Home |
Mexico |
Mundo Maya |
Mexico Travel Services |
Mexico News Sources |
Mexico Books |
Mexico Ecotourism Network |
Participation in two projects
Editor's Note: This article accompanies the author's Spanish language thesis Participacion y Capacitacion en el Mundo Maya
The birth of this program should be seen in the broader context of developments in international tourism, that took place during the eighties. A crucial feature was what was called the rise of a new type of tourists, the so-called 'sun, sea, beach plus'-tourists, who were supposed to be more environmental-conscious and who were looking for more authentic holiday-experiences. Meanwhile, several innovations in the tourism industry made it possible to meet this new kind of tourism-demand. Cultural and historical, ethnic but especially ecotourism became booming business. Countries who could boast on their fame of biodiversity en large pristine nature areas saw new opportunities to present themselves on the international tourist scene (for example Costa Rica, Ecuador). Nature conservation organizations and environmentalists, like the World Wildlife Fund and the Nature Conservancy, also appeared to be interested, since ecotourism promised to match nature conservation, environmental education and development. A tourist, guided by local guides, would now enjoy and learn about nature, while nature conservation and the local population would benefit from his spendings, at least that was the popular image created at that time.
From political point of view the birth of the Mundo Maya-program should be seen in the context of the variety of conflicts Central-America had to deal with at that time: civil wars in Nicaragua and El Salvador tensions and borderline-crossings between Honduras and Nicaragua, the guerilla in Guatemala and the continuing dispute between Guatemala and Belice. A common tourism-program, such as Mundo Maya, could be a first step towards regional cooperation and therefore contribute to the lessening of these tensions. Even moreso, because the program could count on financial and technical support from the European Union (at that time: European Common Market).
This financial support was of course very appealing to the poorer countries, while Mexico on the other handwas looking for possibilities to diversify her touristic offer. Apart from traditional resorts like Cancun, Mexico was also looking for ways to exploit new regions and from a tourist point of view Mundo Maya seemed to provide the answer. The five southern estates (Tabasco, Chiapas, Campche, Yucatan, Quintana Roo) together with Guatemala and a part of Honduras once made up the cradle of the great Maya Civilization, disponed of a rich biodiversity and in fact were still home to a rich 'living Maya'-culture. All that needed to be done was to polish the eco-image of well-known sites like Palenque in Chiapas en Chichen Itza in Yucatan and develop new so called eco-archeotourism-projects.
As a tourguide and student of anthropology, this was the setting I encountered at the beginning of the nineties. Gradually my interest and fascination of the stories I heard about Mundo Maya grew, especially when representatives of the Mundo Maya program told me that the eco-archeotourism projects were also designed as pilotprojects for sustainable rural development. They also stated that participation and training of the local population were the cornerstones of those projects. Therefore I decided to do research on how participation and training were organized at two of the Mexican Mundo Maya-projects, namely: Agua Selva and Calakmul.
The transformation-model takes as its point of departure the idea of the development of a tourist product as a continual transformation of resources (Ashworth and Dietvorst 1995). This proces start with seeing, suspecting and assessing the potential touristic value of the resources. Then a proces of interpreting and coding starts (see also MacCannell 1976/1989), through which just to give an example engraved stones in a tropical forest become seen as traces of a 'lost culture'. Nevertheless to be seen as a mature tourist product this is not enough. A mature tourist product also includes accommodation, transport- and basic services, guides and/or information-services, promotion and finally travel or holiday-arrangements (McIntyre 1993). All of these provisions require transformations of resources. The aforementioned transformations mainly correspond to the supply- or producersside. Tourists and consumers themselves contribute to this process aswell. For example, in the proces of finetuning their expectations with what is actually offered: a plain and simple meal or stay in a country shack can become the so much longed for contact with the authentic local population. They might also give their comments about the touristic offer and express their needs and wants, thereby giving another impuls to the process of transforming resources.
