Ethnic Tourism in Sierra Tarahumara/Planeta.com

Ethnic Tourism in the Sierra Tarahumara:
A Comparison of Two Raramuri Ejidos
by Amy Elizabeth Anderson

CHAPTER 3: ISSUES OF COMPARISON

Economic development, tourist attractiveness, inter-ethnic relations, and community cohesiveness, serve as the basis' of comparison between Arareco's outside-assisted tourist project and Cusarare's inside-initiated approach. This chapter describes in detail each issue, gives global examples from ethnic tourism literature to illustrate main points, and summarizes the situations of Arareco and Cusarare in relation to the issues. The examples are not meant to judge the inside or outside approaches to tourism but rather illuminate the potentials and pitfalls within each strategy related to ethnic tourism.

Issue I: Economic Development

Tourism is both a strategy and a cause for development (Butler 1989:11, Richter 1988), which itself has a multitude of definitions ranging from the provision and enhancement of tourist facilities and services (Pearce 1981:2) to increased employment and a heightened standard of living for the indigenous recipients of tourism (Johnston 1990, Smith 1989:6). The various agents of development play an important role in determining which kind of development takes place and whom it benefits (Pearce 1981:10). In this discussion, the analysis of economic development focuses on the effects and changes wrought by tourist development and the influx of money on the indigenous population. Large-scale and rapid development often focuses on short-term goals at the cost of social and cultural concerns (Jenkins 1982:231, Richter 1989). This is frequently the case because grand development takes outside money and ideas to succeed. Gradual development, usually community controlled, allows the indigenous group to adapt to change as well as to participate in the process (Jenkins 1982:245). Slower development can also reinvest in maintaining the cultural attributes that draw tourists in the first place.

Many forms of economic development associated with ethnic tourism are occurring in China such as with the Sani Yi of Lunan Yi Autonomous County (Swain 1990). Tourism has proceeded rapidly both through government subsidization and the Sani's self-promotion and hard work. The Sani have aggressively marketed their embroidered bags, some have changed their homes into hotels and restaurants, and others advertise "authentic" dance performances, foods, and goods. However, massive tourism and the resulting economic development have changed the Sani Yi from "traditional" people to avid marketers of their culture, a culture that now seems only to exist for tourism.

Tourism does not have to be so disruptive, however, especially if it grows gradually and gives locals time to adjust and participate in the control of this new industry (de Kadt 1979:17). For example, the Dai of Xishuangbanna in Yunnan Province and the Bai of Dali Autonomous Prefecture have benefited economically from tourism (Swain 1990). The Dai earn income from providing lodging, food, and other services to tourists. Outside control or interference is minimal because of Xishuangbanna's remote location. The Bai's territory is also relatively inaccessible and many of the residents are employed in making marble souvenirs, textile goods, and embroidered handicrafts. Over-development and the resultant loss of the ethnic attraction are avoided as slower development encourages slower cultural change.

An alternative to this form of development is to reject tourism. However, unless this is done nationally like in Bhutan which forbids tourism, it can have mixed results (Richter 1989:177). Those communities who close their doors to tourism may have neighbors that do capitalize on it thereby driving up inflation and worsening the situation of those not earning from tourism (Crystal 1989:153).

In Mexico, Arareco and Cusarare both want economic development but their approaches take different forms. Some of Arareco's plans include building roads, a museum, a tourist lodge, and a restaurant. With government money and an outside human-rights group's ideas and planning, the development is large-scale and rapid. Cusarare, with local ideas and little money, has invested in maintaining the cultural and ecological elements of the ejido by putting energy in craft development and maintaining and promoting nature trails. The lack of outside funds and ideas perhaps keeps Cusarare's ambitions much lower than those of Arareco.

