

Government Policy and Planning

preservation of cultural diversity, which are supposed to reinforce one another. However, the interests of investors and business managers often conflict with the goal of preservation. Governments face a dilemma between economic development and cultural preservation as development brings dramatic change to traditional cul­ ture and lifestyles of ethnic minorities. Minorities are not in a good position to compete with experienced Han developers who are better educated and funded, and have easier access to planning and business intelligence. Training of minori­ ties merely focuses on how to behave around tourists, and does not assist them in becoming economically self-reliant. Thus, more nuanced government policies and plans are needed to mitigate many of the issues and reinforce the benefits of tour­ ism development. Governments, Power and Tension in the Kanas Scenic Area of Xinjiang, China

Using Butler’s (1980) Tourism Area Life Cycle (TALC) model as a framework, Yang et al. (2014) examined the development of tourism and tourism policies in the Kanas Scenic Area of Xinjiang, an ethnic inhabited area in Northwest China. They addressed the role of government in each stage of tourism development, discussed the interaction between governments and other groups (local people, entrepreneurs and tourists) and the impacts of the governments’ regulations and policies on tour­ ism development. The Kanas Scenic Area, home of the Tuva and Kazakh ethnic minority people, is located in the Altay Region of Yili Kazakh Autonomous Pre­ fecture, Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region, China, bordered by Kazakhstan and Russia to the north and Mongolia to the northeast. It is a less-developed region of China, but has rich ethnic cultures and natural resources such as nature reserves, national parks and forest parks. The Kanas Scenic Area has seven villages with a population of 4,330 including Tuva, Kazakh, Hui, Russian and Han peoples. Tuva and Kazakh are the main minority groups. Their economy mainly depends on ani­ mal husbandry and tourism. Political stability, rather than economic development, is the current priority of the Xinjiang Government, owing to its multiethnic popula­ tion, its strategic location and sensitivities associated with concerns about funda­ mentalist Islamism. Their study findings revealed that the scenic area has experienced three stages (i.e., exploration, involvement and development stages) and is now at the fourth stage of consolidation with about one million tourists annually. The exploration stage of Kanas tourism started in the early 1980s. At this stage, the number of visitors was small, and largely comprised governmental officials and entrepre­ neurs from neighboring counties and cities in eastern China. There were also a few backpackers from eastern China with different motivations such as business, sight­ seeing and curiosity. Travel arrangements were organized by provincial and local businesses associated with politically sponsored visitors. There were few tourism facilities and no asphalt road leading to the area. Although contact between visitors

Government Policy and Planning

187

and locals was high, their interaction mainly happened through interpreters as very few locals spoke Mandarin. The government tourism initiatives started after the area was rated as a state-level nature reserve in 1986. The establishment of the Buerjin Tourism Bureau in 1987 indicates the start of the development, construc­ tion and administration of Kanas as a tourist destination. Village community han­ dled limited numbers of tourists who complied with village life patterns. Tensions were few, personal and temporary. Tourism was under the control of the commu­ nity and local administration. During the involvement stage in 1987–2000, visitor numbers grew rapidly, particularly long-distance visitation from cities in eastern China increased. Local government launched advertising and marketing programs and promoted ethnic festivals to attract tourists. Tourism facilities and major public infrastructure con­ struction including transport, electricity and water supply systems started in the late 1990s. Travel agencies also started to provide organized tours to the area. The government encouraged residents, private business operators and public agencies to provide tourism services. Tourism was mainly based in Hanas Village and its business opportunities attracted many entrepreneurs from other regions to open restaurants, hostels and shops or rent horses to tourists. As more actors engaged in tourism, the tensions between governments and locals over land use increased. The increasing tourism demands accelerated infrastructure construction and led to relocation of some village homeowners with little compensation. To resolve such tensions, the Nature Reserve Tourism Administrative Committee was established in 1996 to plan construction, daily operations and resources protection in the Kanas Scenic Area. During the development and consolidation stages since 2000, large-scale infra­ structure construction for tourism accelerated after Kanas was listed as a prior­ ity development project by the Xinjiang Government. The government actions enhanced tourism development. The regional and local governments actively mar­ ket and advertise the area. Visitor numbers increased dramatically from 24,000 in 1998 to over a million in 2013. Visitor numbers far exceed the local population in peak tourism seasons. The Kanas Scenic Area Master Plan (2006–2020) was cre­ ated in 2006 and gradually implemented as the blueprint for the development of the area. The Plan separates the tourist visitation and residential areas in order to pro­ tect the natural environment, local culture and traditional lifestyles. Tourist resort zones have been established outside the village. Locals dislike these resort zones because they are not allowed to rent their village houses to outsiders anymore, thereby losing a source of income. As Kanas is now moving into the late consolida­ tion stage, tourism development is restricted to some parts of the area. Regional and central governments play essential roles in marketing, planning and regulating tourism development in the area. With financial support from the central government, the regional and local governments have improved public infrastructure and tourism facilities. Compensation was paid to local Tuvas in Hanas Village in 2006–2010 to offset lost house rents, but locals were unsatisfied

188

Government Policy and Planning

with this compensation because it was much less than their rent incomes before 2005. Furthermore, the differences in tourism policies between villagers in Hanas Village and other villages in the area led to many complaints. In order to protect the environment, local government closed all the hostels and restaurants in the village and prohibited such business operations. Tour groups are required to stay in star-rated hotels in the Jiadengyu Tourism Area, 30 miles from Hanas Village. Independent tourists, especially backpackers, still hope to stay in the village guesthouses, due to lower prices, convenient transport and closer contact with minority people. During the tourism season, government staff check local homes to see if they are being used as tourist guesthouses. Locals and tourists, thus, form an alli­ ance of common interest: visitors are asked by locals to say that they are friends or relatives if approached by officials. Moreover, tensions and conflicts exist between governmental bodies horizontally (e.g., the Tourism Bureau and the Forestry and Natural Protection Bureau), and vertically (county and regional levels) in Kanas’s tourism development. Although administrative committees and new rules have been created and subsequently modified to solve these tensions, the uncertainties of new regulations led to more confusion and dysfunctional responsibilities. The TALC of the Tuva ethnic community is strongly influenced by various levels of government in terms of planning, regulation and direction of the development of the area through policy-making, financial subsidies, official visitations and sugges­ tions, marketing and event organization. In a top-down political system in China, government at all levels holds significant sway over social, political and economic development, especially in underdeveloped regions. The government shapes the spatial patterns of destination development and the direction of the TALC. In the case of Kanas, the catalyst for change in the area is governmental policies, and both corporate capital and local entrepreneurship are permitted because of congruence of interest, but the latter is able to operate only under the auspices of the govern­ ment. The power to provide tourism services has passed from the minority group with traditional lifestyles to a government-initiated, planned and condoned mod­ ernization of place through support for tourism growth. This dominance has been challenged but, over time, the very growth of tourist numbers justifies and legiti­ mizes, through successful expansion, governmental policies, thereby reinforcing the dominant role of the governments. In Kanas, minority people are weak in knowledge of tourism, capital and bar­ gaining power, and they remain in a subordinate role in a hierarchical power struc­ ture, but the relationships with other parties are complex and still evolving. The locals’ motives are primarily economic. But, in Kanas, it is outside entrepreneurs who alert locals to seek change or to resist some regulations. Although the power­ less locals at times prevail in confrontations with the local powerful administra­ tion due to the concern over regional stability and ethnic harmony in Xinjiang, the higher administration prevails over the local administration, and this influences the positions taken by both the local people and local administration. Power is rooted in relationships because those at the bottom of the hierarchy can resist local

Government Policy and Planning

189

administrations through business networks or other relationships, such as external entrepreneurs, that connect to others further up the chain of power structures. How­ ever, a “Just Destination”, seeking effective, fair and thoughtful ethnic tourism policies, is still a difficult quest worldwide (Yang et al., 2014). Discussion

In China’s current market economy, ethnic tourism is guided and managed by heavy state interaction and policies at all stages, from representational strategies to place planning (Li & Hu 2008, 2011). Governments play a central role not only in the planning and marketing of tourism but also in the representational strate­ gies for highlighting particular aspects of minority culture, history and society. Mechanisms of designation, classification and management of place, ethnicity and tourism are highly institutionalized in China (Zhang & Li, 2018). Governments are the key players that direct tourism development through policies and regula­ tion of tourism investment, production and consumption. They function as plan­ ners, regulators, coordinators, arbiters and even investors in the process of tourism development. The presentation of China’s minority settlements as tourism products and their consumption by tourists can threaten the original landscape and heritage and local people may be exposed to negative economic and sociocultural consequences. The development of ethnic tourism has both positive and negative consequences. On the one hand, attracting investment to stimulate the region’s economy is always favored by local governments. Certain changes brought by tourism may be wel­ comed and strengthen ethnic consciousness. On the other hand, villages may be greatly modified and lead to the destruction of ethnic heritage and identity. The outcomes of inappropriate overdevelopment and risks are accentuated by the short­ comings of government policies and planning systems in which locals may find it difficult to make their voices heard (Yang and Wall, 2008). Greater empowerment of China’s ethnic minorities in the tourism arena requires wider political, economic and sociocultural changes, which may not be forthcoming in the immediate future (Henderson et al., 2009). Effective planning and management to protect valuable, yet vulnerable, ethnic cultural resources, while maximizing the socio-economic opportunities associated with tourism development, are essential. Ethnic tourism in China has much potential, but it must be carefully planned, developed and managed to ensure traditional cultural patterns are not unduly dis­ rupted, and minority people must have access to a fair share of the benefits of development. More equitable access to the benefits of tourism should be a priority in government plans. Future tourism planning should provide greater control of tourism by minority people, cultural preservation and more public participation in decision-making processes. As more minority people benefit from tourism, they will develop the self-confidence and commitment required to safeguard their cul­ tural identity and distinctiveness.

190

Government Policy and Planning

5.4 Case Study: Ethnic Stakeholders’ Participation in Tourism Planning in Sapa, Vietnam Tourism Development in Sapa, Vietnam

The Sapa district, located in the mountainous province of Lao Cai, covers an area of 68,329 ha and consists of Sapa town and 17 communes. Each commune has a people’s committee and a council that controls several villages. Sapa is home to a number of ethnic minority groups, including Hmong, Dao, Kinh, Tay and Giay, which together comprise the majority of the district’s population of approximately 53,000 (Van Hoy et al., 2020). Sapa was initially a tourist destination during French colonization and has been under continuous redevelopment since the early 1990s (Michaud & Turner, 2017). The Vietnamese government has actively promoted Sapa as a major domestic and international tourist destination. Tourism facili­ ties in Sapa, including restaurants, hotels and homestays, have been significantly increased, and have provided more jobs and generated additional income for locals via tourist services and the sale of handicrafts. Tourist numbers increased dramati­ cally between 1997 and 2018, from 30,000 to over four million visitors annually (VNAT, 2019). The opening of a new expressway from Hanoi to Lao Cai has facili­ tated access for domestic tourists since 2014. As a result, Sapa town has become crowded and noisy and, thus, international visitors prefer to stay in local villages, rather than in the busy town (Phi, 2014). Tourism development in Sapa has been widely influenced by large external investors such as the Sun Group, which is the largest real estate developer in Viet­ nam with its main activities of resort development, building attraction parks and luxury real estate (Van Hoy et al., 2020). The governmental tourism plans to mod­ ernize Sapa focus on the will and desires of a few powerful Kinh agents and their corporate collaborators, resulting in planning decisions designed to serve their own political and economic interests (Michaud & Turner, 2017). The situation is made worse by the exclusion of poor residents from decision-making processes and tour­ ism development plans in Sapa (Truong et al., 2014). Kinh and Ethnic Tourism Stakeholder Participation in Tourism Planning

Van Hoy et al. (2020) examined the issue of ethnic stakeholder participation and collaboration in tourism planning in Sapa, Vietnam. They concluded that stake­ holder participation in tourism planning in Sapa followed a top-down approach, due to the political system, with little structural support for local participation. Ethnic stakeholders at the community level had very limited participation in the planning process. In Vietnam, the communist party controls all political matters and cultural policies for minority groups (of which 54 are recognized by the gov­ ernment) (Michaud, 2013). In Sapa, a rigid top-down decision-making structure was dominated by the Kinh group, which was comprised mainly of Kinh (low­ land Vietnamese) who accounted for 18% of the population (Michaud & Turner,

Government Policy and Planning

191

2017). Tourism planning was primarily conducted by the government and largescale developers. Other ethnic residents, mostly Hmong and Yao farmers with little formal education, rarely participated in tourism planning and the decision-making process. Four main factors were found that hinder the participation of stakeholders in tourism planning in Sapa: government policy, the unequal distribution of eco­ nomic benefits, social and cultural benefits for residents, and sociocultural and environmental costs. The political system in Vietnam, under which a tourism plan is formed, plays an important role in the process. Many interviewees noted the issue of government policy which hinders stakeholder participation and col­ laboration. On the other hand, government officials believed that it is hard to involve all residents in tourism planning because there is little local knowledge of tourism impacts and there is a poor local understanding of tourism planning. Most interviewees considered economic benefits to be key factors for their par­ ticipation in tourism planning. However, the distribution of benefits is inequita­ ble, with most benefits accruing to large, outside investors and limited benefits arising for local community. Exclusion from tourism benefits is likely to pre­ vent ethnic stakeholders from joining the collaboration process. In addition to economic benefits, social and cultural benefits also facilitate stakeholder par­ ticipation in the tourism planning process. Interviewees also stated that if tour­ ism brings sociocultural and environmental costs to communities, they would not support further development which would, thus, hinder their participation in tourism planning. There is very limited collaboration in the local planning process because most stakeholders are not informed, lack information and do not share a common vision for tourism development. Lack of information also leads to isolation of the local community from the tourism development process. The power of stakeholders in the community may influence their participation and implementation of a tourism plan. There is little difference between the Kinh and other ethnic groups in terms of participation and collaboration in tourism planning. Kinh tourism stakeholders also reported their limited participation in tourism planning. However, there are opposite views between high-ranking (Kinh) and low-ranking (ethnic) manage­ ment levels regarding participation in tourism planning. Only high-level officials in government, held by Kinh people, participate in tourism planning. The lowerlevel government positions have very limited roles in tourism planning. They are aware of tourism plans, but they rarely have input into the planning process. They feel excluded from the design and implementation of tourism plans. Nevertheless, both groups recognize the need for collaboration and input from different parties in tourism planning, but they admit that collaboration is weak and they think that collaborative planning is constrained by lack of interdependence among tourism stakeholders and no shared visions and goals in Sapa due to different views among them. They also share similar views in regard to the circumstances that facilitate and hinder their participation in tourism planning.

