Constructing partnerships for sustainable tourism planning in protected areas
-
Upload
maria-glady -
Category
Travel
-
view
442 -
download
5
Transcript of Constructing partnerships for sustainable tourism planning in protected areas
COLLABORATION
THEORY AND TOURISM
PRACTICE IN
PROTECTED AREASStakeholders, Structuring and Sustainability
Outline of Presentation
Discuss the … ➢ 3 Important Aspects for Sustainability
○ Complexity○ Scale, structure and scope of collaborations○ Challenges of implementation and long term structuring
★ Questions to answer:○ How does the tourism system fit with the protected area system?○ Who represents “Nature” in negotiations over conservation and
use? ○ How can plans and programmes be effectively enacted at the local
level for long term success?
Introduction
What is Collaboration?
“Collaboration provides for a flexible and dynamic process
that evolves over time, enabling multiple stakeholders to jointly
address problems or issues” (Grey, 1989)
“The Law defines protected areas as the identified portions of land/or water set aside by reason of their unique physical and biological significance managed to enhance biological diversity and protected against destructive human exploration.”
- Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Sustainable Tourism
“ is envisage as leading to management of all resource in such a way that economic, social, and aesthetic needs can be fulfilled while maintaining cultural integrity, essential ecological processes,biological diversity and life support systems” (World Tourism Organization, 1997)
Complex planning Domain
- comprise of multiple stakeholders - no individual
stakeholder can fully control planning
- planning challenge increases
● Challenge of sustainable management:
- international tourism destination deal with local impacts
as well as the actions and pressures exerted elsewhere
Complex Adaptive Systems
Management requires consideration of spatial and temporal factors, as well as of the decision-making
dynamics.
Important Sustainability Issues
(1) Most destination tourist organizations tend to focus on marketing
and promotion
(2) Global visitation increase: while new parks and protected areas are
being dveloped, decreasing tax-based budget are requiring ne
management shirts (Eagles, 2007)
(3) Gap in information flow with resulting difficulties in destination
development
(4) lack of awareness and differing ideologies act as barriers to
effective communicatin between tourism agencies and natural
resouorce management
(5) Problem lies in organization and policy barriers to effective public
input, civic education and community debate on sustainability
choice
1999 Plan of Management
(1) Recognition of Bininj/Mungguy interess
(2) Caring for country
(3) Tourism
(4) Telling people about the park
Stakeholders
•The actors with an interest or stake in a common problem or issue
and include all individuals, groups, or organizations “directly influenced
by the actions others take to solve a problem” (Gray, 1989, p.5)
•Public sector, private sector, NGO, scientists, consultants, tourism
industry, local residents and indigenous dwellers, tourists
DENR Administrative Order No. 2013-
19
Guidelines on Ecotourism Planning and Management in Protected
Areas:
•Protected Area Superintendent (PASU) shall initiate the preparation
of the Ecotourism Management Plan and shall involve concerned
stakeholders such as, but not limited to, LGUs, other agencies concerned
(eg. DOT, NEDA), local communities including women’s groups,
indigenous cultural communities, and the private sectors (eg. tour
operators, investors)
Collaboration
•“a process of joint decision making among key stakeholders of a
problem domain about the future of that domain” (Gray, 1989, p.227)
•Problem domain: a situation where the problems are complex and
require inter- or multiorganizational response (Trist, 1983)
Interorganizational Collaboration
5 key characteristics:
•The stakeholders are interdependent
•Solutions emerge by dealing constructively with differences
•Joint ownership of decisions is involved
•The stakeholders assume collective responsibility for ongoing direction
of the domain
•Collaboration is an emergent process by which organizations
collectively deal with growing environmental complexity
Three-Phase Collaboration Framework
1.Problem Setting
2.Direction Setting
3.Implementing/ Institutionalizing
Stakeholder Analysis
•a process of systematically gathering and analyzing qualitative
information to determine whose interests should be taken into
account when developing and/or implementing a policy or program
•You can do all the right things for a project, but mismanaging a
stakeholder who has power, influence and interest can cause failure of
the project
