Collaborative Tourism Planning as Adaptive Experiments in Emergent Tourism Settings by Maureen G.Reed

"Life is terribly similar to Football. Football requires individual ability however in reality it's a collective game; a game people play in groups. Isn't life so? No matter how talented you are, if you don't have a good team you lose. Yes, you lose..!"

That's a quote from a favorite Turkish movie of mine where the coach explains his players about life and football. Collaboration. That seems to be the word for successful sustainable tourism development. It is good to see that people have realized that we have to work together if we want to have a succesful future. This is especially good in a time that individualism is at its peak. Due to tourism fragmented nature, the parties who have interest in the tourism industry can have different values. Some may already be successful at achieving their goals however in the long run if the whole is not doing well then it is likely that they will also be impacted. And the impacts of tourism also are not distributed evenly in between the all interested parties. That is a problem. If you want me to bear the impacts then I should be involved to have my say in the development as well. According to Reed, collaboration is not enough on its own to create sustainable tourism development either. The knowledge of local power relations as well as mechanisms to keep these relations under control is important in achieving a healthy collaborative effort. No single institution should hold the power to make decisions on the tourism product development in a region. Collaborative decision making is explained by Jamal & Getz (1995) as, "a process of joint decision making among autonomous, key stakeholders... to resolve planning problems... and/or to manage issues related to planning and development." (Reed)

In a constantly adaptive planning process, the checks and balances should be set in place for constant, periodic feedback. After agreeing to work towards a common vision according to common values, regular evaluation of where the process is at plays an crucial role in especially Tourism development because of the dynamics of the industry. Whether social, economic or environmental dynamics are concerned, Tourism's fragmented nature will always have rapid change and require quick adaptations in order for it to be succesful sustainably.

The Concept of a Tourist Area Cycle of Evolution: Implications for Management of Resources by R.W. Butler

R.W Butler's Tourist Area Cycle of Evolution explains much of the tourism growth in Turkey in the 80s. Combined with Boosterism (Hall, 1999) much of the mediterranean landscape of Turkey has been attacked by hoards of investors and mass tourists following. I remember reading about towns in South Eastern Turkey where artist would gather to have "Blue Cruises" so to say. Just like Christaller explains in Butler's article, the southern Turkey was first discovered by the artist. One of my favorite books in high school was an autobiography of a well known Turkish author, called the "Memories of a Dinosour" and in there she talked about the exact evolution of the town of Bodrum in the Southern coast of Turkey. She was telling in the book about the poets and the painters that frequented the town back in the day and how they, slowly in time, ran away from Bodrum because of the attack of the tourists.

Now, this cycle seems inevitable for many tourism destinations. You cannot tell someone to not to come, especially if one of the economic drivers of the community is Tourism. So what can be done? There can be improvements on the seasonality of the destination to have a balance in the volume of visitors throughout the year. That can take some of the pressure off, however it may not as well. So here, at this point, it is crucial for one community to work with the other. The interconnectedness of the communities is key in achieveing a balanced and prosperous tourism industry.

When planning, or even just creating a vision, it must be kept in mind that communities are connected as in a web. It is then very important to have an inclusive and integrated plan to cope with the challenges together as well as reaping the benefits together. So even tough it seems like creating a vision for one community is a good idea, if that country has a tourism vision and an integrated plan according to that vision then it can control the usage of resources more efficiently and direct traffic evenly. Smart planning will give the communities some time to refresh themselves as well.

Yes, it is better to do a plan before the area reaches the development stage of the cycle where most of the local control has been lost or given over to the external, more politically and economically stronger parties, however, it is never late to rejuvinate the community. Although it is harder. The main problem the locals feel with the tourism going out of hand is that they lose control over it. They cannot decide what goes on in their back yard anymore and that would be frustrating for the most welcoming person of all.

Organizing Resources for Rural Tourism Development: The Importance of Leadership, Planning and Technical Assistance by Long & Nuckolls

In our age, especially in the last decade Tourism has been seen as a 'saviour' for many of the rural communities. This was due primarily to the low investment requirements of the industry. Tourism gave communities a chance to grow, mainly economically, with what they already have and hopefully increase their general quality of life. Saying that, we should mention that QofL has no one definitive explanation as to what it is since it differs from community to community, even from an individual to another. However, in most cases in the past more than the recent, QofL has been associated with the economic well being of the subjects. This led inevitably to the opening up of communities to the outside investors and entrepreneurs in the hope for a growing economic wheel. The more tourists(visitors), the more money coming in, which was great news. Or so they thought. Many communities and regions started to copy each other and borrow economic growth models from each other.

While the economic impacts of the industry were more visible, especially in tourism literature, other impacts started to surface gradually at first and then rapidly. Socio-cultural and environmental impacts became threatening to communities and its people to the point that due to this erosion, some also lost their economic benefits as well. One of the things Long and Nuckolls point out in their article is that tourism is the most intimate of all industries. It requires the residents to play 'host' to the 'guests' (visitors), even if they want to or not. Same idea was put forward in Reid et al (2001), "In rural communities, all residents are part of the tourism product, whether or not they want to be, simply by virtue of living there."