192

Government Policy and Planning

Discussion

The issues that facilitate or hinder stakeholder participation are not unique to Viet­ nam. The exclusion of local stakeholders at Sapa is in line with research findings in many developing countries (Timothy, 1999; Tosun, 2000). Public participation in tourism planning in developing countries commonly faces political and insti­ tutional challenges, such as a lack of information and education for stakeholders, and structural and operational issues (Tosun, 2000). The centralization of public administration of tourism is a main factor that results in limited opportunities for residents to take part in tourism planning. There is the need for a change from topdown tourism planning to a participatory approach, and more local stakeholders need to be engaged in tourism planning in Sapa. However, moving toward partici­ patory tourism policy requires decentralization of public administration systems, which is not impossible, but will be difficult to achieve. Stakeholders need to work together and apply a bottom-up management system, with provision of educational programs to inform public opinions, as well as conduct of scientific research on the resources of tourism interest. It is also important for local policymakers and plan­ ners to improve public involvement in tourism planning through various common current participation mechanisms such as seminars, meetings and surveys. 5.5 Case Study: Tourism Development Policies and Planning in Ghana, Africa Overview of Tourism in Ghana

Ghana has emerged as one of the leading destinations for international tourism in the West African subregion. It is endowed with a rich variety of natural and manmade resources, which include a 540-kilometer coastline, pristine beaches, rainfor­ ests, protected areas, historical heritage and diverse indigenous cultures. It has also been the recipient of black tourists from the United States who have been explor­ ing their roots in the slave trade. Since independence in 1957, the government has adopted various policies and planning strategies for tourism development. In the past decades, tourism has shifted from the sidelines to become a central develop­ ment policy in Ghana (Akyeampong, 2006). Tourism has received considerable attention in the economic development strategy of Ghana since the late 1980s (Sir­ akaya et al., 2002). Both public and private investments in tourism have increased dramatically. With financial and technical assistance from international agencies such as the World Bank, United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), the World Tourism Organization (WTO) and the United States Agency for Interna­ tional Development (USAID), public infrastructure and tourism accommodations and attractions have been established rapidly. Along with the expansion of tourist facilities, international arrivals and tour­ ism revenue have grown substantially since the 1980s. Over the last two decades,

Government Policy and Planning

193

the tourism industry has developed from a homegrown, “craft-run” business into a pillar industry with significant involvement of large multinational urban-based enterprises (Akyeampong, 2011). Tourism has become one of the fastest grow­ ing sectors of the economy in Ghana and was ranked the fourth highest foreign exchange earner for the country (Adu-Ampong, 2017a). The tourism sector made a total contribution of US $3 billion to the nation’s GDP in 2013 (Adu-Ampong, 2019). The major source markets included USA, Northern/Western Europe (UK, Germany, France and Sweden) and West Africa (Nigeria, Togo and Cote d’Ivoire) (Yankholmes & Akyeampong, 2010). Evolution of Tourism Planning and Policy-Making in Ghana

Adu-Ampong (2019) conducted a detailed examination of the tourism develop­ ment policy and planning process in Ghana from independence in 1957 to 2017 using the “Development First” and “Tourism First” frameworks developed by Burns (1999). Drawing upon a contextual analysis of main national economic and national tourism development policies and plans as well as published research on different aspects of tourism and national development in Ghana, four broad political eras were identified: (i) 1957–1966: postindependence era of Development First; (ii) 1966–1981: political instability era of Tourism First; (iii) 1981–2000: structural adjustment era of mixed Tourism First-Development First and (iv) 2000–2017: democratic consolidation era of Development First. There was little tourist demand for accommodation and leisure travel prior to 1957. The period of 1957–1966 witnessed an active role of the state as an investor and entrepreneur in tourism development. During this period, the state actively engaged in hosting Pan-African conferences and other international meetings, summits and conferences (Akyeampong, 2006), which created the initial demand for the establishment of international hotels and conference facilities in Ghana. Adopting a Development First approach, tourism planning in this period was used as a tool for the overall socio-economic development of the country based on socialist principles. The ideology of African socialism combined a mixed approach of strong state engagement and indigenous private sector involvement that was encouraged in tourism development. In addition to foreign exchange acquisition, tourism served the political purposes of highlighting and impressing upon the world the great socio-economic progress made in the newly independent coun­ try. In this era, many tourism institutions and structures were created which later became the foundation of public sector tourism governance. For instance, Ghana Tourist Corporation (GTC) was established and in charge of tourism policy and planning, with the objectives of developing, promoting and regulating the tourism sector. State Hotels Corporation (SHC) was engaged in expanding the accommoda­ tion capacity and building state hotels, guesthouses and catering rest houses. In the absence of a separate tourism development plan, national economic development plans provided the directions for tourism in economic development (Adu-Ampong,

194

Government Policy and Planning

2018). International tourism was seen as a form of neocolonialism that reinforced dependency relationships and it was incompatible with and ran counter to African socialism. Thus, the government did not push for increased international tourist arrivals during this period (Asiedu, 1997; Akyeampong & Asiedu, 2008). The political instabilities and economic crisis in the period of 1966–1981 had a negative impact on tourism development in Ghana (Teye, 1988). The many coup d’états and constant regime changes created an unstable political and economic environment that pushed tourism to the sidelines (Akyeampong, 2006). The politi­ cal instabilities partly resulted in a Tourism First approach to tourism development with a semi-passive state involvement in tourism. This era was the start of a more systematic approach to tourism planning mainly as a business in line with a Tour­ ism First approach. The 1972 tourism resource inventory study led to a government White Paper on tourism and a five-year tourism development plan for 1972–1976 that sought to encourage foreign investment through concessions and tax incentives (Teye, 1999). Subsequent studies provided the basis for the first major comprehen­ sive nationwide tourism master plan in Ghana. The 1975–1990 Tourism Master Plan delineated the country into three tourism development zones and focused pri­ marily on economic growth through increased tourist arrivals. A 12.5% average annual growth rate was envisaged for the 15 years of the plan with arrivals pro­ jected to increase from 64,000 in 1975 to 357,000 annually by 1990. A projected total of 35,700 additional direct and indirect jobs were to be created while foreign exchange earnings were expected to reach $57 million a year by 1990 (Teye, 1988; Akyeampong & Asiedu, 2008). Beach resort developments combined with cultural tourism in eight selected coastal communities became the nucleus of primary tour­ ism development projects. However, the implementation of the plan confronted serious difficulties as tourism growth rates were low and projected arrival numbers were not achieved. Tourism grew rapidly in the 1981–2000 period due to the liberalization of the national economy and the implementation of a free market system. The Structural Adjustment Programs (SAPs) initiated in 1983 aimed to deregulate the economy and free it from state controls and perceived market distortions and also promote a private-sector-led trade and investment environment (Konadu-Agyemang, 2000). The government deregulation and diversification of the national economy resulted in the transformation of the tourism sector initially from a Tourism First approach. GTDC reoriented its mission of tourism promotion and the mobilization of invest­ ment resources in 1987. Large foreign aid and international investments led to a tripling of hotels from 273 in 1989 to 766 in 1997 (Konadu-Agyemang, 2001), as well as the creation of tourist attractions. The Ministry of Tourism was established in 1993 and took charge of tourism promotion and developed a five-year Tour­ ism Development Action Programme in 1996. Emancipation Day celebration and PANAFEST (Pan African Historical Theatre Festival) were added to the govern­ mental tourism promotion and drew many Africans in the diaspora and interna­ tional tourists to Ghana in the late 1990s.

Government Policy and Planning

195

A 15-year National Tourism Development Plan (GNTDP) 1996–2010 was developed as part of a broader national economic development plan, Ghana Vision 2020, with financial support from UNDP and assistance from the World Tourism Organization (Teye, 1999). The GNTDP was largely based on a Tourism First approach, although there are a few elements of a Development First approach. In line with the overall economic development policy of the SAPs, the plan promoted tourism development mainly in terms of its contribution to national economic growth. Thus, its major objectives were to “bring socio-economic benefits to the country including generating income, employment, foreign exchange earnings and government revenues, serving as a catalyst to expansion of other economic sectors, and strengthening both the urban and rural economies” (Government of Ghana, 1996, p. 28). The mandates of tourism institutions and agencies were regularly reoriented and realigned to meet strategic national interests. The state acted as a facilitator in a neoliberal economic environment (Akyeampong, 2006) and played a critical role in setting the priorities of tourism development through the realign­ ment of tourism institutions. During the era of democratic consolidation in 2000–2017, tourism planning was strategically tied to overall national development ambitions (Adu-Ampong, 2018). The alternation in governance between the two main dominant political parties of the National Democratic Congress (NDC) and the New Patriotic Party (NPP) brought changes in tourism planning and development from a Development First approach. Private sector investment in tourism was a major priority in the first national economic development plan, the Growth and Poverty Reduction Strategy 2006–2009. Ghana was positioned not only as a tourist destination but also as a homeland destination for Africans in the Diaspora in search of their roots (Yank­ holmes, 2013). The Ministry of Tourism developed a Tourism Sector Medium Term Development Plan (TSMTDP) for 2010–2013 based on a Development First approach. Then the plan was succeeded by a new 15-year Ghana National Tour­ ism Development Plan (GNTDP) 2013–2027. The main goals of the plan were to “ensure that tourism in Ghana achieves its full potential in a sustainable and responsible manner and that it contributes to the country’s GDP, reduces poverty, ensures that its operation is not detrimental to the environment and the culture and traditions of the Ghanaians and attracts a wide range of markets” (Government of Ghana, 2013, p. 9). The plan stresses the links between economic growth, tour­ ism sectoral linkages and poverty reduction. It is focused on the local level with tourism seen as part of policies that can improve the livelihoods of local people. The state reactivated its steering role in tourism planning and development in this era. In 2011, Tourism Act 817 was passed to transform the Ghana Tourism Board (GTB) into the Ghana Tourism Authority (GTA) in order to provide a new institu­ tional framework for tourism development. Meanwhile, the Tourism Development Fund (TDF) was established to address the financial constraints facing the tourism sector and to be used for tourism product development and other infrastructural development projects that would contribute to the competitiveness of the sector.

196

Government Policy and Planning

Discussion

Ghana is one of the few African countries that officially embraced tourism develop­ ment as a main socio-economic development strategy in the early 1990s (Sirakaya et al., 2002). The tourism industry in Ghana experienced a rapid growth in response to the growing market demand and the opportunities offered by evolving govern­ ment policies. Adu-Ampong’s (2019) study highlighted how the distinct historical contexts of government involvement shaped the current and future characteristics of tourism development. The study revealed how the shifts and continuities in tour­ ism policy and planning were linked to the wider national policy and the changing paradigms regarding the role of tourism in economic development and poverty reduction. These shifts and continuities, especially institutional structures, shaped the pace and the sustainability of tourism in Ghana. At the time of independence in 1957, a mainly Development First approach to tourism planning was adopted by a socialist government, which took an active steering role as an investor and entrepreneur in tourism development. With the country falling into political instability from the late 1960s and the start of SAPs from the early 1980s, tourism policy and planning began to take a more Tourism First approach. The need for developing countries to diversify their economies led to the transformation of the tourism sector in Ghana and opened it up to interna­ tional investment. Tourism development within national development policy has evolved from a focus on nature-based recreational activities and wildlife tourism in the early years through to a culture and heritage emphasis since the late 1990s. As tourist arrivals and investment increased, however, the expected benefits were not fully realized leading to calls for new approaches to tourism planning. The move toward the Millennium Development Goals in the 2000s and, more recently, the Sustainable Development Goals called for a more Development First approach to tourism. The county’s shifting overall development paradigms have strongly influ­ enced and shaped its tourism policy and planning. The case of Ghana indicates that contemporary tourism policy and planning is closely related to historical antecedents. The current concentration of tourist sites in the Coastal/Central zone of Ghana at the expense of other areas can be histori­ cally traced to the first Tourism Master Plan in 1975, which identified this area as the most viable for initial development. Although the latter plan tried to extend tourism investment and development into other parts of the country, limited gov­ ernment investment constrained the opportunity to open up new areas for tourism. Private investment largely went into the developed tourism areas in the central region, which is known as the tourism hub of the country (Adu-Ampong, 2017b). Thus, a Tourism First approach in the 1975 plan has continued to shape contempo­ rary geographies of tourism development and investment across the country. The challenges of developing and effectively implementing tourism policy and plans are not unique to Ghana, but are common in many developing countries where tourism is promoted as a vehicle for the economic development of the country.