Stakeholders become salient to an organization’s managers when three attributes are perceived:
•The stakeholder’s power to influence the firm (power alone is
insufficient)
•The legitimacy of the stakeholder’s relationship to the firm (legitimacy
is linked to authority)
•The urgency of the stakeholder’s claim on the firm (urgency is
required for execution)
Protected Areas Research
Two Aspects that merit greater attention:
•Representation of nature
•The challenges of implementation esp. in long term
structuring and outcomes of collaborations involving local
communities and residents in/around the protected area
Proximity
•Expanded stakeholder identification and salience model
developed by Mitchell et al. (1997)
•Fourth stakeholder attribute
•Natural environment: the primary and primordial
stakeholder of the firm
Environment
•Natural environment is itself a stakeholder as might be
currently on-living future generations (Starik, 1994, p.94)
Stakeholder Theory of Collaboration
•A stakeholder theory of collaboration in protected area
destinations should, therefore, integrate the relationship
between public/private sector organization, the natural
area destination (the biophysical world within the
protected area) and those who inhabit it, as well as others
who have a stake in it
Stakeholder Theory of Collaboration
•Collaboration in protected areas is relevant in ensuring just
and equitable participation of those most disadvantaged or
least capable of receiving fair treatment in the
collaborations and its outcomes
Overlooked Questions
•Who represents “nature” at a conflict negotiation or planning
process in natural area destinations (or, more speifically, in
protected areas)?
•What roles do local and indigenous knowledge and human-
environmental relations (of local, indigenous, and other groups
such as visitors) play in collaborative initiatives addressing
conservation and use issues?
Three Types of Knowledge
•Scientific knowledge
•Indigenous knowledge or Traditional Knowledge
•Local Knowledge
Stakeholders and Representation of Nature
•An important stakeholder group in protected area
destinations is the local residents who live within it and
depend on it for their well being
•Effective ecotourism depends on the vision, dedication and
leadership of key individuals
Community
•Community as a stakeholder is a heterogeneous concept where
different individuals and groups play different roles and wield varying
degrees of power
•Biologists, social scientists or park managers represent conservation
interests using scientific knowledge but locals represent their interest
and relationship to the biophysical world and nature which cannot be
substituted by scientists and NGOs
Local Participation
•Through training assistance, local community is able to take
control and successfully manage projects for long-term
social and ecological sustainability
•Teaching should work within a context of respecting local
leaders, local processes for making decisions, local
institutions and local knowledge
Any effort to work within local approaches will take
considerably longer than standard western business
practices and the implementation of collaborative
initiatives in protected area destinations has to consider
not only necessary resources but also a long-term time
horizon for success
Collaborations
- Planning scales and organizational levels
- local, regional, national or international level initiatives
For example: Local or area-based initiatives
Partnership Structures
•Vary greatly depending on the purpose and scope of the
collaboration
•Formally instantiated and structured
–Co-management agreements
•To enable joint control or full local ownership
Four Kinds of Bridging Organization
1.Inter-organizational Network
2.Association of Organizations and Networks
3.Intersectoral Partnership
4.Social Movement and Related Coalition
Collaboration’s Scope
•Issues and topics in protected area destinations
–Conservation
–Use
–Economic development
–Poverty alleviation
–Cultural protection
–Heritage management
–Tourism and growth conflicts
Community Level Collaborations
3 main categories:
– Community Managed
–Private Sector/ Government/ NGO
–Joint Venture
Community Based Partnerships
2 important factors:
1. Ensuring long term sustainability of tourism and
natural resources
2. Community or local/indigenous ownership, control
and management of tourism enterprises and
activities
Community-based ecotourism is a potentially good for connecting the business of tourism with goals forsustainable development and long term conservation.
Implementation and Institutionalization as a Weakness
•Why is it a weakness?
•Informal structure
•Issues
Collaboration
•Spatial
–Both within and outside the collaborative space of
gathering.
•Temporal
–Involve short, medium, or long term collaboration.