The actor-approach supplemented this, because it focuses on the role of individuals and organizations, their resources and the social and institutional context in which they operate (Long 1992). From this point of view the social and institutional context is seen as both providing and limiting the margins of the individuals acting.
As regards to the key-issues of participation and training I used the framework developed by Azocar de Buglas (1995), distinguishing forced, consultative, active and real participation. Also concepts like the beneficiary- and empowerment-approach (Young 1993) and methods or used in rural development, like the functional group- and institution-building approach (Huizinga e.a. 1982) proved to be useful.
To organize the field-research I developed a set of questions or items for three specific areas. In the ecotourism field the first one, the local situation, forms part and parcel of the tourist attraction (Schaller 1996) and provides and limits the space of developing a tourist product. In the second area, the actors, the main objective was to review the roles of indivuales and organizations as stakeholders of the project. The third area, participation and training, concentrated on issues like approaches and methods used, how many and which members of the local community participated and what the main problems and drawbacks were in this field.
During my field-research I used a broad variety of research-techniques. Data were obtained through study of literature (mainly policy-documents), participant observation in the ecotourism-communities involved and interviews with keyfigures and local guides.
At the beginning of the nineties local people showed maestro Julio, a Spanish development-technician and founder father of the Integrated Regional Centre of Health and Education (CRISE), some engraved stones, that they had found nearby Malpasito. Practically at the same time, ingeniero Pagola, who runs a hotel in the town of Huimanguillo and is a dedicated nature-fan, discovers the natural beauty of the Sierra. Also doña Gladis, coordinator of the tourism department of the municipality Huimanguillo, is convinced of the touristic potential of the Sierra. Soon a committee, consisting of 2-3 local community members from different villages, is formed. Through broad debate consensus is reached that the different ideas should be brought together in one project. The basic outlines of this project are put on paper and a key role is given to the archeological site and the building of a number of cabañas (plane housing built according to local architecture style and using locally available buildingmaterial) , that as a whole could and should form a new impulse for developing the Sierra.
Using their network of contacts and friends at higher political levels the committee gets into contact with Jorge Belmonte, head of the Ecotourism Department of the Mundo Maya-Mexico program at the Ministry of Tourism in Mexico DF. Belmonte decides to look into the matter himself. Accompanied by Elias Vera, his colleague at the state-level Ministry of Tourism (SEFICOT), he visits the Sierra. The countryside, the flora and fauna, the waterfalls, the archeological site and the presence of a group of Zoques, who are related to the ancient Maya, make up a texture of elements that fit perfectly in the schemes used by Mundo Maya.
In september 1993 Belmonte starts training a small and select group of people, who are supposed to play a pivotal role as guides and coordinating group in the nearby development of the project. Training and organizing a workgroup are Belmonte's priorities, building a camping sites with cabañas will be seen to later on. The chairmanship and main positions in this group are given to people from different villages, but none of them to the people of Malpasito.
Pagola, who was not elected as a member of the coordinating committee, decides to build the cabañas himself. He gets into contact with some people of Malpasito and not only builds his cabañas, located conveniently nearby a waterfall, but also a road towards the cabañas.
In the spring of 1994 SEFICOT decides to organize a trainingcourse. This time not directed at a small and select group, but for everyone who's interested.
These different initiatives and approaches create quite a bit of turmoil among the main actors and the official opening of the project, autumn of 1994, is almost overshadowed by it. Municipal elections add more coal to the fire. Nevertheless, in the spring of 1995 a consensus is reached that an effort to reorganize the project is needed. Again Belmonte is asked to give a training course. His attempt fails and Belmonte decides to withdraw.
The full responsability now lies on the shoulders of SEFICOT, i.e. Elias Vera. Because of changes of personal and reorganization in the Tabasco Ministery it would take until february 1996 before Vera can start a new training course. To Vera 1995 was "a year lost" and now it's a matter of "starting all over". He aims at forming a new group of guides and forming committees in each village, that eventually would have to form a new coordinating group.