Issue II: Tourist Attractiveness

Tourist attractiveness is the degree to which visitors are lured to a particular area. Much of this attractiveness depends on the tourists' expectations which are cultivated through media and other sources (Cohen 1982, 1988). Indigenous groups can suffer consequences of breaking or even upholding tourist expectations. Some say that tourism is the enemy of authenticity and cultural identity because it can both "commoditize" culture for tourism and change culture through the demonstration effect (Greenwood 1977, Turner and Ash 1975:197) while others assert that tourism is an incentive to maintain unique traditions and promote cultural identity (Johnston 1990:31, Swain 1989:29). Clearly, a controversy exists.

Ethnic and nature tourism should ideally stimulate awareness, appreciation, and understanding of a unique culture and the environment the culture lives in (Ryel and Grasse 1991). Unfortunately, many tourists come with expectations and "often prefer to reaffirm their preconceived images of primitive or unusual cultures rather than confront real issues and change" (Harron and Weiler 1992). Guidebooks and brochures often describe the ethnic tourist attraction as traditional, quaint, exotic, and primitive. With these terms in mind, the tourist can become dismayed by the adoption of new clothing or technology by the indigenous group (Graburn 1989:31, Turner and Ash 1975:140). Tourists might bemoan the loss of purity and innocence of "once dignified, proud peoples" (Richter 1989: 189) but fail to realize is that this "traditional culture" has been changing for centuries, just as any other culture (Clad 1984). While it is naive to expect traditional indigenous peoples to remain static while their visitors' lives are always changing, often the native's livelihood depends on this stasis.

There are many problems with upholding tourist expectations and maintaining a traditional life for tourism, especially if this "maintenance" is done by an outside agent. For example, the Filipino government has forced the Monobos and Higaunons of Mindanao island to "stay primitive" by requiring them to retain native dress and live in traditional houses in order to qualify for much needed federal aid (Rocamora 1979). Elective traditionalism can be beneficial, however, such as the Kuna in Panama. By attracting tourists interested in ethnicity, the Kuna have been able to supplement traditional sources of income such as fishing by selling crafts, thereby reinforcing their handicraft tradition (Breslin and Chapin 1984, Swain 1989).

Even if tourists' expectations of a "primitive" culture are temporarily satisfied, their very presence as tourists provide stimulus for change (Smith 1989). Although there is incentive for maintaining traditional habits, there is also increased income and the introduction of new ideas at a rapid rate. For example, tourists enjoy the colorful clothing and crafts of the Ladakhi of Northern India (Goering 1990). Many Ladakhi, eager to show the tourists how modern they are becoming, proudly wear or display Western goods such as logo t-shirts and Barbie dolls. Tourists become disillusioned with the culture as the natives, whose hopes of economic profit from tourism and eagerness to modernize lead them to adopt more of the trappings of modern society. The cultural uniqueness which attracted the tourist in the first place slowly disappears.

Tourist attractiveness might decline if the benefits from ethnic tourism are used as an economic opportunity to "catch up" (Turner and Ash 1975:198) rather than reinvest in their culture and make ethnic tourism sustainable. Although economic development which leads to acculturation is not necessarily negative, for the purposes of ethnic tourism, development decreases tourist attractiveness. In any case, indigenous people who are subject to ethnic tourism are in a dilemma. Sustainable ethnic tourism means maintaining the cultural attributes which make the people unique. By adopting new technology and "developing," indigenous groups decrease tourist attractiveness. Therefore to sustain attractiveness, development efforts need to maintain profitable traditions and select only those modern conveniences acceptable to tourists sensibilities such as medical care or clean water. However, this strategy can be both difficult and unfair.

The issue of tourist attractiveness is an excellent one for comparing Arareco and Cusarare. The plans for "development" in the two ejidos both attract and deter tourism. Arareco's project has already deterred tourists who have either heard about it or have visited the ejido. As basic services are already provided in Creel, many tourists are disappointed that "primitive" Indians are "modernizing." By mimicking the mestizo-provided services, many feel that the residents of Arareco are accelerating their acculturation into modern Mexican society. Cusarare's development, on the other hand, attracts tourists. The residents of Cusarare promote cultural aspects of the ejido because tourism profits is reinvested in "attractive" traditions. Also, by investing in environmental conservation, the residents of Cusarare are ensuring the sustainability of their land-dependent lifestyle.