Parks and the Tourism Industry
•Resulted to new form of partnerships and use agreement
•Effective environmental stewardship.
Chalalan
•First community-owned and operated ecotourism project in
Bolivia.
•Began with a partnership local community of San Jose de
Uchupiamonas, and two international stakeholders,
Conservation International and the Inter-American Development
Bank.
Chalalan’s Objectives
•Generate material benefits for people
•Conserve biodiversity in Madidi National Park located in North
Bolivia.
•The collaboration focuses on Bolivia’s Madidi National Park.
Madidi National Park
•The region as a conservation priority.
•Culturally, ethnically, and linguistically diverse.
•Tourists are drawn to the wild life, forested landscapes, and
mountain vistas.
San Jose de Uchupiamonas
•Primarily hunting and fishing.
•Tourism as an alternate to logging.
•The region partnered with a tour company based in La Paz.
•Two bunkhouses that could accommodate backpackers.
Ecotourism
•Making conservation economically and socially beneficial to
local communities.
•Create a national park in Madidi that would contain both San
Jose and the patch of forest where the local leaders had
envisioned building their tourism business.
Madidi
•One of the most ecologically diverse regions in the world.
•Recommended the government to create a protected area in
the region for conservation and ecotourism.
Vision
•Improve the bunkhouses.
•Make ecotourism work for the integrated goals of community
development and biodiversity conservation.
•Train locals to manage the new national park.
Implementation
•Conservation International become the principal stakeholder.
•Trust issues between partners.
Social Reinvestment
•Profit goes to development of education, health, agriculture,
recreation, legal representation and other miscellaneous needs.
> Parks, reserves, wildlife
sanctuaries, marine protected areas
> Human occupation or exploitation of
resources are limited : BIODIVERSITY
CONSERVATION is the key significance!
> International Union for
Conservation of Nature:
categorization guidelines; protection
1. Important Bird Areas
2. Endemic Bird Areas
3. Centres of Plant Diversity
4. Indigenous and Community Conservation Areas
4. Alliance for Zero Extinction
5. Key Biodiversity Areas
Protected areas
The objective of conserving
biodiversity and providing an
indicator for that
conservation’s progress.
The extent by which resources
are defended are more complex.
IUCN Protected Area Management
Categories:
Category Ia — Strict Nature Reserve
Category Ib — Wilderness Area
Category II — National Park
Category III — Natural Monument or Feature
Category IV — Habitat/Species Management Area
Category V — Protected Landscape/Seascape
Category VI – Protected Area with sustainable use of natural resources
Constructing partnerships for
protected area tourism
planning in an era of change
and messiness
by Stephen F. McCool
Objectives:
1.Describe the messy context of
protected area tourism planning.
2.The significance of establishing
protected area tourism planning
partnerships; and alternative
paradigms of planning.
3. Key attributes of protected
area tourism planning partnerships
4. Conclusion and recommendations
I. Expert Driven Planning Processes
Rational-Comprehensive Model : or Synoptic
Planning; a dominant theory in modern planning
process. All possible options or approaches to
solving the problem under study are identified
and the costs and benefits of each option are
assessed and compared with each other.
: seeks to provide “neutral” experts using
scientific data, and a systematic reproducible
process for identifying future and the pathways
to them.
Six Phases of Rational-Comprehensive
Tourism Planning
It is often very costly in terms of time and other resources that must be
devoted to gathering the relevant information. The costs might exceed
the benefits of an improved decision-making.
(1) Identify problem and articulate goals
(2) Survey conditions and make predictions
(3) Design alternative plans
(4) Compare and evaluate alternative plans
(5) Adopt one plan and implement it
(6) Monitor current trend and evaluate outcome of plan
Rational Comprehensive Model:
Decision-Making Process
1. Proven to be ineffective and very costly
2. Tends to favor the scientific elite and
ignores traditional and local knowledge and
experiences.
3. Ignores other possible aspects of planning
such as the external and internal environment
4. Does not involve informal partnerships
established by public protected areas agencies
Value Judgments
(suggested by McCool)
What should be the goals of tourism
development?
