The debate as to whether sustainable tourism is part of the whole notion of sustainable development or whether sustainable development should be considered in the context of tourism still remains unclear Butler, , Hardy et al. Community participation Consideration of community participation is not new in the tourism literature. In the last two decades, much research has involved local participation. The significance of community participation has been widely recognised in tourism research, and the participation of local people has come to be an essential condition of sustainability.
From a planning perspective, a community-based tourism planning approach was specially developed to emphasise the importance of community participation Murphy, ; Reid, Simmons enriched the discourse by adding debates about participation techniques in tourism planning practice. Clearly, the normative concept of community participation has originated and been popularised in developed countries Tosun, Community participation has traditionally meant power distribution Arnstein, Thus, access to the tourism market needs also to be identified as a significant form of community participation. However, whatever the means of assessment there is now a realisation of the desirability of high levels of participation, and power sharing as meaningful participation in decision-making processes is critical Reed, Undoubtedly, participation has become a key principle of sustainable tourism development.
These perspectives have been recently criticised by rural development researchers for their lack of concern about the rural poor and poverty. As a result, some contend that the SL approach should be employed to understand and analyse tourism in rural development Ashley, Thus there is a growing view that the SL approach is a perfect solution to all criticisms imposed on the so- called conventional tourism perspectives in rural development Cattarinich, Simply using the SL framework to analyse tourism may over-formularise and oversimplify actual complexity and fail to provide a holistic understanding of rural tourism livelihoods.
With primary industries, the rural poor are the producers. They sell products on the market and gain some of the benefits. Consumers are typically outsiders who consume products while distant from their sites of production. For tourism however, producers are most likely outsiders like external investors, national or local governments rather than local rural residents themselves. In terms of consumption, tourists, have to travel to the rural poor to consume tourism products.
In coming from different environments the development and cultural divergence between guest and host ensures that social, cultural and ideological differences are often significant issues in tourism development and management. Tourism is therefore no longer a simple production-consumption phenomenon. It develops within a complex multi-stakeholder context which involves local people, governments, enterprises, tourists and sometimes I NGOs.
Consequently, it may be argued that tourism should not be treated the same way as other productive sectors in addressing livelihood strategies.
- Join Kobo & start eReading today.
- La Scienza della Totalità: Parte Prima (Italian Edition).
- The Greening of Aid | Sustainable livelihoods in practice | Taylor & Francis Group!
- Sustainable development goals and inclusive development | SpringerLink.
Rather, tourism should be considered as a context from which the SLA is considered and viewed. This is the first gap between the SLA and tourism. The second gap lies in the notion of sustainability. As discussed earlier, sustainability is a predominant tenet in much tourism research as well as within the SLA.
Therefore the operationalisation of SL is very often delivered at the individual or household level. In contrast, the sustainability of tourism mostly focuses on the tourism industry itself at the macro level rather than the rural poor at the micro level UNWTO, Livelihood sustainability may therefore conflict with tourism sustainability in some cases, e. The third gap concerns community participation. The SLA sheds light on the local poor and calls for participatory analysis in practice.
Thus, an additional livelihood asset — the institutional asset — needs to be identified and be treated as of equal importance to the other five livelihood assets in theory as well as in practice. Overall then, tourism is different from other productive sectors. This is especially true for rural development in terms of the tourism sector being deployed as a livelihood strategy.
Neither the SL approach nor conventional tourism research theories can exclusively guide tourism to achieve sustainable rural development. Consequently, knowledge about an integration of SL and tourism is needed. Thus, sustainable tourism can only exist within a sustainable destination. A sustainable tourism livelihoods approach aims to incorporate key principles of SL and tourism. SLFT is a system which includes assets, activities related to tourism, outcomes, institutional arrangements and vulnerability context. Figure 3. Consequently, the mediating process of vertical as well as horizontal institutional arrangements becomes of paramount importance to help ensure the tourism system runs as harmoniously as is possible in often contested contexts.
In a broader sense, physical and financial capitals both belong to the orthodox economic concept of capital. For the rural poor, what they know and care about is economic benefits rather than how the framework terms are academically defined. It calls for strengthening people's participation in political governance.
The vulnerability context includes shocks, seasonality, trends, institutions, and tourism external market risks terrorism, disease, etc. For a tourism livelihood, inappropriate institutional actions sometimes do increase vulnerability, so institutions should also be considered one of the vulnerabilities. Vulnerability at different levels varies. At the national and regional level, trends are more of a concern than shocks, seasonality and institutions. At the local level, seasonality is a more direct risk; institutions also can harm local tourism development, while shocks and trends become less important.
Tourism external market risks are hardly predictable and manageable, but the outcomes they cause can be fatal for tourism livelihoods both at the macro and the micro levels. Livelihood outcomes have conventionally been discussed and measured at the individual and household level. However, within the tourism context, the image of rural tourism products is based on the local community as a whole rather than just every family or individual.