For Pagola 1995 was not "a year lost" -- on the contrary. The Asamblea (General Village meeting) of Malpasito had decided to accept him formally as an ejiditario (land-user and thereby official member of the village-community) and had later elected him as president of the village ecotourism-committee.
Therefore Vera had to deal with Pagola at two levels: as provider-owner of accommodation in Agua Selva and as the chairman of Malpasito's ecotourism-committee. This was too much for those, who had had trouble with Pagola before.They also thought that Vera and Pagola were hand in glove and boasted about their waterfalls and tropical forest, without given one peso to the local communities.
This is the situation, commonly know locally as division total (total division), I encountered during my field research. Drawing out the history of the project and mapping out the different positions and possibilities to bridge the gaps between the different parties, at first appeared to be good valid goals for my field work period. The first two I indeed did achieve, albeit in my research report (which was finished a year later!). My second goal was trying to organize a meeting of all those involved and try to establish a new starting point for the project on the basis of concrete project-needs, like rebuilding the shabby information-office. This goal was definitely set too high for a four week research period. The meeting was canceled for a variety of reasons (the municipality didn't support the meeting financially, there was no gasoline for the car that was suppose to pick up participants in different villages etc.) and my stay at Agua Selva came to it's end.
The main elements for an eco-archeotourism-project were also present in the Calakmul region. There were a lot of archeological sites, some of them even quite well-known like Rio Bec and Hormiguero, and the region was well-known for its rich flora and fauna (orchideas, jaguars, birds). The first step in developing a tourism project was training of local guides, who eventually were supposed to manage a small office for incoming tourism. On the whole the training, that took place in 1994-1996, can best be seen as a piecemeal venture, in which several organizations took a share. Among them: SECTUR (Jorge Belmonte), SEDETUR (the state level Ministery of Tourisme) and PRONATURA, a NGO aimed at nature conservation and development. As in Agua Selva organizing the participation of the local population was difficult.
The unique thing about Calakmul was, and this was told time and again when l started my research, that two women had succeeded in making a living out of their work as a guide. Interviewing the two women involved showed, that this was not quite the case, though both saw opportunities in the nearby future to start a business of their own or get a contract with a touroperator. The two women also played a main part concerning the issue of organizing themselves as a group of guides. To keep up appearances towards the 'outerworld' they cooperated, but behind the scenes it was a "real Mafia-mob", according to one of them. A good example of this was presented to me when l assisted a meeting of the guides. The chairman of the group, one of the leading ladies, suggested that a part of the fees would be put aside to form a savingsfund. Her opponent gave her a hard time and only after a hard bargaining proces finally agreed. But, when the meeting was over and all the other guides had signed the agreement, she finally refused to sign.
After my experiences in Agua Selva l decided not to bring this hornet's nest about my ears and concentrate on describing the development of the project, its linkages with the Reserva-project and the opinions the main actors held concerning the part participation and training played in ecotourism.
Both projects showed a vast range of actors: government officials (at different levels: federal and state), NGO's, the tourism-industry (touroperators, hotelowners) and last, but not least the local communities. All of them had different resources (money, technical expertise and assistance, training), but none of them, and especially the external change agents, was able and/or willing to support the projects permanently. The main reason was that they themselves lacked financial resources, policital power, knowledge and experience of the tourism-business and (therefore) probably entrepreneurship. On the whole to get these projects working they were highly dependent on each other and a start could only be made when they would combine their resources.
Theoretically (and practically) the cornerstone of these projects was the active participation of the local communities. Training local guides appeared to be most effective instrument to achieve this. Soon the actors involved discovered that training local guides was not an issue that could easily be dealt with. Being a guide involved being able to draw on a vast knowledge of archeology (and not only of the 'own-known' sites, but those in other Mundo Maya regions as well), flora and fauna, tourism in the broad and ecotourism in the specific sense, dealing and communicating with people, being able to master foreign languages etc.etc. The basic education level of the local guides in these areas was low, most of them had only finished primairy school and studying was a heavy burden for them. Soon it became clear that a one-time course would not be sufficient. Lacking resources and different point of view regarding nature and level of training made it impossible to establish a solid educational program and finally resulted in a set of courses that were given at different levels, from different points of view and aimed at different groups.
