Beyond Greening - Tourism Watch

Beyond Greening: Reflections on Tourism in the Rio-Process | PositioningpaperIncreasing territorial imbalanceAdded to this process of usurpation and disintegration is the increasing territorial imbalance,through the strengthening of tourism under the domain of large companies over alternativemeans of production. One of the main factors causing this imbalance is a budgetary policywhich, through investment in infrastructures and services, training, fiscal incentives, etc.,concentrates public resources on territories under a specific model, while ignoring the needsof peasant and fishing family economies. The end result is that some areas are favoured overothers which are progressively marginalised or transformed and part of their populationsmoved elsewhere.The progressive consequence of territorial imbalances of this kind is the increase of populationmovements from impoverished agricultural areas to new centres of tourist development. Thisis particularly acute in construction work for tourist infrastructure. It is the case, for example,of the Nicaraguans in Guanacaste (Costa Rica), Haitians in Punta Cana/Bávaro (DominicanRepublic) and Central Americans and Chiapanecos in Cancún and Riviera Maya (Mexico). Asecond phase also focuses on low-skilled and poorly paid jobs in tourism-based services(cleaning, cooking, security, gardening, entertainment, etc.) and in the economies generatedin these new urban centres associated with tourism. It is the impoverishment of largeagricultural areas that allows the tourist industry to avail itself of abundant manpower that itcan keep in precarious conditions. Dynamics of this kind end up affecting generationalrenewal and fostering processes of "depeasantisation".Diversification of rural livelihoodsIn this context, any action that might be taken with regard to tourism in rural areas from aposition that is favourable to food sovereignty could involve two forms of intervention. Onthe one hand, tourism models that for different reasons pose a threat to the economies ofpeasant farmers and fishing communities, and therefore limit their possibilities fordevelopment, would need to be addressed. On the other hand, it would also be necessary topromote a form of tourism in which peasant families and fishing communities play a leadingand controlling role, and which is integrated into a strategy of diversification, complementingtheir sources of income.Up to now, this first dimension of the relationship between tourism and food sovereignty hasbeen assumed with greater ease by social organisations and movements of an alternativenature. However, it has been difficult to draw the other perspective into debates about foodsovereignty. The fundamental question, therefore, would be what can be contributed by amodel of tourism that is controlled and developed by the rural populations themselves,through the various forms of collective organisation, in the defence of food sovereignty.Tourism that is managed and controlled by peasant and fishing families may be a way ofincreasing and diversifying their income, generating rural employment, capitalising on thecountryside, reappraising peasant culture in a broad sense and stimulating development intheir own territories. All this may help to consolidate a living rural environment with aproductive rural population that is rooted in its territories. It is not designed as a method toreplace traditional farming activities, but rather as a way of complementing them. Viewedfrom this perspective, tourism would generate a certain perception of potential improvement,which would be particularly relevant for younger generations and would discourage themfrom emigrating.Furthermore, the experiential and respectful rapprochement of urban populations in thecountryside through initiatives of this type helps to stimulate a broad cultural movement thatfinds value in rural areas and peasant culture. This type of tourism acts as a bridge, as a40