What market segments should be attracted?
What standards of impact will be acceptable?
Whose (among the public values) are
privileged?
(Krumpe and McCool, 1998)
Protected
Area
Tourism
Planning
Protection of
key values
that form
basis for
preservation
Allowing
visitors
access to
these
values
Cultural and natural heritage,
outstanding scenery, biodiversity,
Tangible culture, authenticity,
Uniqueness, etc.
Carrying capacity
Extent of visitor’s exposure to area
Infrastructures
Rate and degree of development
There are trade-offs between preservation of
key values and visitor access.
Challenges at the intersection of
competing goals and cultures
> Professional cultures and managers
> paradigms of management
> Function of the kind of area established
: Planning should be directed towards
compromising on one goal to achieve
another.(Cole, 1995; MocCool and Cole, 1998)
Resolving conflicts so as to sustain key values
while promoting sustainable development.
CONFLICTING GOALS
Partnerships have partly shared and partly conflicting goals.
(Preserving heritage vs. providing access)
Conflicting goals form the core of constructing sustainable tourism
policies and actions.
Sustainable tourism has several contested meanings but share a
characteristic of complex trade-offs. Ex. Giving up present income for
future income.
Challenging issues may mean moving forward beyond simplistic
missives such as “thinking green,” or “ buy locally.”
THREE LARGE SCALE FORCES
1. Rapid growth and development in
international travel in the last decade of the
20th century and through the year 2020
(UNWTO,2001) have raised the stakes for
decisions about tourism planning in protected
areas.
2. Access through natural and cultural
heritage may negatively impact the area and
future visitor experiences.Ex.social-
demographic of visitors
COMPLEXITY:
The context within which protected area
tourism planning occurs is often complex
and non-linear. (Roe, 1998).
1. Consequences become unpredictable and
challenging as small changes in one factor may
lead to large changes in another.
2. Actions are based on explicit assumptions about
consequences that are questionable; given the lack
of knowledge connecting causes with effects.
UNCERTAINTY:
Broader spatial and longer temporal
contexts of decision making increases the
level of uncertainty in decisions since
science in the past focused on
understanding ecological processes at
smaller and shorter scales.
Protected Tourism Area Planning
Propositions
A. A “messy context.”
There is a lack of societal agreement on goals
and scientific agreement on cause and effects.
B. At the area of the intersection of natural heritage
protected areas and tourism development, resolving
conflicts is challenging.
Protected Tourism Area Planning
C. Planning is directed towards resolving competing goals
(incompatibilities) in order to :
(a) sustain values protected;
(b) provide opportunities for economic development and
(c) enhance the quality of life of local residents.
D. Protected tourism area planning partnerships serves as
a vehicle in responding to increasing demands and
conflicts while protecting heritage values so that public
interest is safeguarded.
E. Challenges the rational-comprehensive model as an
increasingly unsuccessful method of decision-making in the
messy context of the protected area tourism management.
Partnerships and Sustainable Tourism development
F. Successful informal partnerships: organize societal
action; help protect areas from threats and provide
opportunities for high-quality visitor experiences. Includes
engaging various constituencies in developing policies and
managing tourism and public use.(private-public sector;
tourism players-locals, etc.)
F. The goal of sustainable tourism development as a
fundamental rationale for protected tourism planning
partnerships (Bramwell and Lane, 2000).
Case Study of the Ifugao Rice Terraces
• Contentious issues: protected agricultural sites,
watersheds, biodiversity hosts, cultural heritage sites
and indigenous peoples’ enclaves.
Global issues: poverty, out-migration, dispossession of
property rights, diminishing diversity and resource
management conflicts are major problems.
Areas where partnerships occur
1. Natural resources management:
2. Organizational learning : goals,
interests, culture, values
3. Publicly administered area planning
Why partnerships are formed
How they can be critically examined
What factors that contribute to success or
failure
B.Conflicting Goals, the public
interest and partnerships
The notion of public interest – the
most fundamental goal of protected
area management.
