Linking Culture and the Environment

272 Tourism and Indigenous Peoples
ability, giving weight to the postcolonial and post-structural reflections of
Aitchison (2001) who portrays tourism as an instrument of gender and cultural
‘Othering’ laden with issues of power, representation and hybridity: ‘They get
shame you know, with the tourists and some of them don’t understand, you
know, those hard languages like German and like that. [I]t’s strange for some
people who didn’t grow up or get mixed up with white people’.
The operational fragility of Gunya Titjikala was exacerbated by a clear
lack of communication between partners which was creating community
concerns over financial equity, similar to that uncovered by Dyer et al. (2003)
at Tjapukai Aboriginal Cultural Park, and more broadly, all community-private
sector pro-poor partnerships as reported by Ashley and Roe (2003). In
spite of such fragility, key individuals within the community were optimistic
about the future course of the enterprise and the community overwhelmingly
supported the 50–50 joint venture partnership. However, the need to
cautiously increase the roles and responsibilities of the community within
the venture was also emphasized by many in the community.
Decisions at Gunya Titjikala are made through the joint management
committee consisting of an equal number of representatives from both Gunya
Tourism and the Titjikala community. Key decisions made by the committee
that were deemed crucial to the current success of the enterprise, as identified
by the majority of community research participants, were ‘no work, no
pay’ and ‘don’t criticise tourists’. Both apply to every community member,
group or association. The former implies monetary equality and consistency,
while the latter was in reference to offensive tourist behaviour and the need
to maintain community image.
Most community members, when asked if they had any suggestions for
improving the enterprise, either had trouble articulating it or could not identify
anything pertinent. However, several community interviewees provided
impassioned responses, such as ‘we gotta be in front, not the white man’ and
‘we gotta take it seriously, put it in your heart’. All of the suggestions gleaned
from the community interviews are listed below:
1. Community must be ‘in the lead’.
2. Operated in the ‘Aboriginal way’.
3. Improve basic community facilities and resources.
4. Full-time work should be made available.
5. No ‘grog’ during tourist visitation.
6. Improve method of payment.
7. Social events held to award involvement and contribution.
8. Continual encouragement and support for the younger generation, leaders/
mentors and greater community.
9. A Titjikala Interpretation Centre (Trau, 2006).
Looking into the future, most in the community were quietly optimistic, and
several community leaders and elders voiced their heartening and powerful
visions. From larger and more consistent tourist groups and additional tourist
safari tents to an empowered younger generation with majority community
ownership and control, the aspirations of these ‘champions’ within the