Government Policy and Planning

197

To address these challenges, many scholars call for a holistic approach to sustain­ able development through tourism that is set against sociocultural and environment costs to destination communities (Sharpley & Telfer, 2015; Spenceley & Meyer, 2012). The delicate balance of situating tourism development policies within over­ all national economic development planning is not easy to achieve (Adu-Ampong, 2018). A Development First approach to tourism policy and planning is essential, according to Adu-Ampong (2019), to ensure the long-term sustainability of tourism development. This statement can be accepted provided that tourism is seen as a social, as well as an economic force, and that efforts are directed forms of development that are broadly conceived, and embrace such issues as regional and poverty reduction. 5.6

Case Study: Co-management

In the absence of self-determination, there are a large number of ways of protecting the interests of minority peoples. They include environmental and social impact assessment and conflict management, which attempts to integrate local cultural val­ ues into development decisions, but may be very difficult to achieve whenever tradeoffs between competing threats for the use of an area cannot be avoided. Western approaches to conflict resolution, such as litigation and other adversarial methods, may be inappropriate in many situations and new approaches for resolving disputes may be necessary if minority peoples are to create shared solutions that meet their needs, protect traditional rights and maintain communication for mutual coopera­ tion. However, as pointed out by Hough (1988), those with power will be required to take the initial steps to initiate action in a consensus-agreement approach. The institutions of minority peoples are often poorly understood by outsiders but the effective functioning of traditional resource management systems depends on the existence of appropriate institutions and local people cannot be divorced from the social structures of which they are a part. If outsiders always make the assumption that there are always community-based institutions at work, then insti­ tutional arrangements would be based on a different footing than is usually the case. However, such institutions may need reinforcing or rehabilitating so that they can meet the challenges of a changing world. One approach that is receiving increasing acceptance, particularly in the con­ text of parks and protected areas but also in other heritage sites (Li, 2000), is co-management. Co-management refers to a substantial sharing of management responsibilities and authority among government agencies and interested peoples. Such an arrangement can take many forms and contains inherent tensions. Com­ promise and consensus are essential to the success of such processes. Although difficult to implement, the advantages of co-management can be significant. How­ ever, true co-management may be difficult to find and various forms of co-optation and cooperation may be more common. Co-management and the similar term joint management have been criticized as being terms with imprecise meanings. Extensive experience in Australia has

198

Government Policy and Planning

revealed the importance of clear definitions (Wall, 1996). There the term has been used with regard to national parks, such as Kakadu and Uluru where, under leg­ islation, there is equity in decision-making through Boards of Management (in fact there are aboriginal majorities on these boards). However, there has been a tendency for agencies to use the term “joint management” in the context of lesser arrangements where aboriginal people have little power in decision-making. Not only does this cause confusion, it creates expectations of “joint” decision-making which agencies may be unable to achieve under their legislation or policies. Much like Arnstein’s (1969) ladder of participation, it has been suggested that there is a hierarchy in management arrangements although the division between the levels is fuzzy. This hierarchy is as follows: 1. Aboriginal people being in control of the protected site or area; 2. Joint management (e.g., aboriginal land leased to a government agency with an aboriginal majority on the Board of Management); 3. Cooperative management (where aboriginal people do not have a great deal of power in the decision-making process but there is a close working relationship, possibly through a formal agreement); 4. Consultative arrangements (where aboriginal people are consulted about man­ agement matters but have no decision-making powers). There has been a tendency for agencies to say to aboriginal peoples that they are prepared to discuss joint management without having a clear idea of what they mean by the term whereas aboriginal groups often have a clear idea of what the term means for them. As a result, agencies have found themselves retreating from the use of such terms because they are unable to achieve what aboriginal groups see as joint management due to legislative, political or policy restrictions. Ownership of land and the role which aboriginal peoples play in management are but two of many concerns of aboriginal peoples. They include the designa­ tion and delimitation of protected areas, compensation, indigenous uses, direct and indirect economic opportunities, interpretation (what and how landscapes, sites and artifacts are to be interpreted to visitors and who is to do this), the right to exclude visitors from specific sites and areas, protection and repatriation of human remains and cultural artifacts, and copyright for traditional designs. To a considerable extent, land ownership, which is a concept which, in its Western form, was alien to many aboriginal peoples, and the acquisition of management authority provides means of addressing many other questions. According to the IUCN Agenda for Action, key ingredients in achieving comanagement include: joint research and information-sharing system combining indigenous knowledge and modern science in order to establish sustainable levels of resource use and harvest, joint action plans and management objectives,

Government Policy and Planning

199

a system of rights and obligations for those interested in the resource(s), procedures for making collective decisions affecting the interests of gov­ ernment agencies, user organizations, and individual users in all stages of strategy planning and implementation, including regular review and mon­ itoring. It is suggested that indigenous institutions strongly involved in such a process, particularly in controls created and implemented locally, will achieve a greater degree of compliance, therefore requiring a mini­ mum of enforcement while ensuring better results and solving/avoiding allocation and management conflicts (IUCN, 1993, pp. 25–26). The IUCN Agenda for Action suggested short-, medium- and long-term objectives for decision makers. Under the former heading, it is suggested that confidence-building consultations must be held, priority should be given to indigenous and local people in employment opportunities and due respect must be given to their intellectual property rights. In the medium term, in order for the “subsistence culture” of indigenous people to keep pace with the growing demand for socio-economic development, concerted efforts should be made to blend acceptable resource use strategies with tested modern methods that assure there should be sustainability. Indigenous people must be provided with train­ ing opportunities to prepare them for incorporation into evolving management systems. In the longer term, consideration must be given to decentralization of political power, revenue retention in the indigenous communities for their socio-economic development and the people’s right to self-determination. While governments often take on a leadership role in tourism development, there are many other stakeholders involved in tourism. While it can be appropriate to focus upon and critique government policies because of their importance, pleas to involve a wider range of stakeholders in decision-making have been accompanied by a greater interest in governance, which acknowledges that actions and responsibilities extend beyond official governmental agencies and influence policies and outcomes. Summary

Government agencies must have a clear mandate and not use imprecise terms that create unachievable expectations. However, indigenous practices are often sitespecific and this frustrates the implementation of general approaches. While legis­ lation and formal administrative arrangements are required to empower aboriginal and other minority peoples and to give them greater authority in decisions, in the absence of trust, little may be achieved in real terms. Thus, such initiatives are a necessary but not sufficient requirement for successful co-management. Personal relationships are a vital ingredient and it takes time, effort, understanding and patience, and even mediation (Ruppert, 1994) for these to develop to a level where co-management can be implemented successfully.

200

Government Policy and Planning

At the risk of oversimplification, three points can be made: 1. Facilitating legislation is important because the legal situation circumscribes what various governmental authorities are able to do and also can empower local people; 2. True co-management requires trust, sharing and mutual respect and this takes time and effort on the part of all stakeholders; and 3. Minority peoples have varied cultures and a diversity of concerns reflecting different histories and opportunities. Different mechanisms are likely to evolve to meet the needs of differing situations. There is no quick fix for problems that have festered for centuries. 5.7

Case Study: Engaging With Communities

Most of the research that has been drawn upon in this book has been undertaken by academics, usually Western academics, who were rarely members of the communi­ ties in which they became involved. The voices of minority peoples are commonly muted in these studies and in many of the projects that are related to them. Local people have been the objects of research and recipients of externally generated projects, rather than researchers who generated their own information to address their own perceived needs. This situation is changing slowly but is unlikely to disappear entirely when deficiencies in formal education and economic constraints mean that external inputs of expertise and other resources may be required to sup­ port minority communities. Although local knowledge is increasingly respected and incorporated into investigations, it is likely that outsiders will continue to be involved in tourism initiatives in minority communities. Therefore, it is appropriate to provide suggestions concerning strategies for the engagement of outsiders with such communities. Although many poor communities have turned to tourism as a means of diver­ sifying and strengthening their economies, often with the assistance of external inputs, success is not assured and many such initiatives eventually fail, particu­ larly after the termination of external assistance. In fact, in many cases, few lasting jobs have been created, especially when considering the considerable amounts of aid money expended, and often the major beneficiaries have been the consultants rather than the people that they were hired to help (Harrison, 2008; Singh, 2012). Wu and Wall (2018) documented the tourism initiatives taken in Dabang, a Tsou indigenous community in the central mountains of Taiwan, whose tourism devel­ opments were facilitated through action research (Zuber-Skerritt, 1996; Winter, 1989). Dabang was not selected as a study site by researchers from elsewhere; rather Professor Tsung-Chiung (Emily) Wu was approached by members of the Dabang community who were seeking assistance in exploring the possibilities of tourism development. Being a poor community and observing the apparently suc­ cessful tourism initiatives in other indigenous communities in the mountainous

Government Policy and Planning

201

interior of Taiwan, interest was expressed in assessing the possibility of attracting tourists as a means of stimulating a sluggish economy while respecting the cultural and environmental qualities of a fledgling tourism destination. When the project commenced, Dabang was only visited by occasional climbers. Professor Wu was invited by three local teachers in July 2003 to lead the activi­ ties, which spanned seven years, and she collaborated with the second author of this book to document the experience. Tourism was seen as being a means of diver­ sifying an economy rather than replacing other activities and a long-term perspec­ tive was undertaken, emphasizing the strengthening of local capabilities. Wu and Wall (2018) reported lessons that underpin successful collaborative, communitybased, tourism development, success being indicated by the ongoing involvement of local people and the establishment and survival of tourism businesses, as well as replication elsewhere. Conceptualization and Activities

Following discussion with community leaders, it was decided to place sustainable community-based ecotourism at the core. Furthermore, to encompass concerns about resource conservation, community benefits and the provision of satisfying experiences for visitors, the three supporting elements became environmental qual­ ity, an amiable community and satisfied people (both visitors and residents). Note that these three concepts embrace the common economic, environmental and social constructs of sustainable development. However, such broad conceptualizations, on their own, did not satisfy the concerns of local residents who had very practical needs and identified a variety of “how to?” issues that they felt should be addressed. Such issues included: How to ensure that local people would benefit in a sustain­ able manner?, How to develop ecotourism products and programs of an appropriate quality that would attract and satisfy tourists?, How to promote environmental and cultural education through tourism? and How to manage and minimize negative impacts that might occur as a result of tourism development? Thus, the conceptual framework was revised further through discussions in the community, which identi­ fied areas of concern requiring attention if the objectives of sustainable communitybased ecotourism were to be met. It was expected that this would require the following tasks: develop ecotourism plans for Dabang, establish mechanisms for implementing the plans, inventory resources and build a resource database, moni­ tor resource quality and investigate perceptions of impacts, develop rules for local businesses, residents and visitors, develop and test eco-tour programs, and develop business and marketing plans. Residents of Dabang believed that if these things were done, the resilience of the community would be increased through the utiliza­ tion of unused resources and the diversification of economic opportunities. The activities undertaken in Dabang are best viewed as being an example of action research. This is because the primary emphasis was to support the under­ taking of initiatives to address problems and opportunities identified by people in

202

Government Policy and Planning

Dabang. The aim was also to strengthen the ability of the community to address current issues and future problems, thereby enhancing the resilience of the com­ munity. Thus, a series of specific activities were undertaken that involved the mutual setting of goals and objectives, the collection and sharing of information, and analysis and assessment leading to the undertaking of concrete actions. The activities involved the taking of initiatives together, the exchange of information and “learning by doing”. In this process, while listening to and responding to the suggestions and concerns of residents, the first author adopted a leadership role, by organizing activities and suggesting optional ways of proceeding. Information and insights were shared among all those involved so that all could contribute and could learn and potentially influence what would be done. Thus, the research involved partnership and collaboration between members of the Dabang commu­ nity and a university-based researcher. Professor Wu was able to introduce con­ cepts and insights gained from academic experiences and literature, as well as from a university-based research team, whereas local residents shared their knowledge, including traditional knowledge, each learning from the others. The activities were initiated in early July 2003, when three local teachers from Dabang primary school contacted Professor Wu to seek assistance in the devel­ opment of an alternative type of indigenous tourism in their beloved homeland. They wanted help with the establishment of ecotourism, which they interpreted as requiring respect for culture and environment, providing educational experi­ ences and bringing benefits to residents of Dabang. Thus, a four-year (1 + 3 years) project was developed for Dabang village. The project was supported strongly and funded by the Alishan Scenic Area Administration, a regional office of the Taiwan Tourism Bureau. It was viewed as being an experiment through which feasible community-based indigenous tourism actions could be identified and strategies for implementing sustainable ecotourism development could be explored from which other indigenous communities might learn. Thus, the overall objective of the pro­ ject was to take the principles of community-based indigenous tourism and use them to create action plans which could be adopted and implemented by indig­ enous communities, thereby strengthening their livelihood portfolios. Accordingly, Dabang village became the center of an indigenous ecotourism project that would simultaneously incorporate environmental, sociocultural and economic aspects of community development and, if successful, would increase the resilience of the community by diversifying its economy in a culturally acceptable way. The first year (2004) was used to establish trust and develop an understanding of local circumstances by documenting the historical and current situations. A series of tasks were set for the following three years (2005–2007): (1) development of an indigenous tourism development plan for Dabang; (2) creation of implementation strategies and action plans; (3) the building of a community resource database; (4) the establishment of a community-based monitoring strategy; (5) completion of resident and visitor perception surveys; (6) formulation of behavior regulations for visitors, local businesses and residents; (7) development and implementation

Government Policy and Planning

203

of indigenous tours; (8) development of a community-based process and plan of resource commodification for tourism-related businesses and (9) marketing and promotion. In all of the aforementioned tasks, emphasis was placed on providing assistance to local people rather than undertaking the tasks for them. A substantial number of shared activities were undertaken and these will not all be discussed in detail. For example, resource inventory, product development, mar­ keting and monitoring are particular tasks that required attention. In some cases, external expertise was brought in to share information, raise awareness of options and offer advice. In other circumstances, students provided labor and assisted in the evaluation of data. In all cases, a major emphasis was placed on members of the community actually doing things for themselves, in part so that they would have ownership of the activities and outcomes, and also so that they would have the confidence and abilities to undertake such activities when required in the future. This approach meant that procedures were strongly influenced by the objectives identified by participants and their abilities to undertake specific tasks. Thus, for example, after suggestions by external partners had been made, local residents decided what to monitor and how this was to be done in line with their concerns and capabilities. By 2007, a template for community-based indigenous tourism had been designed and implemented in collaboration with the Dabang community. At this point, the project team decided to withdraw from the role of providing assistance in the implementation of indigenous tourism in Dabang. However, they continued to work with Dabang on the compilation of monitoring reports, in organizing meet­ ings and devising strategies for controlling tourism impacts, and providing consult­ ants as requested by the village in 2008 and 2009. Accomplishments