By the threat of losing communities, the industry has tended to finding approaches for sustainable growth. Various models for planning for tourism development has been drafted, created and sometimes implemented, such as I have discussed in the previous post, to turn this tourism machine, working at the expense of the community (McLaughlin, et al., 1991), into operating in more of a community-minded state. Reading both Long & Nuckolls(1994) and also Reid et al. (2001), two similar ideas stuck in my mind on rural community development that both the articles articulated on.

The idea, of 'a' Leader and the idea, of having a broader cross section of community involvement.

In Long & Nucksoll's paper, the authors immediately talk about the importance of the emergence of 'one single individual'. This is necessary to even start the cause. Such importance has been also given by Reid et al (2001) by calling that one person the 'Catalyst'. In order for anything to happen there should be a catalyst who is to going to 'champion' the cause as Dave Robinson says (2011 and many years before that.) However one difference in writing was very intriguing for me. In Reid et al (2001), there is over emphasizing of 'having the community as the priority in your mind' as if they have suffered so much from this 'personal interest first' attitude. It is almost a warning, a caution signal appearing in many pages of the Manual (Reid et al. 2001).

Both articles also explain how increasing the representation of the general public from all diverse areas of the community is very crucial to effective community planning. In the end, they are the owners of the estate and most impacted by its impacts, especially negative ones. In order to gather more information, all parties who are going to be impacted should be better known. More information means that planners and the planning committee can calculate the consequences of any step in furthering the tourism product. So they can make better choices that will affect most of the community if not all. (never all).

The aim of having a community minded leader and a higher representation of the general public is to create a more overall, all round,  better sustained community growth. Otherwise it is a few entrepreneurial leaders pulling the economy towards their own business sector, which is creating an unhealthy imbalance in the community. This can also drive people out of their traditional occupations in order to get a job that is making them more money. 'Social change follows. Economy, once seemed getting stronger, gets weaker and weaker because the growth that made traditional jobs come to a halt has now met the demand and itself came to a halt and is working over the capacity. Wages drop, people are laid off and they become poorer. They do not have their culture to hold on to anymore. One by one they fall into the bottles of alcohol and drown.' This is one theory that can come true with inadequate or one sided community planning.

Strategies for development: the role of planning in tourism

Due to the dynamic nature of the Tourism industry, flexibility and being able to make incremental and rapid adjustments becomes very important in planning process. As we can see in the planning model below, (Williams, 1998) almost in every stage of the process there is a chance to evaluate and make the necessary change.  As Williams puts it, this is a quality that is especially important in tourism planning.

Moving on from this general planning model, there are 3 main approaches to tourism planning. These are Master plan, incremental plan and systematic plan. They differ from each other on the emphasis they put on different levels of the general planning model above. To give a brief idea about each one: Master plans are usually framed around a certain time period, like 5 years, and set out definite goals at the beginning. They are usually not interfered during this period and allowed to run their course. It is after this period that they are evaluated and a new master plan is set in motion. As you can see, this is the least suitable approach for a dynamic, constantly changing industry such as Tourism.

On the other hand incremental plans differ from the master plans in that they allow for the constant adjustment. As Williams explains, where master plans focus on the stages 1 & 2 of the general planning model, incremental planning is focused on the stages 8, 9 and 10. This gives the planners and everybody involved in the planning process the flexibility to adjust policies matching the fluctuations in the demand. This gives planners room and the ability to stay on top of their programs.

Lastly, systems approach has been thrown out there as a more in-depth and suitable approach to planning, especially in tourism where the industry has many linkages with other industries around. According to Williams systems approach simply means that a change in one factor will produce consequential and predictable change in other parts of the system. Thus it requires extensive knowledge of the structure and the workings of the system, which means money. That is why systems approach is not preferred or used by many of the tourism and planning professionals.

So why is planning important? For many things. To quote Arthur Schopenhauer here, “As the biggest library if it is in disorder is not as useful as a small but well-arranged one, so you may accumulate a vast amount of knowledge but it will be of far less value than a much smaller amount if you have not thought it over for yourself.” So is tourism growth just like that. If it is disorganized it can lead to no good or even the destruction of the surroundings, however, when planned carefully it can grow and sustain a region. As I have mentioned in earlier posts, if we want to be successful in Tourism we have to be on top of the this beast making sure it goes where we want it to go.

