A Critical Look at the State of Tourism Studies in

8 downloads 0 Views 69KB Size Report
Argentina, Paraguay, Chile, and Brazil (Barretto,. 2011). .... Fitó, M. (2009). Las religiones y culturas de origen afri- ... Commercial folklore and voodoo in.

Tourism Analysis, Vol. 23, pp. 249–259 Printed in the USA. All rights reserved. Copyright Ó 2018 Cognizant, LLC.

1083-5423/18 $60.00 + .00 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3727/108354218X15210313504599 E-ISSN 1943-3999 www.cognizantcommunication.com

A CRITICAL LOOK AT THE STATE OF TOURISM STUDIES IN ANTHROPOLOGY IN LATIN AMERICA AND THE CARIBBEAN1

CARLA GUERRÓN MONTERO Anthropology Department, University of Delaware, Newark, DE, USA

Anthropology has expanded by including within its purview the study of tourism. Although tourism is a subject of relative recent concern among anthropologists, anthropological scholarship on tourism has contributed greatly to tourism studies. In this conceptual article, I offer a preliminary study of the state of tourism studies and anthropology in Latin America and the Caribbean, based on a survey of literature published in English, Spanish, and Portuguese in Latin America, the US, and Europe. My primary concern is to discuss the relationship between tourism studies and anthropology in studying Latin America and the Caribbean. I conclude proposing that for the anthropology of tourism to advance towards more vibrant development, there needs to be an equal and multilingual dialogue among scholars, practitioners, and tourism stakeholders in the Global North and South, as well as a conceptualization of tourism as one aspect of a larger spectrum of movements, representations, and practices. Key words: Anthropology of tourism; Tourism studies; Latin America; Caribbean

Introduction

In this conceptual article, I offer a preliminary study of the state of tourism studies and anthropology in Latin America and the Caribbean,2 where I  have conducted ethnographic research on tourism, gender and racial relations, and constructions of citizenship since 1996.3 To do so, I have surveyed literature published in English, Spanish, and Portuguese in Latin America, the US, and Europe. I  have included the work of anthropologists living and practicing in the US, Canada, and the Western world with a focus on Latin America and the Caribbean, as well as the work of those who

Anthropology has expanded by including within its purview the study of tourism. Although tourism is a subject of relative recent concern among anthropologists, anthropological scholarship on tourism has contributed greatly to tourism studies. Likewise, the field of tourism studies has grown significantly over the last few decades and has achieved a prominent position as a multidisciplinary field (Graburn & Jafari, 1991; Jafari, 2001; Nash, 2007), thereby contributing to anthropology and other social sciences.

Address correspondence to Carla Guerrón Montero, Associate Professor of Anthropology, University of Delaware, 135 Munroe Hall, Newark, DE 19716, USA. E-mail: [email protected]

249 IP: 76.111.174.212 On: Wed, 06 Jun 2018 19:37:00 Article(s) and/or figure(s) cannot be used for resale. Please use proper citation format when citing this article including the DOI, publisher reference, volume number and page location. Delivered by Ingenta

250

GUERRÓN MONTERO

operate in the region itself.4 When necessary, I make a distinction between these two groups of Latin Americanists. My primary concern is to discuss the relationship between tourism studies and anthropology in studying Latin America and the Caribbean, following a critical tourism methodology (Ateljevic, Pritchard, & Morgan, 2007). I conclude by proposing that for the anthropology of tourism to advance towards more vibrant development, a more equal and multilingual dialogue among scholars, practitioners, and tourism stakeholders in the Global North and South needs to develop. Tempering the Tropics Tourism is of fundamental economic, political, cultural, and social importance in Latin America. Historically, the region has been characterized by its global orientation, while tourism additionally represents a vehicle to develop a comprehensive nationbuilding agenda. In fact, in many Latin American countries, tourism has come to occupy a central place in their economies, replacing traditional colonial staples like sugar, tobacco, and coffee as the engines of economic growth; therefore, the study of tourism is as important as any political or cultural phenomenon studied in the region (Fields, 1984; Spoor, 2000). How did the tourism industry initiate its long history in Latin America? For most of the 19th century, in Western countries (particularly the US and UK) warm weather was believed to be unhealthy and unsuitable for the assumed delicate nature of its population. With the advent of the Industrial Revolution and the globalization of markets and cultures, the discourse changed dramatically during the late 19th century, and by the early 20th century, the upper and middle classes in the US and UK engaged often in tourism in the tropics (Merrill, 2009). Warm weather, tropical fruits, and dark peoples were viewed as healthful and reinvigorating remedies for cold temperatures. Pursuing these remedies (consuming the weather, the fruits, the peoples, or getting a tan) through leisurely trips to presumably pristine places became a welcome option for the wealthy and the middle class. Latin America and the Caribbean transformed into prime locations for this newly acquired fascination with “the tropics,” which came to represent intimacy with a bountiful nature—perhaps even with