Reality: Constructing such interests
is conscientious in complex settings
that require negotiation among
multiple voices.
Relationships between stakeholders in
Tourism Industry
Stakeholder theory : a normative tool in tourism planning that may be used to promote cooperation between the fundamental parties involved in the planning process. Stakeholder interaction has highlighted the importance of the resource of partnerships, as a way to mobilize the different groups of intervening bodies and coordinate effectively the interests of each (ROBERTS; SIMPSON, 2000).
Approaches Definition Principles Steps Used Role of Participation
COMPREHENSIVE(Roots: RationalComprehensive
Planning)
Conventional goal is to stimulate growth.
Reformed approach is to plan the fragmented
but interrelated components into the
tourist system and to link the tourism sector in the
large scale development
Conventional RCP; “The third way of planning” mainly follows the steps to explore the situation in a
comprehensive, participatory way
Preparation; Set Goal; Survey and
Data AnalysisSynthesize and
select from alternatives; Plan
formulation; Implementation; Evaluation and
Monitoring
In the reformed approach; the ideas and concerns of local people, NGO’s and entrepreneurs will be carefully examined in the planning process.
Tourism Planning Approaches
*Source: The Routledge Handbook of Tourism Research
Approaches Definition Principles Steps Used Role of Participation
Community-collaborative
Planning(Community-based, and Stake-holder based planning)
Roots: TRANSACTIVE COLLABORATIVE
A process of decision-making in key stakeholders in tourism to resolve problems and/or to
manage issues relating to P &D
Public Participation is
the main component.
Participation is included at the beginning to
permit broadly-based planning
of objectives and goals.
Different planning
methods are adopted based on the situation: Group-setting inquiry; round-table discussion;
community consulting
meetings; in-depth interviews,
etc.
Mainly participatory in
nature and theoretically
share decision-making and
planning processes with
whoever is affected by or is interested in the direction or
plan.
*Source: The Routledge Handbook of Tourism Research
Tourism Planning Approaches
Approaches Definition Principles Steps Used Role of Participation
Community-collaborative Planning(Community-based, and
Stake-holder based planning)
Roots: TRANSACTIVE COLLABORATIVE
Ideally two-way communication and positive participation
of various stakeholders should be encouraged.
Different planning
methods are adopted based on the situation: Group-setting inquiry; round-table discussion;
community consulting
meetings; in-depth interviews,
etc.
Fundamentally inclusive; practicability is sometimes limited because of political, social, cultural and economic and constraints.
Tourism Planning Approaches
Approaches Definition Principles Steps Used Role of Participation
INTEGRATEDRoots:
Integrative Planning;
inputs from different sectors
To respond to different values and objectives and
the need for interconnectedness.
Adopted when making background information for further detail plan
formulation or policymaking
External Integration:
integration of the tourism system
into the macrosystem
(regional; national development or
international market. INTERNAL
INTEGRATION: Encompasses
various areas of tourism:
transportation; balances demand and supply, links public and private
sector
Identify key issues and goals; share experiences
and exchange ideas; provide strategies or
recommendations
collectively.Held in
workshop settings such as stakeholder
meetings
Often limited within
government scope but
often includes public-private
sector partnerships
Tourism Planning ApproachesApproaches Definition Principles Steps Used Role of
Participation
STRATEGICRoots: SWOT
ANALYSIS
A continual iterative process that creates a feasible match
between internal needs and
resources and external
environmental conditions
Two scales: At a site-scale oriented
to an organization site’s mandates or
needs such as conservation, environmental
protection, impact minimization. Regional
scale: generalize regional information
and guidelines whether to foster tourism
growth or recommend management.
Environmental scan; Set key issues; set
goals/vision; External and
internal environmental
analyses; Develop Strategiesl develop
implementation; plan monitor,
update and set another scan.
Key issues are identified by client organization; Coordination with local policies and political structure; Community participation in collecting information is necessary in this approach.
Approaches Definition Principles Steps Used Role of Participation
SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
Proposes to carry out tourism
development to fulfill present
human needs in such a way that
future generations will not be “worse
off.”