Three sets of action plans were created as key elements in the development of a form of community-based indigenous tourism which could contribute to the long­ term well-being of Dabang. The first set of action plans was designed to enhance environmental stewardship. Under this principle, emphasis was placed upon: the inventory and maintenance of local resources, the construction of tourist facilities, and monitoring changes in local resources, by understanding both residents’ and tourists’ perceptions of impacts, and by developing adaptive management strate­ gies for impact control. The second set of action plans addressed economic viabil­ ity. Plans focused on the creation of commercial tourism products through the use of local resources, the marketing of Dabang’s indigenous tourism to selected tourist markets, development of an operational mechanism for cooperation among tour­ ism suppliers in the community and enhancement of the quality of tourism supply. The third set of action plans was directed at community capacity building. These plans emphasized the generation of visions for indigenous tourism that incorpo­ rated its likely contributions to community well-being; launching and facilitating

204

Government Policy and Planning

empowerment programs, including skill development and training courses on a variety of subjects through workshops and interactive field trips; and setting up a network to form a bridge between the community and external stakeholders. Issues and associated responses pertaining to environmental concerns, resource assessment and monitoring, economic impacts, the supply system, capacity build­ ing, and community were identified and addressed with cross-cutting themes. There is too much detail to be reported here. However, for example, regarding community, a fund comprised of a proportion of the revenues of tourism businesses was established. The common fund was used to enhance the general welfare of the community, such as by providing winter clothes for the elderly and paying for the cleaning of the environment. Standardized operational procedures were introduced, but elders were consulted to check for consonance with traditional viewpoints and to ensure that residents had higher priority than tourists, for instance, in the use of public areas and facilities. The project team was very careful about its relationships with the community. For example, efforts were made to contact diverse groups within the community and to work with skeptical groups to emphasize the honesty of their intentions. Such people were invited to participate in project events and befriended where possible. The experience of early benefits, such as a clean environment, increased sales of agricultural products and new skills learned through participation in pro­ ject tasks, built trust between the project team and the community as a whole. The team members positioned themselves as professional companions and the local community always had the final say, even if it was very different from the initial plans proposed by the project team. Sometimes the community was allowed to learn from its mistakes! A network of external contacts was created on which the community could draw as desired. This was done to ensure the continuation of learning and involvement opportunities through access to advice from external experts while ensuring that the visions and concepts of the latter met the needs of the community in its current development stage. Capacity building and empowerment programs are often required to strengthen the abilities and confidence of minority people, thereby contributing to resilience by increasing the ability to respond to challenges. Many indigenous communities have received occasional funding or support for training programs. However, these have rarely provided sufficient capacities to deal with tourism development and related challenges. This is because the quality and quantity of the skills and knowl­ edge imparted may not be congruent with the multipronged nature of indigenous tourism, for successful tourism development involves much more than the creation of new attractions. Furthermore, the learning habits of local indigenes may differ from those assumed in general education programs. The project team first identified the capacity-building programs that were needed through analyzing the gaps between the current status of the community and the capacities required for tourism development. It then provided the necessary

Government Policy and Planning

205

educational programs and encouraged villagers to attend other enhancement oppor­ tunities elsewhere. Program provisions were adjusted to be compatible with work and living schedules, and incorporated a variety of types of learning and teach­ ing styles, such as field trips, exercises and one-on-one consultations, with the awarding of certificates to mark successful learning. The comprehension of con­ cepts requires a very different understanding from most villagers’ previous learn­ ing experiences, although abstract concepts are important foundations for local people to debate to determine their visions and principles for indigenous tourism development. Overall, a “learning by doing” approach was adopted. For example, when illegal fishing with poison occurred and villagers were angry about what had happened, they were encouraged to organize a voluntary patrol team to look after their own river. As another example, young primary students worked with elders to organize a “root-seeking” tour to learn about Tsou legends. Overview

Community-based approaches to tourism development will vary with the context. They will need to take into account the attributes and complexity of the commu­ nity, and the needs and opportunities that exist, ideally as identified by members of the community, albeit with some outside assistance. Nevertheless, some generali­ zations can be made. Little is likely to be achieved in the absence of trust. This does not mean that everyone will agree all of the time. In fact, this is unlikely. Rather, it means that decisions should be made following open discussion, reasons favoring one option over another should be explained, and decisions should be documented. Further­ more, first impressions are important: it will be necessary to gain the trust of local leaders as well as other community members and this is likely to take time and effort, understanding local traditions, multiple visits, participation in events and ceremonies, the exchange of pleasantries and often the sharing of food and drinks. Real trust is earned and is not the same as respect which may be accorded an outsider initially, partly as a result of perceived status. It is gained through sharing of information and cultivating the ability to listen as well as to talk. One usually learns more when one is listening rather than talking! The asking of questions (and careful listening to responses) is more important than having “all the answers at one’s fingertips”. In fact, the latter may give the impression that one lacks empathy and is not prepared to listen and learn. Thus, through the establishment of personal relationships, information and ideas can be exchanged and partnerships and collaboration can occur. Progress can only be made through working with others so the creation of networks of local participants in project activities is vital. Thus, the establishment of partnerships and collaboration is fundamental to the successful undertaking of community development initiatives. All of these actions will take time and require a long-term commitment. While, ideally, early successes are desirable to maintain initial enthusiasm through the

206

Government Policy and Planning

provision of positive feedback, real change will not be instantaneous but is likely to occur over years and even decades. Many projects fail because external support is withdrawn before local capacities have been enhanced sufficiently to enable local people to continue with and build upon the initiatives that have been taken through partnerships and collaboration with outsiders. Thus, local capacity building is usu­ ally essential to the successful taking of community development initiatives. Empowerment and capacity building occur in a variety of ways, among which “learning by doing” is the most important. Training programs, instructional workshops, demonstration activities and the like can be valuable inputs, but work­ ing together to make the changes that are needed is the most important aspect of action research. Such activities provide practical experiences and increase the confidence of local participants in their own abilities. Thus, when external support is eventually withdrawn, they have the knowledge and wherewithal not only to continue with existing activities but also to address the changing circumstances that will inevitably have to be faced. The inputs that are required for the successful development of tourism are var­ ied. They include environmental and visitor management, product development, marketing and monitoring, financial analysis and so on. At the same time, the inter­ ests and abilities of members of a community may be diverse. Successful develop­ ment, therefore, requires moving ahead with a variety of interrelated initiatives in what may be called a multipronged strategy, different initiatives providing opportunities for the involvement of people with different interests and skills. In this way, the development initiatives can involve more people, penetrate further into the community and are less likely to rely on the success or failure of a single initiative. A number of principles have been distilled from the seven-year experience in Dabang, as well as from similar experiences elsewhere, that likely apply to many minority communities seeking to increase their sustainability and resilience through the establishment of tourism development initiatives. Broad concepts, such as sustainable development, were modified to create a more specific conceptualization that placed the community at the core. Through discussions in the community, areas of concern requiring attention were identi­ fied and it was expected that these could be addressed by undertaking the follow­ ing tasks: development of (eco)tourism plans, establishment of mechanisms for implementation of the plans, inventory of resources and creation of a resource database, monitoring of resource quality and investigation of the perceptions of impacts, development of rules for local businesses, residents and visitors, devel­ opment and testing of eco-tour programs, and development of business and mar­ keting plans. Three sets of action plans were created that addressed environmental steward­ ship, economic development and community capacity building, respectively. For each plan, issues were identified, addressed and presented, along with examples of responses to the issues that could occur in the study area. Briefly, it was found that

Government Policy and Planning

207

(1) Environmental actions should involve local people and incorporate their tradi­ tional knowledge; (2) Community-based implementation of resource assessment and monitoring can be accomplished through involving external experts but protocols require modification in recognition of local conditions and abilities; (3) The quality of jobs created, the retention and distribution of economic gains, and local meanings should receive serious consideration during the process of product development for tourists’ consumption; (4) A common center is needed to facilitate cooperation among various small oper­ ators and interested individuals to assure the quality and stability of service delivery, especially in a small, remote community; (5) Community-based indigenous tourism should not be confined to tourism but should incorporate residents’ needs and the long-term well-being of the com­ munity. In addition, a network of external aids should be established to aug­ ment local abilities and assist the community when requested; (6) The quality and quantity of empowerment programs should be congruent with the multipronged nature of development and accommodate local learning hab­ its, such as learning by doing. Finally, drawing together a number of themes that cut across the topics, issues and initiatives addressed in this example of action research, five subjects have been highlighted. They are the establishment of trust, partnerships and collaboration, a long-term commitment, empowerment and capacity-building, and the adoption of a multipronged development strategy. We suggest that these underpin success­ ful community-based tourism development and will enhance community resilience when supported by outside assistance (as almost all such initiatives are). Summary

This chapter has examined the impacts of an important stakeholder group, gov­ ernments, and their roles in tourism development and reveals various outcomes of government-led tourism planning and policy. Both developed and develop­ ing countries design their policies to generate economic benefits from the tour­ ism industry. Governments, particularly in developing economies, are becoming more involved in ethnic tourism as it is increasingly valued as a strategic tool for economic development and diversification. Governments have critical roles to play in the policy formulation and enhancement of the overall growth of the tourism industry. The significance of government policy and planning in tour­ ism development lies in its ability to administer effectively valid policies and consistent standards, taking into account their potential effects. However, tour­ ism in many destinations is often promoted by government or industry with­ out an overall strategy or adequate planning, without consultation or inclusion of local communities, and without effective culture and heritage conservation

208

Government Policy and Planning

plans. Inadequate public planning and policy may result in unintended negative consequences. The global political agenda is increasingly dominated by economic principles which focus on the aggressive consumption of local resources. Public interests are often abandoned in favor of the interests of business, corporate prosperity and economic growth. The short-term economic benefits from tourism are often valued highly, while the significant social and environmental costs have to be borne by local communities. Thus, there are urgent needs for the formulation of appropri­ ate tourism policies and adequate destination plans. It is essential to ensure proper planning and development of ethnic tourism as it makes an increasing contribution to the livelihood of ethnic communities and the economy of the destination coun­ try. The collaborative policy-making and planning is advocated by many scholars (Zielinski et al., 2020), but it can only be achieved with adequate political support. Policy-making is a complex process of negotiation and compromise (Yanes et al., 2019). Policy-making should be coupled with the development of effective com­ munication and coordination between various key stakeholders at different levels, ranging from government agencies to the grassroots level, to ensure the full poten­ tial of a tourism destination is achieved (Harilal et al., 2019). The policymakers and planners should formulate a comprehensive set of consistent and transparent plan­ ning missions, strategies and guidelines, foster coordination among diverse stake­ holders, and empower local citizens to participate in the tourism planning process. Finally, whether one is an academic conducting research, an official implement­ ing a project, or a tourist seeking a novel experience, one should engage with eth­ nic communities in a respectful manner. First impressions are important. Respect should be earned, and it takes time and effort to develop trust. References Adu-Ampong, E.A. (2017a). State of the nation address and tourism priorities in Ghana – a contextual analysis. Tourism Planning & Development, 14(1), 135–138. Adu-Ampong, E.A. (2017b). Divided we stand: Institutional collaboration in tourism plan­ ning and development in the central region of Ghana. Current Issues in Tourism, 20(3), 295–314. Adu-Ampong, E.A. (2018). Tourism and national economic development planning in Ghana, 1964–2014. International Development Planning Review, 40(1), 75–95. Adu-Ampong, E.A. (2019). Historical trajectories of tourism development policies and planning in Ghana, 1957–2017. Tourism Planning & Development, 16(2), 124–141. https://doi.org/10.1080/21568316.2018.1537002 Akyeampong, O.A. (2006). Tourism development in Ghana, 1957–2007. Legon Journal of Sociology, 3(2), 1–23. Akyeampong, O.A. (2011). Pro-poor tourism: Residents’ expectations, experiences and per­ ceptions in the Kakum National Park Area of Ghana. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 19(2), 197–213. https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2010.509508 Akyeampong, O.A., & Asiedu, A.B. (2008). Tourism in Ghana: A Modern Synthesis. Accra: Assemblies of God Literature Centre Limited.