Issue III: Inter-ethnic Relations

The issue of inter-ethnic relations is concerned with how the indigenous minority relates, competes, and cooperates with non-indigenous or mestizo neighbors who are often the national majority. Because inter-ethnic relations deal with voluntary cooperative relationships, it differs greatly from outside-assistance whereby an outside group or population aids, influences, and often controls the indigenous tourist enterprises and relations. Cooperation without monopoly and without exploitation is difficult to establish but it is possible. By learning how to maintain or enter into cooperative relationships with the dominant majority when necessary, the indigenous minority can perhaps maintain their autonomy and improve their economy by working together with their neighbors (van den Berghe 1980).

Tourism among the Kuna of Panama illustrates both the advantages of cooperative relations and the disadvantages of severing or not having them. Carti is a seacoast region of Kuna-occupied land that has been a tourist destination since the 1960s. Most hotels were owned by outsiders and employment opportunities for the Kuna consisted of low-level service jobs and opportunities to sell hand-woven Mola artwork to the tourists (Breslin and Chapin 1984, Chapin 1990). Tourism was not a cooperative venture but rather an exploitative one as outsiders reaped most of the benefits. Dissatisfied with this arrangement, the Kuna evicted the outsiders and disrupted the Panamanian governments plans to invest in a new tourist complex. The supplementary income from tourism was desirable. The Kuna took over the aspects of tourism that they could manage such as the hotels and entered cooperative relationship with outsiders to provide the rest; i.e., travel agencies in Panama City promote the islands and provide transportation to the remote Carti region. Links of cooperation were not made with the Kuna's other tourist region, Nugasandi. Although a research station was built in the middle of a rainforest, the expected flow of tourists failed to come (Chapin 1990). There are several reasons why Nugasandi does not share the same success as Carti; one of which was Nugasandi's failure to enter into cooperative relationship with outsiders who could provide necessary services to promote tourism: chiefly advertising and transportation. Consequently, Nugasandi rests quiet and empty as tourist visiting Panama are diverted to more accessible areas.

A study of inter-ethnic relations around Cuzco, Peru showed that almost all of the urban mestizo population benefits from tourism (directly or indirectly) while the indigenous communities are the attractors of tourism rather than its beneficiaries (van den Berghe 1980:383). There are many reasons why Peru's indigenous communities do not benefit as much or in the same way as their urban mestizo neighbors. Most indigenous Peruvians live agrarian lives far from transportation routes. These isolated communities usually do not offer tourist services such as hotels and bottled water. Also, language is a barrier when the indigenous minority still uses their native tongue as their primary language. The mestizos, on the other hand, are usually located near bus and train stops. They have opportunities to learn useful skills such as driving and they have exposure to the outside world through media which allows them to know how to provide for visitors (1980:385). This mestizo dominance of tourism does not necessarily mean the indigenous communities must remain in a subservient position and not benefit from tourism. Breaking off relations in order to garner all benefits for themselves does not always work but working with the dominant majority without becoming exploited is very difficult as well. One option is for the two ethnic groups to provide the services that they could each do best: often this means the mestizos offer the hotels and transportation since they have the resources and the indigenous group provide guides and make crafts. This arrangement, however, can intensify economic and social inequalities between the two ethnic groups where those indigenous people who want to provide more services cannot break the cultural monopoly.