Sustainable development more like
a concept than a planning approach. .
Mainly from environmental
(conservation) and community
(sharing benefits and mitigating
negative impact) perspectives. Very few cases display the procedure of this approach and
little evidence exist to show it is used in practice.
Key issues are identified by client organization; Coordination with local policies and political structure; Community participation in collecting information is necessary in this approach.
Tourism Planning Approaches
The limits of legislative and
administrative decrees
(1) Vague and abstract – lacking detail and explicit definitions about conditions
deemed appropriate to the values protected in the area.
(2)
Tame problems where society holds agreement on goals, and
scientists agree about cause-effect relationships use
conventional rational-comprehensive planning
In messy situations, goals conflict; cause-effect relationships are
uncertain
•Consensus
•Requires new paradigms of tourism planning
Tourism Planning Partnerships
•Formal, informal, but coherent arrangements involving a variety
of interests
•To address issues, develop and implement policies centered on
management of protected areas
•Also known as taskforces, collaborative groups, advocacy
coalitions, consensus forums, working groups, and partnerships
Primary Rationale: Consensus
•‘Unanimous agreement’
•‘No one blocks an agreement’
•Places heavy burden on the partnership
•MAJORITY AGREEMENT through VOTING
-Not necessarily the best approach to defining consensus
because:
1.Reduces tourism planning issues to ‘yes’ or ‘no’ decisions
2.Partners share burdens, risks, and benefits, and where only
negotiation can lead to accommodations or integration of
concerns
•May be best approached through “grudging” agreement
•People make trade-offs because they share common interests
and goals.
•Achieved through the satisfaction of the ff. conditions:
1. Partners share in the definition of the problem
2. Agreement through partnership or public engagement
process
3. They have equitable access to knowledge
•Integrated with collaborative learning process
--Understanding of multiple interests joins a basic scientific
understanding of relevant conditions
•Requires partnership composed of:
1.Planners/managers - mandate for planning; technical and
procedural expertise
2.Scientists - specialized knowledge; effects of management
actions
3.Members of the public demand - high quality research
Secondary Rationale: Learning
•Process of accumulation of knowledge
•Deliberation of that knowledge
•Interaction between people and their environment
•In acting upon the knowledge, errors and surprises occur and
are evaluated and lessons are learned
•Adaptiveness – important component of planning and
management
•The deliberation leads to an enhanced understanding of the
tourism system and ways to solve the challenges confronting it.
•The types of learning that occurs in protected area planning
partnerships
1.Involving the content or substance of the planning issue
2.Technical planning process itself
3.Backgrounds and perspectives of varying other partnerships
Since there is considerable uncertainty in cause-effect relationships, venues and agendas need to be designed to encourage dialogue and active involvement in learning. (Daniels & Walker, 1996)
Representativeness
•Attending to the diversity of values and beliefs
•Encouraging dialogue among conflicting groups
•Reducing the influence of technocratic expertise and
strengthening the authority of experiential knowledge and
public preferences
•Including those in the political marketplace who hold ‘veto’
power over implementation of plans
Ownership
•Sense of caring and responsibility
•Shared sense of problem and process
•Association of citizens and agencies to collectively define, share,
and address problem situations with an implicit redistribution of
power
•Partners have intrinsic interest in the outcome and thus are
motivated
•Plan put together by the people affected by and who have an
interest in the area.
Learning
•Tourism is characterized by a variety of influences occurring at larger scales, some of which could be termed major disturbance factors.
•With disturbances/unpredictable events that arise which have significant and unexpected consequences, continuous attention to learning is required.