Government Policy and Planning

209

Arnstein, S.R. (1969). A ladder of citizen participation. Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 35(4), 216–224. Asiedu, A.B. (1997). Prospects for an emerging tourism industry in Ghana. Research Review, 13(1–2), 11–26. Baidal, J. (2004). Tourism planning in Spain: Evolution and perspectives. Annals of Tourism Research, 31(2), 313–333. Baud-Bovy, M. (1982). New concepts in planning for tourism and recreation. Tourism Man­ agement, 3, 308–313. Bramwell, B., & Lane, B. (2000). Tourism Collaboration and Partnerships: Politics, Prac­ tice and Sustainability. Clevedon: Channel View Publications. Bramwell, B., & Lane, B. (2011). Critical Perspectives on Governance and Sustainability. London: Routledge. Brendehaug, E., Aall, C., & Dodds, R. (2017). Environmental policy integration as a strat­ egy for sustainable tourism planning: Issues in implementation. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 25(9), 1257–1274. https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2016.1259319. Burns, P.M. (1999). Paradoxes in planning: Tourism elitism or brutalism. Annals of Tourism Research, 26, 329–348. Butler, R.W. (1980). The concept of a tourism area cycle of evolution: Implications for man­ agement of resources. Canadian Geographer, 24(1), 5–12.a. Connell, J., Page, S.J., & Bentley, T. (2009). Towards sustainable tourism planning in New Zealand: Monitoring local government planning under the Resource Management Act. Tourism Management, 30(6), 867–877. Costa, J. (2001). An emerging tourism planning paradigm? A comparative analysis between town and tourism planning. International Journal of Tourism Research, 3, 425–441. de Kadt, E. (1979). Social planning for tourism in the development countries. Annals of Tourism Research, 6, 36–48. Dredge, D. (2006). Policy networks and the local organisation of tourism. Tourism Manage­ ment, 27(2), 269–280. Dredge, D., & Jamal, T. (2015). Progress in tourism planning and policy: A post-structural perspective on knowledge production. Tourism Management, 51, 285–297. Dredge, D., Jenkins, J., & Whitford, M. (2011). Tourism policy and planning: Historical development and contemporary challenges. In Dredge, D., & Jenkins, J. (Eds.). Stories of Practice: Tourism Planning and Policy (pp. 13–34). Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing. Dwyer, L., & Forsyth, P. (1993). Assessing the benefits and costs of inbound tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 20(4), 751–768. Dwyer, L., Forsyth, P., & Spurr, R. (2004). Evaluating tourism’s economic effects: New and old approaches. Tourism Management, 25(3), 307–317. Farsari, I., Butler, R., & Szivas, E. (2011). Complexity in tourism policies: A cognitive map­ ping approach. Annals of Tourism Research, 38(3), 1110–1134. Feng, X. (2008). Who benefits? Tourism development in Fenghuang County, China. Human Organization, 67(2), 207–220. Getz, D. (1983). Capacity to absorb tourism: Concepts and implications for strategic plan­ ning. Annals of Tourism Research, 10(2), 239–263. Getz, D. (1986). Models in tourism planning: Towards integration of theory and practice. Tourism Management, 7(1), 21–32. Getz, D. (1987). Tourism Planning and Research: Traditions, Models and Futures. Paper presented at the Australian Travel Research Workshop, Bunbury, Western Australia, Bunbury, Western Australia.

210

Government Policy and Planning

Gladwin, T.N., Kennelly, J.J., & Krause, T. (1995). Shifting paradigms for sustainable devel­ opment: Implications for management theory and research. Academy of Management Review, 20, 874–907. Government of Ghana. (1996). National Tourism Development Plan for Ghana, 1996–2010. Accra: Government of Ghana Printer. Government of Ghana. (2013). National Tourism Development Plan (2013–2027). Accra: Government of Ghana Printer. Gunn, C.A. (2002). Tourism Planning: Basics, Concepts, Cases. New York: Routledge. Hall, C.M. (1994). Tourism and Politics: Policy, Power and Place. West Sussex: John Wiley and Sons. Hall, C.M. (1999). Rethinking collaboration and partnership: A public policy perspective. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 7(3), 274–289. Hall, C.M. (2000). Tourism Planning: Policies, Processes and Relationships. New York: Prentice Hall. Hall, C.M. (2005). The role of government in the management of tourism: The public sector and tourism policies. In Pender, L., & Sharpley, R. (Eds.). The Management of Tourism. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Hall, C.M. (2011). A typology of governance and its implications for tourism policy analysis. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 19(4/5), 437–457. https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.20 11.570346 Hall, C.M., & Jenkins, J. (1995). Tourism and Public Policy. London: Routledge. Harilal, V., Tichaawa, T.M., & Saarinen, J. (2019). “Development without policy”: Tourism planning and research needs in Cameroon, Central Africa. Tourism Planning & Develop­ ment, 16(6), 696–705. Harrill, R., & Potts, T.D. (2003). Tourism planning in historic districts: Attitudes toward tourism development. Journal of the American Planning Association, 69(3), 233–244. Harrison, D. (2008). Pro-poor tourism: A critique. Third World Quarterly, 29(5), 851–868. Healey, P. (1997). Collaborative Planning. Vancouver, BC: UBC Press. Henderson, J., Teck, G.K., Ng, D., & Tan, S. (2009). Tourism and ethnic communities: Two Miao villages in China. International Journal of Heritage Studies, 15(6), 529–539. Hodge, G., & Greve, C. (2010). Public-private partnerships: Governance scheme or lan­ guage game? Australian Journal of Public Administration, 69, S8–S22. Hopwood, B., Mellor, M., & O’Brien, G. (2005). Sustainable development: Mapping dif­ ferent approaches. Sustainable Development, 13, 38–52. https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.244 Hough, J.L. (1988). Obstacles to effective management of conflicts between national parks and surrounding human communities in developing countries. Environmental Conserva­ tion, 15(2), 129–136. Inskeep, E. (1991). Tourism Planning: An Integrated and Sustainable Development Approach. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold. IUCN Inter-Commission Task Force on Indigenous Peoples. (1993). Indigenous Peoples and Sustainability: A Guide for Action. IUCN Inter-Commission Task Force on Indige­ nous Peoples and the Secretariat of IUCN in collaboration with the International Institute for Sustainable Development. Jamal, T.B., & Getz, D. (1995). Collaboration theory and community tourism planning. Annals of Tourism Research, 22(1), 186–204. Jamal, T.B., & McDonald, D. (2011). The short and long of collaborative planning in the mountain resort destination of Canmore, Canada. Current Issues in Tourism, 14(1), 1–25. Jenkins, J., Hall, C.M., & Knono, M. (2014). Tourism and public policy. In The Blackwell Wiley Companion to Tourism (pp. 542–555). Chichester: Wiley.

Government Policy and Planning

211

Kamble, Z., & Bouchon, F. (2014). Tourism planning and a nation’s vision: A review of the tourism policy of Sri Lanka. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 144, 229–236. Konadu-Agyemang, K. (2000). The best of times and the worst of times: Structural adjust­ ment programs and uneven development in Africa: The case of Ghana. The Professional Geographer, 52(3), 469–483. Konadu-Agyemang, K. (2001). Structural adjustment programmes and the international tourism trade in Ghana, 1983–99: Some socio-spatial implications. Tourism Geogra­ phies, 3(2), 187–206. Li, Y. (2000). Ethnic tourism: A Canadian experience. Annals of Tourism Research, 27(1), 115–131. Li, Y., & Hu, Z. (2008). Red tourism in China. Journal of China Tourism Research, 4, 156–171. Li, Y., & Hu, Z. (2011). Communist identity in China: A case study of red tourism. Interna­ tional Journal of Arts and Sciences, 4, 55–73. Liu, C., Dou, X., Li, J., & Cai, L.A. (2020). Analyzing government role in rural tourism devel­ opment: An empirical investigation from China. Journal of Rural Studies, 79, 177–188. Mason, P. (2008). Tourism Impacts, Planning and Management (2nd ed.). Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann. Michaud, J. (2013). Comrades of minority policy in China, Vietnam, and Laos. In Turner, S. (Ed.). Red Stamps and Gold Stars, Fieldwork Dilemmas in Upland Socialist Asia (pp. 22–39). Vancouver, BC: University of British Columbia Press. Michaud, J., & Turner, S. (2017). Reaching new heights. State legibility in Sa pa, a Vietnam hill station. Annals of Tourism Research, 66, 37–48. Mill, R.C., & Morrison, A.M. (1985). The Tourism System. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall. Murphy, P.E. (1985). Tourism: A Community Approach. New York and London: Methuen. Murphy, P.E. (1988). Community driven tourism planning. Tourism Management, 9(2), 96–104. Nunkoo, R., & Smith, S.L. (2013). Political economy of tourism: Trust in government actors, political support, and their determinants. Tourism Management, 36, 120–132. Oakes, T. (1998). Tourism and Modernity in China. London: Routledge. Page, S.J. (2007). Tourism Management: Managing for Change (3rd ed.). Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann. Phi, S. (2014). Why Is There a downward trend of Western tourists to Sapa. https://news. zing.vn/vi-sao-khach-tay-den-sapa-co-xu-huong-giam-post480917.html (accessed 22 February 2022). Qu, C., Timothy, D.J., & Zhang C. (2019). Does tourism erode or prosper culture? Evidence from the Tibetan ethnic area of Sichuan Province, China. Journal of Tourism and Cul­ tural Change, 17(4), 526–543. https://doi.org/10.1080/14766825.2019.1600867 Reid, D., Mair, H., & George, W. (2004). Community tourism planning: A self-assessment instrument. Annals of Tourism Research, 31(3), 623–639. Ruhanen, L. (2004). Strategic planning for local tourism destinations: An analysis of tour­ ism plans. Tourism and Hospitality Planning & Development, 1(3), 239–253. Ruhanen, L. (2013). Local government: Facilitator or inhibitor of sustainable tourism devel­ opment? Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 21(1), 80–98. Ruppert, D. (1994). Redefining relationships: American Indians and national parks. Practic­ ing Anthropology, 16(3), 10–13. Sautman, B. (1999). Ethnic law and minority rights in China: Progress and constraints. Law & Policy, 21(3), 283–314. Sautter, E.T., & Leisen, B. (1999). Managing stakeholders: A tourism planning model. Annals of Tourism Research, 26(2), 312–328.

212

Government Policy and Planning

Sharpley R. (2000). Tourism and sustainable development: Exploring the theoretical divide. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 8, 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/09669580008667346 Sharpley, R. (2005). Managing the countryside for tourism: A governance perspective. In Pender, L., & Sharpley, R. (Eds.). The Management of Tourism. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Sharpley, R., & Telfer, D.J. (Eds.). (2015). Tourism and Development: Concepts and Issues (2nd ed.). Bristol: Channel View Publications. Simão, J.N., & Partidário, M.R. (2012). How does tourism planning contribute to sustain­ able development? Sustainable Development, 20, 372–385. Simmons, D.G. (1994). Community participation in tourism planning. Tourism Manage­ ment, 15, 98–108. Simpson, K. (2001). Strategic planning and community involvement as contributions to sustainable tourism development. Current Issues in Tourism, 4(1), 3–41. Singh, T.V. (2012). Does tourism reduce poverty. In Singh, T.V. (Ed.). Critical Debates in Tourism (pp. 123–150). Bristol: Channel View Publications. Sirakaya, E., Teye, V., & Sönmez, S. (2002). Understanding residents’ support for tourism development in the central region of Ghana. Journal of Travel Research, 41(1), 57–67. Sofield, T.H.B., & Li, F.M.S. (2007). Indigenous minorities of China and effects of tourism. In Butler, R., & Hinch, T. (Eds.). Tourism and Indigenous Peoples: Issues and Implica­ tions (pp. 265–280). Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann. Spenceley, A., & Meyer, D. (2012). Tourism and poverty reduction: Theory and practice in less economically developed countries. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 20(3), 297–317. Teye, V.B. (1988). Coups d’etat and African tourism: A study of Ghana. Annals of Tourism Research, 15(3), 329–356. Teye, V.B. (1999). Commentary: Tourism plans and planning challenges in Ghana. Tourism Geographies, 1(3), 283–292. Timothy, D.J. (1998). Cooperative tourism planning in a developing destination. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 6(1), 52–68. Timothy, D.J. (1999). Participatory planning a view of tourism in Indonesia. Annals of Tour­ ism Research, 26(2), 71–391. Tosun, C. (2000). Limits to community participation in the tourism development process in developing countries. Tourism Management, 21(6), 613–633. Tosun, C. (2005). Stages in the emergence of a participatory tourism development approach in the developing world. Geoforum, 36(3), 333–352. Tosun, C., & Jenkins, C.L. (1998). The evolution of tourism planning in third-world coun­ tries: A critique. Progress in Tourism and Hospitality Research, 4, 101–114. Truong, V.D., Hall, C.M., & Garry, T. (2014). Tourism and poverty alleviation: Perceptions and experiences of poor people in Sapa, Vietnam. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 22(7), 1071–1089. Van Hoy, N., Diane, L., & Newsome, D. (2020). Kinh and ethnic tourism stakeholder par­ ticipation and collaboration in tourism planning in Sapa, Vietnam. International Journal of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality Research, 14(4), 579–597. https://doi.org/10.1108/ IJCTHR-12-2018-0179 VNAT. (2019). Tourism in Lao Cai. http://vietnamtourism.gov.vn/index.php/items/29676 (accessed 22 February 2022). Wall, G. (1996). Towards the involvement of indigenous peoples in the management of heritage sites. In Robinson, M., Evans, N., & Callaghan, P. (Eds.). Tourism and Cultural Change, Proceedings, Tourism and Culture: Towards the 21st Century (pp. 311–320). Newcastle: University of Northumbria.

Government Policy and Planning

213

Wearing, S., & Neil, J. (2009). Ecotourism: Impacts, Potentials and Possibilities? London: Routledge. Wight, P.A. (2002). Supporting the principles of sustainable development in tourism and ecotourism: Government’s potential role. Current Issues in Tourism, 5(3–4), 222–244. Winter, R. (1989). Learning from Experience: Principles and Practice in Action-Research. Philadelphia, PA: The Falmer Press. Wu, T.-C., & Wall, G. (2018). Learning from Dabang, Taiwan: Sustainability and resilience in action in indigenous tourism development. In Cheer, J.M., & Lew, A.A. (Eds.). Tour­ ism, Resilience and Sustainability: Adapting to Social, Political and Economic Change (pp. 222–242). London: Routledge. Xavier, M., & Alfred, V. (2008). The changing role of governments and the emergence of the relational state. Corporate Governance, 8(4), 389. Yanes, A., Zielinski, S., Diaz Cano, M., & Kim, S.I. (2019). Community-based tourism in developing countries: A framework for policy evaluation. Sustainability, 11(9), 2506. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11092506 Yang, J., Ryan, C., & Zhang, L. (2014). Sustaining culture and seeking a just destination: Governments, power and tension – a life-cycle approach to analysing tourism develop­ ment in an ethnic-inhabited scenic area in Xinjiang, China. Journal of Sustainable Tour­ ism, 22(8), 1151–1174. https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2014.924953 Yang, L., & Wall, G. (2008). The evolution and status of tourism planning: Xishuangbanna, Yunnan, China. Tourism and Hospitality Planning & Development, 5(2), 165–182. Yankholmes, A.K., & Akyeampong, O.A. (2010). Tourists’ perceptions of heritage tourism development in Danish-Osu, Ghana. International Journal of Tourism Research, 12(5), 603–616. Yankholmes, A.K.B. (2013). Developing Ghana’s Slave Route Project for Cultural Tourism: Planning and Marketing Implications. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong. Zeng, B., & Ryan, C. (2012). Assisting the poor in China through tourism development: A review of research. Tourism Management, 33(2), 239–248. Zhang, H., & Li, Y. (2018). Tourism and China’s ethnic rurality: A tale of two vil­ lages. Anthropological Notebooks, s24(1). Zielinski, S., Kim, S.I., Botero, C., & Yanes, A. (2020). Factors that facilitate and inhibit community-based tourism initiatives in developing countries. Current Issues in Tourism, 23(6), 723–739. Zuber-Skerritt, O. (1996). New Directions in Action Research. London: The Falmer Press.

