INCENTIVES FOR COMMUNICATION
The value of communication is based on relevant
and timely information. Without such information, there can
be no effective communication.
Most of us are content to socialize with people who think like
ourselves. When we wish to communicate with others, there are
opportunities for conflict. That's ok! Think outside the bubble!
Where there is conflict, there are also opportunities for change.
If we accept the idea that we need better communication, let's
keep things as friendly as possible. Find ways to create incentives
for communication.
Dialogues needs lively public forums -- online and in the natural
world. We share some ideas of how to reinvigorate communication
as a tool to promote conservation and responsible tourism and
conservation in our May 2006 presentation Improving
the Dialogue: Responsible Tourism and Conservation.
Authors who participate in the Planeta Forum are more likely
to have their books featured on our home page. We have tips
for authors and publishers.
BACKGROUND
In 1996 I was invited to speak at the Coloquio
Internacional sobre Ecoturismo. My presentation: The
value of information AND communication. Basic lesson - The
Web allows everyone to be connected in ways that were unimaginable
ten years ago. The value
of communication is based on good information. Without relevant
information, there is no effective communication. Garbage in,
garbage out.
WHY COMMUNICATION IS ELUSIVE
A colleague says the problem with communication is the illusion
that it has occurred. My response is the fact that communication
is not necessarily desired. How else to explain the lack of
adequate documentation and signage?
Many tourism stakeholders are aware that improving
communication is a worthy objective, yet they feel stymied by
how to put the practice into action. Communication is not as
easy as it appears. Jargon is used, particularly by 'experts,'
to make topics less accessible.
Sustainable tourism requires mindful communication. This means
incorporating feedback loops that provide critical input to
service providers, travelers, media, policy-makers and other
players.
Sharing information needs to be structured into our interaction.
We need to be demanding of 'green
events.' And we need to learn the skills the Web provides
for those interested to become volunteer
editors.
Dialogues need lively public forums -- online and in the natural
world.
In July 2002 I participated in a review of a study commissioned
by the World Bank about ecotourism in Oaxaca,
Mexico. The report -- Oaxaca Ecotourism Study (Reference
Contract #7118160) -- supported financing forestry
projects that include an ecotourism component. All well
and good!
That said, the document was prepared without public consultation,
the study is not available online, nor has there been a single
reference to the work on the World Bank website.
This is not a critique of the loan nor the report -- just the
lack of communication, which creates unnecessary risks in project
implementation.
If the information were public from contract bidding through
field research and interviews and leading to the publication,
this and similar bank-funded initiatives would stand a greater
chance of success. But how do you create synergies when the
principal players
(aka 'stakeholders') are not informed?
In the 2003 panel, it was difficult to critique the bank's
lack of transparency and public dialogue during the meeting.
"We know about stakeholders," said one official. My response:
"But what do stakeholders know about you?"
LEARNING WHAT DOES NOT WORK
During the 2002 Financing
Sustainable Tourism Conference, one of the proposals was
to create an independent directory of failed sustainable tourism
projects. Knowing what hasn't worked would be good to know.
Supposedly, of 100 internationally funded projects in Ecuador
in the 1990s, 95 failed. It would be good to know why. I'm not
interested in casting blame, but if we don't admit errors, we've
learned nothing from our mistakes and the vicious cycle of project
funding and project failure begins anew.
|