•Normally characterized as understanding links between causes
and effects, evaluating, and responding accordingly
• In messy problems, mental models used to organize learning
and behavior not only have to change but must remain adaptive
in response to social change and new knowledge
May result to:
1.Linkages between cause and effect can be confirmed
2.Unintended consequences (surprises)
•Focused on understanding what causes led to which
consequences
•Must be ‘double-looped’ –understanding cause-effect
relationships and the variables that govern the operation of the
system
•Detection and correction of error
•Encourage double-loop learning through:
1.Sharing control of learning process
2.Participation in design and implementation of actions
Relationships
•To focus energies on framing and resolving issues rather than
taking positions
•Quality of openness
•Lack of ‘hidden agendas’
•Understanding of others beliefs
•Focus on authentic communication
•Clear understanding of roles and responsibilities
•Mutual respect
• The design criteria can be successfully implemented when partners are mindful to the presence of certain conditions as they provide the context within which the partnership operates.
• These considerations deal with fundamental ideals of effective governance. In this regard, protected area tourism planning partnerships represent a type of governance system.
• Building effective partnerships mindful of these considerations requires three conditions: trust, power and access to knowledge.
Trust
• It is an important foundational condition to any partnership.
•“regular, honest and cooperative behavior, based on
commonly shared norms.” (Fukuyama, 1995)
• Trust is difficult to construct but easily to lose.
• Lack of trust is one of the most fundamental barriers to
implementation of protected area plans (Lachapelle, McCool &
Patterson, 2003)
• It is something that must be continuously monitored and attended to over time, especially in a messy situation where a variety of actors engage in a purpose with multiple objectives holding a diversity of views.
• Trust includes both organizational and interpersonal dimensions (Moore, 1995)
• Protected area tourism planning partnerships lead to planning
documents which may be viewed as a type of social contract
between governments and those affected by its decisions.
Ideally, the contract outlines the actions that will be taken by
partners who have collaborated in the planning process. It also
contains agreements about the processes by which it will be
modified and amended.
Power
• It is the ability to influence people to behave in ways that may not be in their own immediate self-interest.
• Certain groups or interests, because of their political power, hold virtual “veto” authority over plan implementation.
•Forster argues that if planners ignore those in power, they assure their own powerlessness.
•Partners must address the notion of power.
• Such empowerment leads to incorporation of a wider diversity
of knowledge in the planning process, greater potential for
constructing consensus and more ownership in the plan and the
protected area.
Access to knowledge
• Protected area agencies have access to or hold specialized
knowledge about the area: ecological, biological and
climatological data, species and habitats, disturbance processes,
spending and economic impact information and visitor use
levels, patterns and preferences.
• Some may have operationally or systematically limited information. It may be as a matter of policy or as a result of lack of technical proficiency among partners to understand and assimilate information.
• Acknowledging that issues arise in situations of multiple
competing goals and conflicting interests might occur allows
partnership to address processes to deal with such situations.
• There can be structural distortions in knowledge access, and such distortions are counter to the notion of a partnership.
1. Identification of socially acceptable actions.
2. Construction of social agreement about the character of a
desired future.
3. In democratic contexts, plan development and
implementation may be more efficient.
4. Help to fulfill expectations that protected areas provide a
model of governance that is more sensitive to people’s
needs, and better integrates conservation with sustainable
tourism development.
• Partnerships become an important strategy in enhancing the
stewardship of protected areas. They are formed because
protected area agencies and tourism industry can no longer
work without each other.
• Tourism protected planning partnerships are designed to
identify desired futures and develop pathways to those futures.
• Constructing planning partnerships is based upon shared goals
and visions, and requires attention to the rationale for the
partnership as well as the attributes that make for success:
ownership, learning, representativeness and relationships.
• Such attributes will be successful only when partners attend to
the distribution of political power, access to knowledge and trust
among the partners.
• Action in a messy society requires multiple actors working in a
coordinated and cooperative manner in variety of roles.
• Partnerships provide the opportunity for more realistic,
integrative and more effective protected area tourism planning.
Sources Cited:
1. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y_cm671oZ_4
2. p. 172, Kaye Sung Chon. The Routledge Handbook of Tourism Research
2. http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0018/001826/182647e.pdf
3. A Case Study About Rice Terraces of the Ifugao
4. https://prezi.com/h3nda1fv4i6_/a-case-study-about-rice-terrace-of-ifugao-
philippines/
5. http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1679-
39512010000400003