6 THE FUTURE OF ETHNIC TOURISM

Ethnic tourism has become a global phenomenon that showcases ethnic distinctive­ ness and attracts tourists to explore ethnicity while on vacation, thereby allowing them to acquire cross-cultural experiences in unfamiliar locations. Ethnic tourism is unusual in its culture-centric focus along with education, personal growth and other intrinsic values that underly travel motivations. Many ethnic tourism vacations com­ bine physical activities such as trekking, horse-riding and boating with pursuits that raise cultural awareness. Experience of ethnic foods and customs may occur in close proximity to opportunities to learn about native flora and fauna, and their uses and meanings. Ethnic tourism offers experiences that affect tourists’ attitudes to minor­ ity cultures and the environment and, ultimately, their actions. Ethnic tourism then is not just an “industry”, for it is as much about cultural education, and the fostering of attitudes and behavior that is conducive to conservation and the empowerment of host minority peoples. It has facilitated changes in the relationships between ethnic communities and parts of mainstream society through tourism development. The objectives of this concluding chapter are to address the impacts, potentials and possi­ bilities of ethnic tourism, to discuss sustainable models of tourism development and operation, and to identify directions for the future development of research in this field. But first, the experiences of ethnic peoples with tourism will be summarized. 6.1

Experiences of Ethnic People With Tourism

It is possible to identify a number of situations in which minority peoples have found themselves as tourism has advanced in their communities. These circum­ stances are most clear in the cases of indigenous communities whose resources have been expropriated and lifestyles have been disrupted by external colonial set­ tler powers. It is not suggested that the situations represent a sequence, or series of DOI: 10.4324/9781003373964-7

The Future of Ethnic Tourism

215

stages, through which ethnic communities have passed, although there have cer­ tainly been changes over time, both globally and locally. There can be both losses and gains in access to power over time, and the circumstances of minority com­ munities continue to reflect changes in majority society and decisions that have been or are being imposed upon them, which they cannot control, but to which they must respond. Indeed, all of the situations currently exist in different parts of the world, and multiple situations may exist even within the same jurisdiction. It is suggested that the situations identify a range of possibilities that minority peoples have experienced, endured, and to which they may aspire, thereby providing a list of categories through which current practices may be reviewed. Ignored: In the early years of settler encroachment and for many years after­ ward, the interests of existing inhabitants were largely ignored. Indeed, the doctrine terra nullius meant that the land was deemed to be unoccupied or uninhabited. The lifestyles of the existing inhabitants were poorly understood by the newcomers, as were their uses of the resources that sustained their communities. Indeed, the uses of such terms as wilderness, bush, outback and periphery by settlers denotes that these places were evaluated differently from those for whom they were home and for whom they had provided sustenance for generations. Such views permeated the early development of tourism in many indigenous territories. Displaced: The presumption of unoccupied land was frequently incorrect, but supported by low population densities, the mobility of people as they accessed resources in different areas seasonally, and the light impacts of indigenous com­ munities upon the land. The early development of tourist attractions, as in the establishment of parks and protected areas, often involved the removal of existing inhabitants and human-made structures. In a desire to allow natural processes to occur, without the interference of humans, people were displaced and traditional resource uses, such as hunting and gathering, were banned. Paradoxically, outsid­ ers were often encouraged to visit these reserves even though they, too, needed facilities and had impacts. This situation still occurs in many parts of the world, particularly when national parks or similar reserves are established, but it is not confined to such places: for example, when historical districts are upgraded, or when traditional fishing communities are displaced by resort developments, local people often lose access to resources. Attractions: As tourism has grown and interest in minority cultures increased, ethnic communities and their resources have become increasingly attractive to visi­ tors. Sometimes it is the relatively natural areas in proximity to such communities that are attractive, perhaps for hiking, hunting and fishing, resulting in increased competition for access to resources. At other times, it is the expressions of culture, including festivals and events, that attract visitors. However, the attraction of visi­ tors does not necessarily mean that minority people benefit from the tourism that is occurring, particularly if the visits are arranged by outsiders and there is no local involvement. They become objects of the tourist gaze but the benefits, particularly the economic benefits, of tourism go elsewhere.

216

The Future of Ethnic Tourism

Participants: As participants in the provision of tourism opportunities, it is likely that some of the benefits of tourism are retained within the community. How­ ever, often jobs are menial, seasonal and unreliable, and local people may have little influence over how their communities, culture and resources are presented to tourists. They and their activities may be photographed freely and without per­ mission. They are unable to avoid the tourism that is occurring, and may not fully understand why their ordinary everyday activities are of interest to outsiders. Beneficiaries: Participants become beneficiaries when tourism improves the quality of life of residents of minority communities, often by increasing and diver­ sifying economic opportunities, and also by enhancing pride and identity, expand­ ing understanding and respect for culture, and finding new uses for resources and applications of local knowledge. However, although benefitting from tourism development in some ways, the direction of tourism development remains else­ where and the undesired effects of tourism are unaddressed. Consider, for example, the situation of a hunting or fishing guide who, day after day, draws upon indigenous knowledge to provide members of another culture with access to scarce resources and a successful outdoor experience. While in many ways in a leadership position with a great deal of responsibility, for most of their working life, they are outnumbered and in a subservient position to those of another culture who they may perceive as representing a colonial power whose activities disrupted traditional access to and relationships with the land (and water). Decision makers: Minority peoples, as individuals and communities, can become decision makers who make the important choices about the future of tour­ ism in their territories. Sometimes this is partial, as in the case of co-management schemes that have proliferated in parks and protected areas in many parts of the world, or it may be more complete, as in the case of many ethnic restaurants, which often serve a mixed clientele of residents and visitors. It is believed that the abil­ ity to participate in and take decisions is likely to influence the distribution of the resulting benefits and costs. Indeed, it is widely argued that individuals should have the opportunity to influence the decisions that affect their lives, although the ways that this is achieved will vary with the circumstances. Tourists: Although not widely addressed, minority people may also be tourists and, although seldom considered as such, they may constitute distinct market seg­ ments. The most obvious cases of this are where migrant populations retain strong contacts with their former homelands and return to renew family and cultural ties. Movements occur in both directions, raising complex questions about the nature of “home”, “away” and “home away from home”. Global diasporas result in tourism flows as increasingly mobile societies retain their connections. Thus, for example, Chinatowns in many cities throughout the world are visited by tourists from China while, at the same time, their residents across several generations may cherish and renew their connections with their distant homeland. Caribana, a Caribbean cul­ tural festival in Toronto, caters to a substantial immigrant population in the city while also attracting visitors from the islands. “Roots” tourism, too, has grown

The Future of Ethnic Tourism

217

as black residents of North America have shown increased interest in the parts of Africa from which their ancestors were forcibly relocated as slaves. It is possible that minority peoples, because of their cultural attributes, may engage differently with destinations, as implied in the novel by King (2020). Also, minority peoples may have their own travel circuits: for example, Muslim minori­ ties throughout the world strive to visit Mecca in Saudi Arabia to take part in the “Hajj”, and the powwow circuit (Ellis et al., 2005), although a relatively recent phenomenon in the long history of indigenous people in North America, attracts a substantial number of performers and their families, other relatives and friends, indigenous businesses and curious visitors. 6.2

Impacts, Potentials and Possibilities

In exploring ethnic tourism, the questions of who participates, who makes deci­ sions and who controls tourism experiences need to be addressed. The introduction of tourism to ethnic communities creates a complex system of ethnic relations that involves different cultures, divergent interests, interactions of people of varying social status, and the uneven distribution of power. This book has focused upon four main stakeholder groups: tourists, ethnic people and their communities, tour­ ism entrepreneurs and governments. Tourists are drawn by the “otherness” of the minority peoples, the pursuit of authenticity and, often, the environments in which they live. Ethnic communities are the homes of minority people that become attrac­ tions that are visited and gazed upon by tourists. Governments establish policies to guide tourism development and regulate the tourist market, and tourism entrepre­ neurs endeavor to benefit economically from commodification of the interactions between hosts and guests. The complex system interplay among these groups can be seen as a special form of ethnic relations (Van den Berghe, 1994). It involves the interlinkages of socio-economic, political and cultural forces (Xie, 2011). Tourism is one economic activity in which ethnicity and entrepreneurship can, arguably, mesh to achieve the development aspirations of ethnic peoples. Ethnic knowledge, culture, identity, history and folk customs constitute valuable resources that ethnic peoples can use to construct and offer tourism products, services and experiences that differentiate themselves and their destinations from others. In many ethnic destinations, tourism has become an important economic activity that commodifies and sells ethnic culture and identities for economic gains. Tourism, inevitably, involves the trading of experiences for money and there need be noth­ ing inherently wrong in this. However, ethnic tourism is not just an entrepreneurial activity undertaken in the seeking of economic well-being; it is often a multifaceted enterprise that is intertwined with the self-determination and sustainable develop­ ment of ethnic peoples. It commonly reflects their intentions and efforts to preserve their culture and way of life, and their willingness to share these with others on their terms. Yet, ethnic peoples may be limited in their involvement in tourism to small-scale enterprises that supplement household incomes due to restricted access

218

The Future of Ethnic Tourism

to entrepreneurial resources, markets or governmental and other institutional sup­ port (Carr et al., 2017). Sometimes the utilization of their cultural heritage to earn money from tourism leads to desecration of sacred sites (Johnston, 2013), divid­ ing the community because the benefits are inequitably distributed (Tabani, 2010). While tourism may bring financial improvement for ethnic communities, it can also simultaneously draw attention to and diluted the cultural heritage. Thus, eth­ nic tourism is a double-edged sword as it provides a way for traditional peoples to achieve economic progress and modernity while, at the same time, it may threaten their cultural characteristics. As seen in many cases discussed in the book, tourism yields both positive and negative consequences for every stakeholder, depending upon the circumstances of their involvement. Stakeholders play different roles in tourism development and hold different positions with respect to tourism and cultural preservation. Business decisions, profit generation and benefit distribution by ethnic communities, entre­ preneurs and government occur in a contested space (Mowforth & Munt, 2003). Competing objectives among stakeholders often result in tensions and social con­ flicts, and give rise to negative effects of tourism development on host communi­ ties. Governments often put a high priority on state regulation of tourist markets, while tourism developers may be more interested in economic development than cultural preservation. Tourism entrepreneurs may establish cultural centers, theme parks or folk villages to showcase exotic cultures, but gravitate toward touristic presentations that mix traditional and contrived elements. Ethnic communities commonly strive to improve their livelihoods through tourism, but many devel­ opment costs are often borne by the communities while most economic benefits may accrue to the outsiders. At the community level, tourism generates increased revenues, and may stimulate the enhancement of public infrastructures and the initiation of community projects. Although the presence of ethnic peoples may be vital to the success of tourism in their communities, this does not mean that they are in control of such endeavors or benefit holistically from them. Although ethnic tourism has great potential to be a tool for conservation and sustainable development, in many cases, it has not generated the expected benefits by generating revenues for conservation or creating additional income sources for communities. Economic aspirations are often overemphasized in destination plan­ ning and development and, as a result, the quality of life and sustainability of destinations may be compromised. While destination communities may receive benefits from tourism, they are most frequently in the form of seasonal low-paying jobs. Especially when outside control or short-term profit-oriented goals domi­ nate the decision-making and development processes, negative outcomes such as increased traffic, pollution, sequestering of profits by outsides and rising local prices become significant local problems. The ambition to create authentic crosscultural experiences that educate tourists has not been fulfilled in many ethnic destinations. The achievement of a balance between economic benefits and the maintenance of cultural integrity and authenticity appears to be central to the

The Future of Ethnic Tourism

219

solution of problems in the development of ethnic tourism. However, a sound, balanced, self-regulating system is difficult to achieve and is unlikely to happen overnight. Ongoing identification and management of problems and challenges is likely to be required, through participatory processes that will vary with the issues and the circumstances. There is no clear answer in the literature on how best to address the issues discussed here. The effectiveness of ethnic tourism in the future will ultimately depend on the distribution of benefits and costs, which, in turn, will reflect how it is implemented. Ethnic tourism development changes the relationships between host communities and other stakeholders, and even has ramifications for the interactions among those within the destination community. Even though community needs and concerns are not always heard or listened to, tourism can open up opportunities to establish partnerships between ethnic people, the private sector and governments that allow many stakeholders to be involved in tourism planning and development. Govern­ ments, particularly in developing countries, have often seen tourism as a pana­ cea for development problems and as a solution for lack of employment, foreign exchange and capital for the construction of infrastructure. Many scholars have called for more support for destination communities and for their greater empow­ erment, particularly in the early stages of tourism development. The challenge for tourism planners is to engage with minority people to create platforms, regulations and incentives so that socio-economic benefits are generated from tourist activities and programs, and distributed more appropriately, thereby contributing to the eco­ nomic, cultural and environmental sustainability of ethnic communities. 6.3

Sustainable Models and Ethnic Tourism

Sustainable development (SD) has been a much-talked-about model for develop­ ment in various fields. Tourism has been unequivocally positioned within tourism studies as a tool to advance the achievement of sustainable development goals (SDG). Sustainability can be a policy or development goal for most types of tour­ ism activity, regardless of scale (Bramwell et al., 2017). Originally orientated from concerns about the negative impacts of tourism and influenced by the wider sustainability movement, sustainable tourism (ST) has been widely embraced by the academic community as a broad conceptualization that embraces environmen­ tal issues in conjunction with social, cultural, economic and political challenges since the 1990s (Bramwell et al., 2017) for their long-term coordinated develop­ ment of tourism industry with society, environment, economy, natural and cultural resources (Guo et al., 2019). ST has been linked with the preservation of ecosys­ tems and biodiversity, the promotion of human welfare and cultural equity, and public participation and access by all stakeholders in decision-making (Ruhanen et al., 2019). While meeting economic development needs, the negative impacts of tourism can often be reduced without compromising the natural and cultural resources on which tourism development depends (Guo et al., 2019).