the Garden of Eden (Cocks, 2007, 2013; Reis & Shelton, 2011; Schwartz, 1999). Ultimately, tourism industry mediators “recasted climatic determinism in a romantic, instead of a tragic vein” (Cocks, 2007, p. 220), by “tempering” the climate of Latin America and the Caribbean and advertising it as manageable. In line with this new perspective, pleasure travel to Latin America began to be advertised heavily since the 1880s in the US and Europe, and by the mid-1920s the industry was firmly established (Berger, 2006; Cocks, 2013; Merill, 2009). After WWII, most Latin American countries used tourism as means of economic growth. Resulting from more economic air travel and the establishment of large beach resorts, tourism became a mass activity from the late 1960s onwards. Just like their predecessors, “the tourists who booked their holidays at these resorts were attracted by the promise of sun, sand, sea, and (possibly) sex. They could enjoy these under rather luxurious circumstances and without much awareness of daily life outside the resorts” (Baud & Ypeij, 2009, p. 2). There was a sharp interruption of this steady growth in the 1970s and 1980s, when authoritarian regimes, violence, and human rights violations kept foreign visitors away, especially in countries such as Chile, Nicaragua, and El Salvador (Mings, 1980). Mean­while, “backpack” tourism emerged in the 1970s in the region. Tourism reemerged in the 1990s and 2000s, even in those places that were previously perceived as dangerous and not welcoming to US tourists, such as Peru or Nicaragua (Babb, 2011). Since then, tourism has become an essential industry in the region (Baud & Ypeij, 2009).5 The United Nations World Tourism Organization (UNWTO) reported that 51.5 million tourists and 55 million tourists visited the region in 2010 and 2011, respectively; this represents 5.5% of the world market share (UNWTO, 2012). The projections estimate that the region will receive 79 million tourists by the year 2020, with a combined annual growth of 13.7% (UNWTO 2012). In the last decade, Latin America and other emerging regions of the world have gone from being mere tourism destinations to also become prime dispatchers of world tourists. In fact, Latin America has witnessed a dramatic rise in domestic and intraregional travel. Domestic travelers’ tourism spending has grown 15% since 2006, more

IP: 76.111.174.212 On: Wed, 06 Jun 2018 19:37:00 Article(s) and/or figure(s) cannot be used for resale. Please use proper citation format when citing this article including the DOI, publisher reference, volume number and page location. Delivered by Ingenta



STATE OF TOURISM STUDIES IN ANTHROPOLOGY

than three times the world average, while 60% of all international arrivals are intraregional visitors (Ruggles-Brisse, 2012). However, it should be stressed that at least a decade before, Latin America and the Caribbean were not only carriers of receptive tourism. For instance, intraregional travel has been commonplace between countries such as Argentina, Uruguay, and Brazil at least since the 1980s (dos Santos Filho, 2008; Sammarchi, 2001). The Study of Tourism in Anthropology Anthropologists and tourists have many things in common. Both travel to nearby or distant places with the intention of having some kind of cultural, ecological, or social experience at a given place, and both do this on a temporary basis. Nonetheless, in spite of the ubiquitous nature of movement in anthropology (both by anthropologists themselves as well as by the cultures studied), tourism and travel became subjects worthy of discussion in anthropology relatively recently, in Europe in the 1930s and in the US in the 1960s. Three reasons explain this paucity of attention. First, anthropologists argued that their experience and motivations for being in a distant location could not be compared to that of tourists, and they believed that they were being unfairly associated with the tourists they encountered in these faraway places (Crick, 1995). In order to more securely establish themselves as legitimate academics, anthropologists tended to dismiss tourists as superficial pleasure seekers, individuals whose actions are unconstrained by ethical obligations and who are neither interested in nor taken seriously by the people they encounter in their travels (Levi-Strauss, 1992). Although, in practically every ethnographic field site anthropologists encountered at least occasional tourists, they were perceived to be an undesired nuisance and given scant or no attention. Second, anthropologists considered tourism a subject not serious enough to discuss intellectually and ethnographically (Nuñez, 1977). This was motivated in part by a degree of insecurity about the limits and seriousness of the discipline. Finally, there was a general lack of recognition of the impor­ tance of tourism as a sociocultural phenomenon. In spite of this inauspicious beginning, the field of tourism studies and its relationship to anthropology has witnessed tremendous growth since the