The rural Raramuri of Arareco and Cusarare are surrounded by mestizos living on farms and clustered in lumber towns such as Creel. The mestizos provide services such as hotels and transportation while the Raramuri and their land serve as the tourist attraction. The Raramuri have been able to supplement their income by selling crafts and entering in cooperative relationships with their mestizo neighbors. Hotel-run guide services transport the visitors to ejido land and directly to the craft sellers. Raramuri guides show the hotel guests around thereby completing the "tour." Monetary gain is made by the hotel selling the tour, the craft seller, and the Raramuri guide who charges either the guest of the hotel for his services. Arareco's tourist project began charging an entrance fee to the ejido which surpassed the cost of a tour to the ejido. Discouraged, hotels began offering tours to other areas, such as Cusarare, where the entrance fees were more reasonable. By asserting their rights without maintaining cooperative links with the mestizo hotel-owners, the residents of Arareco are suffering from the consequent decline in tourist flow.

Issue IV: Community Cohesiveness

Tourism brings change and can effect the cohesiveness of a community. Factionalism and social stratification can be exacerbated and daily routines disrupted when divisions of power and benefits are uneven or deemed unfair (Hitchcock and Brandenburgh 1990). Cohesiveness can be maintained or fostered by an approach to tourism that incorporates all the people in decision-making and profits.

The Toraja of Sulawesi, Indonesia have been divided because of tourism (Adams 1990, Crystal 1989). Government planners assist the Toraja in controlling tourism and this has intensified the divisions. For example, tourist zoning was implemented to control tourism but it has also caused animosity between villages where local elites gain prestige if their village is on the list of "tourist objects." Zoning might put one community on the tourist list while leaving another off. Additionally, the Toraja who do not gain a supplementary income from tourism see their neighbors who do economically surpass them. Other divisions occur between those who want to retain traditional ways and those who want to modernize. Planners encouraged the Toraja to hold a traditional ceremony off-season for the benefit of the tourists. Traditionalists rejected this but those who wanted economic development supported it.

The Basarwa or Bushman of Botswana are also divided because of tourism. The divisions are between those who welcome tourism and its economic benefits and those who resent the intrusion of tourists which they have no control over (Hitchcock and Brandenburgh 1990). Tourism provides jobs but takes workers away from traditional occupations such as foraging and agriculture which are necessary to sustain the group (the majority of the Basarwa are not involved in the money economy). Also, there is not equal opportunity in tourism. Usually, multilingual males who have experience with outsiders dominate tourism jobs such as guides (Smith 1989). Their added income increases the stratification between the haves and the have-nots in their culture.

The residents of Taquile island on Lake Titicaca in Bolivia have worked to avoid the problems of uneven benefit distribution (Healy and Zorn 1983). Tourism became important in 1976 when Taquile was first mentioned in a popular guidebook. By 1977 the profits of tourism were enough for the islanders to pool together their money and buy a boat-motor to transport tourists faster to their island. Upon arriving the tourist is assigned to a family as a "guest" because there are no hotels. This arrangement allows every household the opportunity to bring in extra income by lodging and feeding the traveler. Inequalities from tourism were avoided by community control and fair distribution of benefits and responsibilities.

Both Arareco and Cusarare have divided communities that have resulted, in part, from their approaches to tourism. Arareco's tourist project benefits 30 families directly and 370 indirectly. Of course, the main supporters of the project are those families who are the direct beneficiaries. The short-term results of the project have reduced tourist flow, however, and this has reduced the income of the women who would formerly sell crafts from their homes. This has intensified problems between the craft-making women and fee-collecting men. In Cusarare, the division is also between those who benefit from tourism and those who do not. Many see the opportunities provided by tourism and want to take advantage of it, possibly with a tourist development project such as Arareco's. Others, however, reject intrusion and want to sustain tradition over that of monetary gain.

Conclusion

Economic development, tourist attractiveness, inter-ethnic relations, and community cohesiveness are only a few of several issues involved in ethnic tourism. The purpose of presenting such a variety of examples was to demonstrate the similar problems that arise in ethnic tourism around the world. Additionally, the given examples define some consequences and alternatives that apply to the situations in Arareco and Cusarare. The next two chapters focus on Arareco and Cusarare, respectively, and their divergent approaches to tourism in relation to these four issues.