Sustainable development goals and inclusive development
In addition, the notion of sustainability can be embodied in the achievement of livelihood outcomes according to Scoones The emerging SL approach provides an organising framework to analyse individual and household livelihoods at the local level and offers basic information for macro policy-making at a nation-global level. However, the principles of SL do not appear to easily fit the tourism context. Conversely, tourism has formed its own research system theories and practices.
The principles of tourism research mainly focus on tourism evolution at the macro destination level. Accordingly, theories and methods of tourism research might not be able to guide livelihoods research properly at the micro household level. Thus, new thinking is needed and knowledge about SL and tourism need to be constructed and developed in order to maximise benefits brought by tourism to the rural poor, and guide sustainable rural development with tourism as a livelihood strategy in practice, and further facilitated to reach the goal of poverty reduction.
The SLFT proposed here, does not intend to be all-inclusive but rather to seek to bridge the gaps between SL and tourism. Its intention is to provide for broader scale thinking about the complexity and dynamism of a tourism livelihood system in its wider development context. In fact, the tourism context is always case-specific and research and application results may vary in multiple circumstances. Operationalising sustainability in regional tourism planning: an application of the limits of acceptable change framework. Tourism Management, 23 1 , Arnstein, R.
A ladder of citizen participation. Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 35, Ashley, C. London: Chameleon Press. Aziz, S. Rural development: learning from China.
London: Macmillan. Baumgartner, R. In search of sustainable livelihood systems: managing resources and change. Becker, E. Sustainability and the social sciences: a cross-disciplinary approach to integrating environmental considerations into theoretical reorientation. London [etc. Butler, R. Canadian Geographers 24, Tourism— an evolutionary perspective. G Nelson, R. Butler and G. Wall eds. Waterloo: University of Waterloo Press. Tourism and recreation in rural areas.
New York: J. Cahn, M. Sustainable livelihoods approach: concept and practice. Carney, D. Livelihoods approaches compared. Agricultural intensification and sustainable rural livelihoods: a think piece. IDS Working Paper Brighton: IDS. Cattarinich, X. Pro-poor tourism initiatives in developing countries: analysis of secondary case studies. Chambers, R. In: P. Max-Neef Eds. London: Routledge. Sustainable rural livelihoods: practical concepts for the 21st century. Clancy, M. Tourism and development: Evidence from Mexico.
Annals of Tourism Research 26 1 , Clarke, J. A framework of approaches to sustainable tourism. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 5 3 , — Conroy, C. The Greening of aid: sustainable livelihoods in practice. London: Earthscan Publications Limited. Cottrell, S. China Tourism Research 3 2 , Sustainable livelihoods guidance sheets.
Doxey, G. Heritage Canada 2 2 , Echtner, C. Eden, M. The built environment and sustainable development: research meets practice in a Scandinavian context. Planning Theory and Practice, 1 2 , Elizalde, A. Economic and regulatory capital: what is the difference? Ellis, F. Rural livelihoods and diversity in developing countries.
The greening of AID: sustainable livelihoods in practice.
Farrington, J. Sustainable livelihoods in practice: early applications of concepts in rural areas [Electronic version]. Getz, D. Tourism and research: traditions, models and futures. Paper presented at the Australian Travel Research Workshop. Bunbury, Western Australia Goodwin, H. Sustaniable tourism and poverty elimination.
Tourism Planning: Policies, Processes and Relationships. Harlow: Pearson Education. Hall, C. Sustainable tourism: a geographical perspective. Harlow [England]: Longman. The geography of tourism and recreation: environment, place and space 2nd ed. London; New York: Routledge. Hall, D. Rural tourism and sustainable business. Clevedon [England]: Channel View Publications. Hardy, A.
Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 10 6 , Harriss, J. Rural development: theories of peasant economy and agrarian change. London: Hutchinson University Library. Ho, P. Rural development in transitional China: the new agriculture. Holland, J. Jamieson, W. Contribution of tourism to poverty alleviation pro-poor tourism and the challenge of measuring impacts. The components and nature of tourism: The tourism market basket of goods and services.
It works at both a conceptual level — developing background papers and guidance material — and providing operational support to country programmes. The White Paper stresses the importance of partnerships at all levels. The debate has not yet extended adequately to partner organisations in developing countries.
People-centred The livelihoods approach puts people at the centre of development. Sustainable poverty reduction will be achieved only if external support i. Rather, it aspires to provide a way of thinking about livelihoods that is manageable and that helps improve development effectiveness. This does not mean that it places undue focus on the better endowed members of the community. Macro-micro links Development activity tends to focus at either the macro or the micro level.
Much macro policy is developed in isolation from the people it affects.
Sustainable livelihoods guidance sheets – Efls
Both these areas will need to be better understood if the full value of the livelihoods approach is to be realised. It should not be ignored or marginalised. Its different aspects are discussed in detail in the following sheet. What is sustainability?
Sustainability has many dimensions, all of which are important to the sustainable livelihoods approach. Very few livelihoods qualify as sustainable across all these dimensions. Why is sustainability important? However with diversity come trade-offs; trade-offs within livelihood outcomes see 2. This is, however, an area in which further work is required. The asset pentagon that lies at the heart of livelihoods analysis see 2.