251

1970s. Since then, anthropological scholarship on tourism has contributed greatly to tourism studies and has grown exponentially (Guerrón Montero, 2012; Leite & Graburn, 2009; Nash, 1996). Anthropologists recognize that tourism provides an ideal context for the study of subjects related to political economy, social change and development, natural resource management, and cultural identity, among others. In fact, many of the great questions asked by anthropologists since the 19th century can be studied through the lens of tourism (Stronza, 2001). Although some scholars argue that the anthropological study of tourism has achieved a status of subfield (Burns, 2004), others (Leite & Graburn, 2009) invite us to consider the work of anthropologists in tourism studies as “anthropological interventions.” Leite and Graburn (2009) proposed that “most anthropologists conducting tourism-related research orient their work toward disciplinary audiences focused on other topics” (p. 35) due to the lack of evidence of a coherent discipline. Some of the main recognized contributions of anthropologists to tourism studies include ethnographic understandings of tourism’s impact on host communities; the influence of travel on an individual; the power relationships in tourism developments; heritage and culture commodification; types of tourism and tourists; and the relationships between tourism and ethnicity, identity, material culture, nationalism, and the environment. In the US, the first recognized study of tourism in anthropology focused on Latin America. In an article entitled “Tourism, tradition, and acculturation: Weekendismo in a Mexican village” Theron Nuñez (1963) studied wealthy domestic tourists in Guadalajara, Mexico, who spent weekends at nearby Lake Chapala. Nuñez argued that tourism can be studied within the context of acculturation theory, by considering the urban tourist as a “donor” culture and the host population (the rural inhabitants of Lake Chapala) as a “recipient” culture. For the anthropologist, the presence of a “weekending” urban leisure class in a rural village in Mexico represented a second conquest with harmful consequences in terms of political authority, social organization, economics, and values (Nuñez, 1963). Nuñez stated, “the tourist is today more ubiquitous than the missionary, the technical assistance agent, or the trader, all of whom have been considered agents of diffusion and acculturation” (p. 352).

IP: 76.111.174.212 On: Wed, 06 Jun 2018 19:37:00 Article(s) and/or figure(s) cannot be used for resale. Please use proper citation format when citing this article including the DOI, publisher reference, volume number and page location. Delivered by Ingenta

252

GUERRÓN MONTERO

This article launched the interest on the study of tourism in anthropology in the US. At the American Anthropological Association meetings in 1974 (Mexico City), anthropologist Valene L. Smith organized the first panel on tourism at a US professional conference. The panel was followed by the publication of the first edited book on tourism and anthropology, Hosts and Guests: The Anthropology of Tourism, published by Smith in 1977 and reedited in 1989 (see Smith, 1989). This volume marked the beginning of a more serious interest in tourism and travel in anthropology. It included a collection of 16 essays that addressed tourism both theoretically and ethnographically. Latin America was only represented with one article on indigenous peoples in Panama (Swain, 1989). At about the same time, Annals of Tourism Research, one of the first academic journals dedicated to tourism,6 published work focused on anthropological approaches to tourism in the 1970s, including articles by Greenwood (1976), Aspelin (1977), Smith (1977, 1979), Jafari (1979), and Nash (1979). In the 1980s, Annals of Tourism Research dedicated two issues to anthropological approaches to tourism (Graburn, 1983; Jafari, 1980). The 1980 issue addressed anthropological perspectives on tourism and development and the 1983 issue tackled the anthropology of tourism specifically, which suggested the appearance of a separate field of study. From the 1960s until the mid-1980s the framework of most of the scholarship within the anthropology of tourism centered on social impact analysis, noting the lack of attention given to local populations in the development and benefits of tourism. Almost invariably, the supposition was that tourism brought negative economic and cultural impacts (Meyer-Arendt, 1990; Nash, 1989). There were important exceptions, such as those offered by MacCannell7 (1976) and Graburn (1977). These scholars understood tourism as a ritual and a sacred journey for Western modern societies, akin to religious pilgrimages in small-scale societies. Regarding publications that discussed tourism in Latin America, in addition to the article by Margaret Swain (1989) on gender roles in indigenous tourism among the Kuna indigenous peoples in Panama, Paul Aspelin (1977) studied tourism from an anthropological perspective among the Mam­ ainde indigenous peoples in Brazil. Argentinean