220

The Future of Ethnic Tourism

With the increased interest in ST and the related evolving debates, rhetoric and evaluations, diverse sustainability frameworks and models have been proposed in tourism research and applied in various case studies in different regions (Scheyvens et al., 2021). Numerous policy initiatives and interventions in ST have been pro­ posed at different levels. Guo et al. (2019) pointed out that current ST policies still tend to be oriented primarily toward economic growth. They argued that the princi­ ples of SD cannot be transferred easily to tourism because the inherent dependence on capital and consumption in tourism makes it hard to meet the principles of SD (Guo et al., 2019). Scholars have discussed many obstacles to the implementation of ST policies and have suggested that successful implementation is less a technical issue, than dealing with the political, economic, social and cultural changes that are involved (Dodds & Butler, 2010). One of the biggest challenges is the determina­ tion of how to respond properly to constantly changing environmental, social and political conditions. Power and political issues are critical to sustainable tourism development (STD) (Scheyvens, 2011). Controversies over STD in many destina­ tions are affected by the complex power relationships among multiple stakeholders (Wesley & Pforr, 2010). Lack of communication between stakeholders often makes it more difficult to develop a unified policy and, thus, an SD network is needed to coordinate the interactions between multiple stakeholders with different objectives, interests and powers (Guo et al., 2019). A big gap has been found between ST policy development and implementation in the literature. Inconsistencies often also exist between the priorities of govern­ ments and the goals of ST policies in many destination tourism strategies (Yüksel et al., 2012). Geographical differences need to be considered in ST policies, includ­ ing models of regional economic development, institutional and policy environ­ ments, local social and cultural systems, and their associated power relationships (Bianchi, 2004). Sound policies and regulatory frameworks are essential to STD planning. Governmental management of ST requires a delicate balancing of poten­ tial conflicts of interest among stakeholders (Guo et al., 2019) through a process of continuous negotiation on power sharing through public and private partner­ ships (Bramwell, 2011; Dredge & Jamal, 2015). Developing trust and cooperation among stakeholders is key to successful tourism planning (Soulard et al., 2018). Twining-Ward and Butler (2002) asserted that ST development needs a compre­ hensive, systemic approach that can adapt to and accommodate complex, dynamic relationships. Wu et al. (2021) applied a Participatory Systems Mapping (PSM) method to analyze ST policy with stakeholders in Barcelona and revealed that shar­ ing best practices and peer-to-peer learning can promote inclusivity and empower stakeholders. Higgins-Desbiolles (2018) argued that tourism must be understood and managed with a wider context of sustainability than is usually the case. Many scholars have constructed a variety of ST indicator systems to guide or evaluate the development of ST policies at tourism destinations (Castellani & Sala, 2010). How­ ever, there is no consensus on what policies should be adopted, and who should be responsible for mitigating the negative impacts of tourism and the fairness of

The Future of Ethnic Tourism

221

ST policies (Miller, 2001). It is a challenge to incorporate ST into public policy for many countries, where existing policies are not well integrated, and internationally accepted recommendations for STD may not apply everywhere without modifica­ tion (Guo et al., 2019). In addition, the labor and employment issues that affect STD are rarely addressed in ST policies (Baum, 2018). A number of empirical studies have been undertaken on the interface between ethnic or indigenous peoples and ST (Carr et al., 2017; Mayuzumi, 2022; Sof­ ield, 1991, Zhuang et al., 2017). In an empirical study of ethnic communities in Southwest China, Yang and Wall (2014) asserted the preservation of authenticity and cultural integrity is fundamental to sustainable ethnic tourism, irrespective of the cultural context. Zhuang et al. (2017) addressed the social aspect of sustain­ able ethnic tourism through comparative case studies of two ethnic Hakka com­ munities in China and identified several factors contributing to socially sustainable ethnic tourism, including levels of community involvement, control of tourism products, the benefits accruing to ethnic communities, perceived inconveniences/ externalities and authenticity. The achievement of social sustainability will depend upon the greater involvement of destination communities in decision-making, management, business operations and benefit distribution (Zhuang et al., 2017). Mayuzumi (2022) examined the influences of tourism on Balinese sculptures and paintings through interviews and surveys with craftsmen and analyzed whether the UNWTO’s STD requirements were being met by ethnic tourism in Bali. His results revealed that many craftsmen involved in traditional crafts had lost their employment and, thus, sustainability has not been achieved from the perspective of maintaining the livelihoods of artisans. A special issue of the Journal of Sustainable Tourism (JOST) explored the inter­ relationships between STD and indigenous peoples, and highlighted the capacity of tourism to be an effective tool for achieving sustainable indigenous develop­ ment (Carr et al., 2016). This issue provided insights into the positive (capacity building) and negative (commodification) outcomes of indigenous development, as communities struggled against poverty or were empowered through indigenous tourism ventures (Carr et al., 2016). Seeking pathways to sustainable transitions in tourism, Boluk et al. (2019) stressed the importance of engaging with diverse and underrepresented worldviews, with attention to feminist and indigenous per­ spectives that present alternatives to the neoliberal economic growth model within which the SDGs are embedded. They highlighted the issues of power, justice and oppression, consideration of indigenous epistemologies and ontologies, as well as the significance of relationships and responsibilities to people and environ­ ment. In contrast, Pereiro (2016) argued that tourism is no longer a threat to indig­ enous peoples, due to the wider adoption of responsible approaches to tourism that enable sustainable development and empowerment. However, other scholars remained unconvinced that the SDGs provide a useful guiding framework for tour­ ism development, asserting that human–environment relations require fundamental rethinking and greater openness to alternative development trajectories if tourism

222

The Future of Ethnic Tourism

is to be sustainable (Hall, 2019). The SDG agenda has been criticized for fail­ ing to incorporate adequately culture in general, and the concerns and values of indigenous peoples in particular (Yap & Watene, 2019). Scheyvens et al. (2021) examined the SDGs from the perspective of small- to medium-sized indigenous tourism enterprises in case studies in Fiji, Australia and New Zealand. They found that the indigenous tourism enterprises operated in the spirit of many of the SDGs, although they had low awareness of these goals. The operators confirmed that their business practices largely align with SDG priorities, supporting sustainable social, environmental and economic outcomes. Their research also revealed that indig­ enous values and knowledge are central to sustainable business operations, while the SDGs support indigenous-led development aspirations. Certain indigenous val­ ues and lifeways, such as appreciation of the intrinsic connection between nature and culture, correspond with the SDG agenda, and could be used to advance the tourism agenda in ways that benefit indigenous enterprises and communities. These studies have revealed the tensions and power disadvantages that require greater attention in the SD of ethnic and indigenous tourism. Ethnic communities are emerging increasingly as new forces in developing ethnic tourism, with some ethnic villages organizing tours and creating tourism precincts independently. While governments have often assumed responsibility for facilitating the ST agenda, it is unclear how this can be best accomplished (Wang & Xu, 2014) or how the rights of ethnic groups can be taken into consideration in its implementation (Zhuang et al., 2017). Although community participation has become a mantra of ST advocates, in practice it is not often that involvement has moved beyond passive participation in many cases of ethnic tourism in remote regions of the world (Cole, 2006). The barriers to participation often include lack of knowledge, confidence, time, inter­ est, capital, skills and institutional support. In order to achieve the sociocultural dimensions of ST in the twenty-first century, it is necessary to examine further how empowerment through tourism can be fostered and the ST agenda needs to focus explicitly on how to bring this about (Cole, 2006). The empowerment of communities has been discussed extensively in the tourism literature (Scheyvens, 2003; Sofield, 2003). For instance, Scheyvens (2003) created a framework around four dimensions of empowerment: economic, psychological, social and political. Although community participation has become a widely accepted criterion of ST, many scholars have pointed out that active community participation and empower­ ment are hard to achieve in practice for reasons such as lack of ownership, capital, skills, knowledge and resources (Cole, 2006; Scheyvens, 2003). In summary, these studies shed light on the conceptualization, application and evaluation of ST, which has become an important policy framework to guide tour­ ism planning and development at a variety of scales. The growth of tourism has enabled it to be an effective tool for many countries to achieve economic growth and corresponding socio-economic developments. The meaning of ST has been enriched, from the initial focus on environmental issues to a broader emphasis on a more balanced and synergistic development of society, environment and economy

The Future of Ethnic Tourism

223

(Torres-Delgado & López Palomeque, 2012). However, while environmental issues have remained a central theme of ST, the sociocultural issues are still often over­ shadowed or marginalized (Cole, 2006) for it introduces issues that are difficult to assess and manage. In addition, insufficient attention has been paid to date to how the SDGs can best inform local priorities and tourism agendas, and how different perspectives and voices are represented in the achievement of the goals (Scheyvens et al., 2021). It has been suggested that the goals do not sufficiently consider indig­ enous worldviews and priorities. Gap in understanding exists between international intentions and local practice, which lead to the marginalization of indigenous peo­ ple and their preferred development strategies (Meo-Sewabu & Walsh-Tapiata, 2012). In the Pacific Islands, although tourism is very important to the region, its development impacts are “muted” (Cheer et al., 2018). Similarly in New Zealand (Amoamo et al., 2018), Australia (Akbar & Higgins-Desbiolles, 2018) and China (Yang & Wall, 2014), concerns have long been raised that while the tourism indus­ try draws heavily on the cultural representations of ethnic people, it has often failed to deliver desired development benefits to indigenous communities in destination areas. It is important, then, to examine whether tourism initiatives in ethnic places address and are aligned with local perspectives and values. While much has been written about how tourism can contribute to the achieve­ ment of the SDGs, insufficient attention has been given to local priorities and the identification of more sustainable tourism development trajectories based on the transformation of human–environment relationships. Thus, more research is needed to ascertain how the SDGs can be achieved while embracing the priorities and aspirations of ethnic people which themselves may be varied. While stakehold­ ers are often mentioned as being important, few tourism studies have identified in detail how to identify, participate and collaborate with different stakeholders. Fur­ ther research is needed to address gaps in the understanding of complex stakeholder relationships (Saito & Ruhanen, 2017) to find practical ways to help stakeholders to cooperate and participate more effectively in the development and implementa­ tion of ST policies (Koens et al., 2021). In addition, few ST studies span more than one region or multiple cultures, and more investigation is required into social and cultural issues, and the development of methods and tools to support the translation of SDGs into policy and practice in ethnic tourism. 6.4

Looking Ahead

The future of ethnic tourism is uncertain. This is because it is complex and influ­ enced by a multitude of factors. In fact, there are likely to be many futures that vary from place to place, depending upon the positions that minority people take or in which they find themselves, as expressed in the range of circumstances presented earlier in this concluding chapter. The birth rates of minority people throughout the world are higher than those of the majority population and, although their death rates also tend to be higher,

224

The Future of Ethnic Tourism

the number of minority people is growing. The number of international migrants, both voluntary and forced, has also increased, as has the number of inter-ethnic marriages. Thus, the number and proportion of those living as part of a minority are likely to grow. At the same time, many people leave their communities of origin to live else­ where. There are frequent pressures to conform to the ways of life of the major­ ity. Thus, many minority cultures are threatened, and languages and traditions are being lost. In response, many efforts are being made to protect, invigorate and even recreate threatened cultural expressions. The very risk of loss, distinctiveness and rarity may result in enhanced interest and curiosity, among both the bearers of minority cultures and those who wish to engage with them. Many minority peoples are still striving to escape from the shackles of colonial­ ism and the extent with which they are able to do this will influence their power and willingness to share aspects of their culture with others. Tourism, too, has its challenges. Given the energy consumed and the green­ house gases generated, it is reasonable to question if international tourism can ever be sustainable. Greenhouse gases are modifying the climates and environments that have sustained indigenous and aboriginal peoples for generations. Such peo­ ples and their cultures have been closely linked to the land. As this book is being written, tourism has been dislocated by a global pandemic and there is great uncer­ tainty regarding the speed of recovery and the need for new forms of leisure travel. At the same time, minority peoples, many of whose populations were decimated by the sicknesses introduced by colonial incursions, have had to bear more than their fair share of health challenges, which is not good for their communities nor for tourism. There is much to disentangle! The pace of market change and the innovations and variations offered by des­ tinations demonstrate an economic and sociocultural reality that is more dynamic than the concepts and theories used to represent ethnic tourism phenomena. The field of ethnic tourism studies is constrained by concepts and research focused on specific cases and lacks sufficient recognition of processes at the larger societal and global levels. In particular, more attention could be given to globalization issues, the mobility of minority populations and the possible realignment of ethnic rela­ tions through tourism development. Gaps remain in understanding cultural evolu­ tion, power relationships, sociocultural changes, the spatiotemporal transformation of ethnicity, and tensions between tourism and other development initiatives. Future studies should examine these underdeveloped themes and emerging issues. Stronger links are required between ethnic tourism studies and planning research and practice in order to address adverse effects and to develop better processes for community engagement (Yang & Wall, 2014). Future investigations should respond to the globalized tourism market, the new dynamics of ethnic relations and the changing ethnic composition of societies. More interdisciplinary endeavors and new methodological approaches will be needed to explore these new research avenues.