During these courses emphasis was put on the need to organize, but never was the issue of how to organize touched. It proved to be a very difficult matter. In Agua Selva the lack of support and discontent regarding the way the group was formed and representative membership led to the splitting of the group itself and to the development of different 'fractions'. In Calakmul the group had to confront so many problems, that they too eventually split up, although for the outside world they closed ranks.
One of the main problems that the guides had to face in both projects was that most of the people that came to visit the projects only came as 'daytrippers'. They did not come in large quantities and neither on a regular basis. Most of the guides had their own work and obligations as farmers, head of families and members of communities. Working in the tourism-business for them meant taking a chance on loosing a normal workingday. Most of them could not afford this and therefore participation was limited too a handful of people, whom by their own saying had "now and then" taken a course and for whom guiding once-and-awhile offered an opportunity to gain something extra.
First of all tourism-development in rural areas calls for a proper investigation regarding the possibilities and limitations tourism development. Such an assessment encompasses both an analysis of the touristic potential and resources available, as well as the social-economical and cultural profile of the local communities involved (from an anthropological point of view here we are basically dealing with 'classic ethnografic research') and the economical feasability of the project. The official Mundo Maya-project documents repeatedly stated that this type of investigation was needed, but in practice they were never done. This leads to our second lesson to be drawn.
Tourism-development in rural areas for theoretical aswell as practical reasons calls for the participaticion of different actors. Establishing a platform, where a finetuning of resources and interests of these participants can be reached, is an essential precondition. This was also foreseen in the projectdocuments and in the case of Calakmul this was actually present in the form of the Consejo Regional. What was lacking however was information regarding under which type of conditions the actors were participating. A sort of 'social contract', in which participants formally state what they will contribute (and under which conditions they will withdraw their support), might be an important medium to establish their commitment and get a basic idea about the chances and/or garantees regarding the continuity of the projects.
Active participation remains the keyword to the project's success. Given the socio-economical situation in these rural areas being able to offer a realistic perspective as regards to short term financial benefits is pivotal and underlines the importance of feasability-studies. Taking these as starting point one can and should start developing a training course, that not only focuses on professional skills (for example: concerning guiding) but on managementskills and organization-issues as well. Active participation in eco-archeotourism should eventually lead to the creating community-based and community-organized small-enterprises.
Lessons that with the benefit of hindsight might be qualified as wise and valid. Whether or not they will ever be put into practice in Mundo Maya is a different piece of cake, because Mundo Maya in more ways than one remains "otro mundo" (another world).
Azocar de Buglas, Leida (ed.)
1995: Ecoturismo en el Ecuador - Trayectorias y desafios. Quito: DDA, Intercooperation, IUCN.
Huizinga, B; Raalte, R. van; Rling, N.
1982: Five approaches to rural extension. International course on rural extension. International Agricultural centre. Wageningen.
Long, Norman
1992: 'From paradigm lost to paradigm regained?' - the case for an actor-oriented sociology of development, in: N. Long and A. Long: Battlefields of knowledge. The interlocking of theory and practice in social research and development. London: Routledge.
McIntyre, G.
1993: Sustainable Tourism Development: guide for local planners. Madrid: World Tourism Organization.
Schaller, David T.
1996: Indigenous ecotourism and sustainable development. The case of Rio Blanco, Ecuador (paper). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota.
Young, Kate
1993: Planning development with women. Making a world of difference. London: MacMillan.
Contact Ron Martens via email: ronmartens@yahoo.com
Exploring the Mundo Maya Eco Travels in Mexico Mexico Travel Directory Mexico Ecotourism Network
Home |
About |
Advertise! |
Books |
Central America |
Ecotourism |
Headlines
Learn Spanish |
Mexico |
Media |
Site Map |
South America |
World Travel |
Updates