Introduction: studying tourism public policy by Hall

Government intervention.. This week we go one step further to look at what we do to in order or in hope to tame the 'Tourism Monster' and make it our best friend even.. We call these public policies, in our case tourism public policies.. Ideally and theoretically, in trying to shape a beautiful tourism sculpture for the community, various actors come together and make adjustments to the public policies that deal with tourism industry. Sounds simple enough? Hardly, because it doesn't end there. [heykel resmi]

From the first chapter of Hall's book [Tourism and Public Policy], we understand that 'public policy' does not have a single meaning that has been agreed on by those who are involved in the policy making process. Because each interest group has a different agenda, each view public policy in a different perspective. Nevertheless I also like Dye's (1992) interpretation of public policy as, 'whatever governments choose to do or not to do'. Looking back at Turkey, public policy is definitely what Dye says. Of course interest groups such as business and environmental groups are in effect while formulating the policies but it is more of a government job to create and implement public policy. And usually, ideology plays a big part on those public policies. Every government tries to benefit their supporter base so they design the policies in accordance with the ideological direction of the current administration.

When it comes to Tourism Public Policy, things don't get any less complicated. Given that Tourism is a relatively 'vague and spread' subject which can encompass different meanings for each interpreter. Thus, policy being like an 'elephant; recognizable yet hard to define' applies very much to the tourism public policy as you can imagine. For my understanding, I compare it with the word 'terrorism' almost; how each government or political group defines 'terrorism' according to their own needs and perceived outcomes, so they act upon THEIR perception rather than rationalizing it for the greater number.

As it is evident that there are many players to public policy formulation such as the government of course, pressure groups, community leaders and members, and many other with interests at stake, there has to be a common ground where all these parties can and will meet to create public policies. I think that common ground is the attitude of putting the 'region and its people' before anything else and doing what is best for the region and its people. That is the critical role of an ideal government I think; it is not to create a policy rather than to act as the mediator between all parties to find the best policy solutions for that region.

Last but not least, a policy as it has been mentioned in Hall's piece, is a theory more than anything. It is created for a given issue with the hope that, at the end some desirable outcome will be achieved. You can guess that not all the time the desirable outcome is achieved however. Therefore policy is an ever changing process. As people change, as interests change, even as climate changes the policies are (should be) in constant change in keeping up with the times...

Globalisation and Tourism for indigenous peoples By Raymond de Chavez

One of the most occurring topics in Tourism literature today, and probably all time, when talking about the affects of tourism is the ‘affects of tourism industry on Local communities’, especially indigenous peoples. As mentioned in the introduction of this article by Raymond de Chavez, Third World countries saw tourism “as a shortcut to rapid development of the economy”. I remember from my childhood, the president of Turkiye would talk on television about the growing tourism industry as the ‘industry without a chimney’; emphasizing its cleanliness whilst delivering big on the economic scale. It sounded great and most of the public, involved in tourism or not, got behind the industry and showed support only to realize later that this new industry is not really taking their needs into consideration. Actually tourism did not take anything into consideration other than looking for ways to bring more and more people in somehow. This rapid unplanned growth caused the loss of pristine environment, especially on the coastal areas of west and south Turkiye. Growing number of holiday villages and big hotels on these once unspoiled land started to enclose their surroundings and drive the locals away. Adding to this was the pollution of the beaches and the sea as well as growing arrogance of the tourists and their disregard for the local traditions. So, as I read this article and articles similar to this one, I can picture clearly from a local perspective how the tourism monster in unleashed.

To protect and preserve something, first, one has to love that thing. If one loves money more than nature or people, then it is understandable (!) that they will try to protect their interest - money wise. By opening up pristine land occupied by indigenous peoples to tourism industry, to tourism corporations to be exact, it is almost giving up the land rather than giving it away.

What makes me bitter and sad in most of these scenarios is the attitude of 'exploitation'. An exploitation of natural resources, exploitation of traditional values, exploitation of trust between cultures (seeing visitors in 'dollar signs' etc) yet there is not much 'generation' or even 're-generation' of something. Tourism generates money which most of goes to the head offices of the corporations anyway. The money it generates for the local indigenous economy more often than not is not enough to take that economy to another level. The locals are at the base of the wage chain working for a minimum in most cases.

I cannot help but think about the sociopolitical, sociocultural and political affects of Chavez's words when he says,

Cash production for the tourism industry has led to commercialism and individualism in contrast to the indigenous ways of simple living and mutual cooperation.

Tourism arguably has led or helped the disintegration of many cultures, big or small, around the world. 'Individualism and loss of mutual cooperation'. I have grown up in an environment where family was all about mutual cooperation to whereas now that I look around it is more of an individual game. In such a short time of maybe 10 years, now that I move back and forth between Canada and Turkey, I can clearly observe the change as it is happening, not gradually but very rapidly almost in a revolutionary sense. Of course there are many reasons for it; Media, mainly television being at top. However, tourism is not innocent.

Like the example Chavez gives on the hotel that was built on sacred land in the Cook Islands, Tourism and the drive to exploit as much as possible without taking into consideration anything about locals, not even sacred lands is the killer of those communities. Don't you see any resemblance of Americans taking over Native Soil?? I think there is an invasion nowadays under the name of “Tourism”.

As Chavez says, “unless benefit sharing mechanisms are put in place” there is no way tourism will ever help indigenous peoples. It is of course if it's not already too late..