Juan José Selebri studied resort tourism in his book Mar del Plata, el Ocio Represivo (Mar del Plata, the Repressive Leisure), first published in 1970. Through a sociological lens, Selebri used Marcuse’s concept of repressive desublimation to analyze Latin America’s oldest tourism resort. Selebri considered tourism as a new form of alienation, as Argentineans who engaged in these pursuits needed to sustain two or three jobs to finance a short leisure experience in Mar del Plata. In an article that traces studies of tourism in Latin America from a geographical perspective in the 1980s, Meyer-Arendt (1990) argued that most research in that period was along the lines of host–guest interactions and their implications, mostly assumed to be negative (Callimanopulos, 1982; Dunkel, 1985; Evans, 1981; Husbands, 1983, 1986; Lange, 1980; Passariello, 1983, 1986; van den Berghe, 1980). Other foci included the neoliberal nature of tourism (Jurdao, 1992; Santana, 1997; Turner & Ash, 1975), and the impact of tourism on religion, culture, or the environment (Arana, 1983; Glazier, 1983; Goldberg, 1981; Molina, 1982). The focus shifted from the assumed negative impacts of tourism to the study of the functions of tourism within the boundaries of the hosts’ own societies. In the 1990s, anthropology experienced what became known as a “critical” or “reflexive turn” (Fabian, 2001). This turn in the discipline also influenced anthropological tourism studies, which blended with cultural studies and addressed topics such as the deconstruction of travel and “traveling cultures”; the application of concepts such as “borderlands” and “borderzones” to tourism (Bruner, 1996; Clifford, 1997; Rojek & Urry, 1997), and the semiotic analysis of promotional material in tourism (Dann, 1996). In Latin America, the anthropology of tourism followed a similar path with a different timeline (Barretto, 2011; Barretto, Grünewald, & Otamendi, 2010). The “critical turn” in tourism studies developed later, in the 21st century, with major proponents of this approach calling for interpretive, qualitative, and reflexive research, and the unification of philosophical and theoretical approaches (Ateljevic, Harris, Wilson, & Collins, 2005; Ateljevic et al., 2007; Hollinshead & Jamal, 2007; Lew, Hall, & Williams, 2004; Phillimore & Goodson, 2004; Tribe, 2006). More recently, the “new mobilities” framework has gained relevance in anthropology and tourism

IP: 76.111.174.212 On: Wed, 06 Jun 2018 19:37:00 Article(s) and/or figure(s) cannot be used for resale. Please use proper citation format when citing this article including the DOI, publisher reference, volume number and page location. Delivered by Ingenta



STATE OF TOURISM STUDIES IN ANTHROPOLOGY

253

studies (Glick Schiller & Salazar, 2013; Salazar, 2013). For Sheller (who studies the Caribbean) and Urry (2006), this approach recognized both the salience of both movement and its absence throughout history and the need to examine them as interdependent and unbounded. It aimed to go past the imagery of terrains or the global and the local, to recognize both the materiality and the locality of mobilities. Cohen and Cohen (2015) proposed that this approach merged the study of tourism— often understood as an extraordinary event with a beginning and an end—with more mundane local, national, and transnational corporeal mobilities. One key methodology employed by mobilities researchers is based on the transdisciplinary approach more commonly used by anthropologists, ethnography. Mobilities proponents call for the application of “mobile” or “itinerant” ethnographies to the social sciences (Sheller & Urry, 2006, p. 217).