The Future of Ethnic Tourism

6.5

225

Conclusion

The explosion of interest in tourism as a strategy for promoting socio-economic development and as a funding source for conserving ethnicity, cultural diversity and environments has presented important opportunities for ethnic communities, many of which have limited other development options. Ethnic tourism introduces many enticing opportunities for change and advancement. The numerous impacts of tour­ ism on ethnic communities are well documented and discussed extensively in the literature. Ethnic tourism development has faced many development challenges in a diversity of cultural contexts. Each ethnic group’s circumstance is culturally laden, reflecting their own attributes, and influenced by their political and social histories, which have often involved colonialism. Thus, there is no “one fix” and no easy solu­ tions for many of the negative circumstances that many ethnic communities face. Long-term success is not guaranteed for ethnic tourism nor for the minority peoples that engage with it. However, the obstacles to success are not insurmountable. Under­ standing the impacts, potentials and possibilities of ethnic tourism development is essential for the creation of mechanisms that will facilitate the involvement of all stakeholders’ involvement in tourism planning and development, leading to the man­ agement and mitigation of challenges, and a more equitable distribution of benefits. This book has provided readers with an overview, summary and examples of various aspects of ethnic tourism, thereby contributing to the theoretical and meth­ odological understanding of ethnic tourism development. It has examined ethnic tourism scholarship critically and has explored emerging themes, concepts and issues within the ethnic tourism context. It has coupled detailed analysis of the conceptual underpinnings of ethnic tourism and narrative depictions of empirical research in various ethnic destinations worldwide. It has highlighted the complex­ ity of using ethnic tourism as a tool for regional/local sustainable development and the enhancement of ethnic well-being. Questions, findings, issues and debates associated with the product devel­ opment, planning, management and marketing of ethnic tourism in a variety of locations and cultural contexts have been offered. Chapter 1 provides the broad intellectual context and theoretical background through which our approach to eth­ nic tourism can be understood. Chapters 2–5 detail the views and positions of four main stakeholders in ethnic tourism: tourists, ethnic communities, tourism entre­ preneurs and governments and address the challenges and issues faced by each of these stakeholder groups. Chapter 6 examines the evolving relationship between ethnic tourism and the concepts and practices of sustainable tourism. Such knowl­ edge is required if ethnic communities, businesses and products are to flourish in ways that will also sustain cultural and natural resources. Both tourism academics and practitioners should benefit from a nuanced understanding of ethnic cultural experiences, histories, politics, values and traditions in tourism. Insights have been provided into the consequences and nuances of tourism development for ethnic communities, many of which struggle with poverty, in the

226

The Future of Ethnic Tourism

hope and expectation that tourism ventures can contribute to the creation of sus­ tainable livelihoods and empower communities that are willing and enable to share aspects of their culture with visitors. References Akbar, S., & Higgins-Desbiolles, F. (2018). Critical perspectives on aboriginal and Tor­ res Strait islander tourism: Towards indigenous-led approaches. In Karavatzis, M., Gio­ vanardi, M., & Lichrou, M. (Eds.). Inclusive Place Branding: Critical Perspectives on Theory and Practice (pp. 46–59). London: Routledge. Amoamo, M., Ruckstuhl, K., & Ruwhiu, D. (2018). Balancing indigenous values through diverse economies: A case study of Māori ecotourism. Tourism Planning & Develop­ ment, 15(5), 478–495. Baum, T. (2018). Sustainable human resource management as a driver in tourism policy and planning: A serious sin of omission? Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 26(6), 873–889. Bianchi, R.V. (2004). Tourism Restructuring and the Politics of Sustainability: A Critical View From the European Periphery (The Canary Islands). Journal of Sustainable Tour­ ism, 12(6), 495–529. Boluk, K.A., Cavaliere, C.T., & Higgins-Desbiolles, F. (2019). A critical framework for interrogating the United Nations sustainable development goals 2030 agenda in tourism. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 27(7), 847–864. Bramwell, B. (2011). Governance, the state and sustainable tourism: A political economy approach. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 19(4/5), 459–477. https://doi.org/10.1080/09 669582.2011.576765 Bramwell, B., Higham, J., Lane, B., & Miller, G. (2017). Twenty-five years of sustainable tourism and the journal of sustainable tourism: Looking back and moving forward. Jour­ nal of Sustainable Tourism, 25(1), 1–9. Carr, A., Ruhanen, L., & Whitford, M. (2016). Indigenous peoples and tourism: The chal­ lenges and opportunities for sustainable tourism. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 24(8–9), 1067–1079. https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2016.1206112 Carr, A., Ruhanen, L., Whitford, M., & Lane, B. (2017). Sustainable Tourism and Indig­ enous Peoples. London: Routledge. Castellani, V., & Sala, S. (2010). Sustainable performance index for tourism policy develop­ ment. Tourism Management, 31, 871–880. Cheer, J.M., Pratt, S., Tolkach, D., Bailey, A., Taumoepeau, S., & Moyono, A. (2018). Tour­ ism in Pacific Island Countries: A Status Quo Round-up. Canberra: Australian National University. Cole, S. (2006). Information and empowerment: The keys to achieving sustainable develop­ ment. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 14(6), 629–644. Dodds, R., & Butler, R. (2010). Barriers to implementing sustainable tourism policy in mass tourism destinations. Tourismos, 5, 35–53. Dredge, D., & Jamal, T. (2015). Progress in tourism planning and policy: Apost-structural per­ spective on knowledge production. Tourism Management, 51, 285–297. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.tourman.2015.06.002. Ellis, C., Lassiter, L.E., & Dunham, G.H. (Eds.). (2005). Powwow. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press. Guo, Y., Jiang, J., & Li, S. (2019). A sustainable tourism policy research review. Sustain­ ability, 11(11), 3187. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11113187.

The Future of Ethnic Tourism

227

Hall, C.M. (2019). Constructing sustainable tourism development: The 2030 agenda and the managerial ecology of sustainable tourism. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 27(7), 1044–1060. Higgins-Desbiolles, F. (2018). Sustainable tourism: Sustaining tourism or something more? Tourism Management Perspectives, 25, 157–160. Johnston, A.M. (2013). Is the Sacred for Sale: Tourism and Indigenous Peoples. London: Earthscan. King, T. (2020). Indians on Vacation. Toronto: HarperCollins. Koens, K., Smit, B., & Melissen, F. (2021). Designing destinations for good: Using design roadmapping to support pro-active destination development. Annals of Tourism Research, 89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2021.103233. Mayuzumi, Y. (2022). Is meeting the needs of tourists through ethnic tourism sustainable? Focus on Bali, Indonesia. Asia-Pacific Journal of Regional Science, 6(1), 423–451. Meo-Sewabu, L., &Walsh-Tapiata, W. (2012). Global declaration and village discourses: Social policy and indigenous wellbeing. AlterNative: An International Journal of Indig­ enous Peoples, 8(3), 305–317. Miller, G. (2001). The development of indicators for sustainable tourism: Results of a Delphi survey of tourism researchers. Tourism Management, 22(4), 351–362. Mowforth, M., & Munt, I. (2003). Tourism and Sustainability: Development, Globalisation and New Tourism in the Third World. London: Routledge. Pereiro, X. (2016). A review of indigenous tourism in Latin America: Reflections on an anthropological study of Guna tourism (Panama). Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 24(8–9), 1121–1138. Ruhanen, L., Moyle, C.L., & Moyle, B. (2019). New directions in sustainable tourism research. Tourism Review, 74(2), 138–149. Saito, H., & Ruhanen, L. (2017). Power in tourism stakeholder collaborations: Power types and power holders. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, 31, 189–196. https://doi.org/10.1177/13563890022209415. Scheyvens, R. (2003). Tourism for Development, Empowering Communities. Hoboken, NJ: Prentice Hall. Scheyvens, R. (2011). The challenge of sustainable tourism development in the Maldives: Understanding the social and political dimensions of sustainability. Asia Pacific View­ point, 52(2), 148–164. Scheyvens, R., Carr, A., Movono, A., Hughes, E., Higgins-Desbiolles, F., & Mika, J.P. (2021). Indigenous tourism and the sustainable development goals. Annals of Tourism Research, 90, 103260. Sofield, T.H. (1991). Sustainable ethnic tourism in the South Pacific: Some principles. Jour­ nal of Tourism Studies, 2(1), 56–72. Sofield, T.H. (2003). Empowerment for Sustainable Tourism Development. Oxford: Pergamon. Soulard, J., Knollenberg, W., Boley, B.B., Perdue, R.R., & McGehee, N.G. (2018). Social capital and destination strategic planning. Tourism Management, 69, 189–200. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2018.06.011. Tabani, M. (2010). The carnival of custom: Land dives, millenarian parades and other spec­ tacular ritualizations in Vanuatu. Oceania, 80(3), 309–329. Torres-Delgado, A., & López Palomeque, F. (2012). The growth and spread of the concept of sustainable tourism: The contribution of institutional initiatives to tourism policy. Tour­ ism Management Perspectives, 4, 1–10.

228

The Future of Ethnic Tourism

Twining-Ward, L., & Butler, R.W. (2002). Implementing STD on a small island: Develop­ ment and use of sustainable development indicators in Samoa. Journal of Sustainable Development, 10(5), 363–387. Van den Berghe, P. (1994). The Quest for the Other: Ethnic Tourism in San Cristobal, Mex­ ico. Seattle, WA: University of Washington Press. Wang, C., & Xu, H. (2014). The role of local government and the private sector in Chi­ na’s tourism industry. Tourism Management, 45(12), 95–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. tourman.2014.03.008 Wesley, A., & Pforr, C. (2010). The governance of coastal tourism: Unravelling the layers of complexity at Smiths Beach, Western Australia. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 18(6), 773–792. Wu, J.S., Barbrook-Johnson, P., & Font, X. (2021). Participatory complexity in tourism policy: Understanding sustainability programmes with participatory systems mapping. Annals of Tourism Research, 90, 103269. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2021.103269 Xie, P.F. (2011). Authenticating Ethnic Tourism. Bristol: Channel View Press. Yang, L., & Wall, G. (2014). Planning for Ethnic Tourism. Surrey: Ashgate Publishing Company. Yap, M., & Watene, K. (2019). The sustainable development goals (SDGs) and indigenous peoples: Another missed opportunity? Journal of Human Development and Capabilities, 20(4), 451–467. Yüksel, A., Yüksel, F., & Culha, O. (2012). Ministers’ statements: A policy implementation instrument for sustainable tourism? Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 20(4), 513–532. Zhuang, L., Taylor, T., Beirman, D., & Darcy, S. (2017). Socially sustainable ethnic tourism: A comparative study of two Hakka communities in China. Tourism Recreation Research, 42(4), 467–483. https://doi.org/10.1080/02508281.2017.1338817.

INDEX

action research 201–207 advertising 164–165 assimilation 12 attractions 8, 129, 215; festivals and events 63; gaming 122; performances 8, 11; spectacle 10; hyperreality 23 Australia 60–61 authenticity 10, 20–31, 70, 72, 73, 77, 85, 99 B&B 162 Canada 115–119 capacity building 206 China 19, 62, 64–80, 100–101, 103–108, 153–156, 184–189; Sichuan 65; Xinjiang 186–189; Yunnan 64, 76, 103, 152 collaborative planning 36–37; partnership 6, 25 co-management 197–199 commodification 10–12, 16, 20, 28–31 decision making 216 definitions and terminology 2, 7 development 6, 13, 16, 72, 82, 184, 192; economic development 98 diaspora 88–89 displacement 215 economic benefits 16, 99, 126 empowerment 13, 151, 206; power 37–38

entrepreneurship 16, 141–166; entry barriers 143; small and micro enterprises 147, 158–159 ethnic communities 97–130; community benefits 9, 97; community costs 9; community involvement 66; enclaves 2–8; ethnic boundaries 19; ethnic markers 17; perceptions and attitudes 10, 101 ethnicity 14–19; reconstructed ethnicity 17 ethnic tourism futures 214–226 etic perspective 14 Fiji 110–115 front and back regions 21, 68 gender 13, 69–70, 99, 120, 151, 156–164 gentrification 13 Ghana 192–197 government 10, 12, 18, 73, 107, 146, 178–208 host-guest relationships 9, 13, 16, 24, 125 identity 7, 12–18, 67, 73, 100, 120; Mosuo identity 67 image 10, 99; representations 8 impacts 12, 13, 98, 107, 121, 217; environmental 13; social 10, 13, 100 indigenous tourism 115–120 Indonesia 10, 17

230

Index

leadership 129

local involvement 24, 37; benefits 216;

local attitudes 72, 103

Maori 80–88

marketing 18, 67, 164–165

neocolonialism 10

New Zealand 80–88

Palestine 89

planning and management 6, 34, 38, 153,

178, 190, 192

postcolonial 11

poverty 103

poverty reduction 13, 105

pro-poor tourism 103–105

quality of life 102, 110–115 real estate development 75

reservations 120

social capital 162

social costs 97, 102

South Africa 161–164

souvenirs 63, 69

stakeholders 6, 13, 14, 31–39, 190;

stakeholder theory 31–34

stereotype 18, 100

sustainable tourism 219; sustainable

livelihoods 126–129 Taiwan 63, 126–129, 200–205

Thailand 156–160; Akha minority

156

theme parks 17, 153–156; folk villages

153

tour guides 69, 74

tourist demand 58

tourists 58–90; activities 76; experiences

10, 58; motivations 10, 34, 61, 63,

76; perceptions 62, 84; satisfaction

63, 75; serious ethnic tourists

78; visitor profiles/segments 58,

60–64

trust 205

United States 17, 19–126, 34

urban tourism 3, 8, 156

Vietnam 190–192