Caribbean, especially during the 1990s and 2000s (Friedman, 1983; Gregory, 2006). In general terms, the research that has developed in Latin America is more connected to applied and public anthropology and public policy (Rufino & Rufino, 2009). Barreto (2011) provided an explanation for this prevalence by questioning rhetorically the role of the “anthropologist turismologist” in an emerging region like Latin America, “a continent marked by favelas, fishermen, indigenous peoples, caboclos,8 Afrodescendants, peasants: [is it to] observe and register or to attempt to assist in self-management, unifying local knowledge with scientific knowledge[?]” (p. 6). An analysis of the published work on the anthropology of tourism in Latin America reveals that anthropological interventions have centered heavily on the following themes: identity, authenticity, ethnicity, heritage, nation building, gender and sex, and poverty. In what follows, I provide more specific details about these topics:

Anthropology and Tourism in Latin America and the Caribbean

1. Historically, anthropology has been concerned with exploring identity politics through culture. Scholars of the anthropology of tourism in Latin America have followed suit; not surprisingly, cultural identity, ethnicity, and identity politics are predominant. Common studies include the influence of tourism on local systems of ethnic relations and hierarchies (César Dachary & Arnais Burne, 2009; Van de Berghe, 1980), and the application of concepts such as “commodification of culture” and “staged authenticity.” The anthropology of tourism has provided invaluable contributions to the understanding of the role of indigenous peoples, black populations, and other minorities in the creation of ethnic and indigenous tourism. These studies have demonstrated that the complexity and ambiguity of the categories indigenous, black, or mestizo in Latin America are generally erased in cultural tourism. As Barretto (2011) noted:

In spite of the long history of tourism in Latin America and the Caribbean, the anthropological study of tourism has gained prominence only since the mid-1990s (Barreto, Grünewald, Graburn, Santos, & Steil, 2009; Schluter, 1988). Anthropological interventions of tourism in the region have contributed to tourism studies in terms of theory, method, and topics. In theoretical and methodological terms, an emphasis on understanding the global political economy of the topics studied and the particular Latin American context runs through the literature. Most studies address the power structures that are attached to the touristic experience, while also offering nuanced ways to understand the relationships among so-called hosts, guests, and tourism mediators. As has happened with the anthropology of tourism overall, more commonly the hosts have been the focal point of analysis (Chambers, 2009), while the study of guests and tourism mediators has been addressed with less frequency (see Duccini, 2009; Nunes & Pacheco, 2009; Toniol, 2011). Methodologically, the ethnographic approach and applied methods—including action and participatory action research—are the common denominators. Attention to globalization permeates the anthropological study of tourism of Latin America and the

Local inhabitants are not isolated from the world; they are in the world; cosmopolitanism is present among indigenous groups and Afro-Latin Americans, who react to the presence of tourists in a reflexive and dialogic way, showing them their cultural roots as a way to maintain a unique attraction and with this, strengthening those groups at the political level. (p. 2)

IP: 76.111.174.212 On: Wed, 06 Jun 2018 19:37:00 Article(s) and/or figure(s) cannot be used for resale. Please use proper citation format when citing this article including the DOI, publisher reference, volume number and page location. Delivered by Ingenta

254

GUERRÓN MONTERO

2. Anthropologists have pointed out that the tourism industry has a propensity to present indigenous cultures as a unique vestige of the past preserved over the years to be admired by the tourist gaze. Thus, the reinvention of lo indígena plays a fundamental role in Andean and Central American cultural tourism. Indigenous cultures have been the issue around which most of the political and intellectual debates have revolved, and this continues to be visible in tourism’s iconography (Anderson, 2012; Babb, 2011; Baud & Ypeij, 2009; Castañeda, 1996; Castellanos, 2010; Chernela, 2011; Pereiro Pérez & De León Inawinapi, 2007; Pereiro Pérez, 2015). More recent studies on ethnic communities tackle alternative tourism studies in various forms, including religious tourism (Fitó, 2009); ecotourism and sustainable tourism (Stronza & Durham, 2008; Vivanco, 2001); community-based and rural tourism (Coronado, 2014; Da Silva Leal, 2009; Ferreira de Faria, 2009; Fierro Reyes, 2015; Juárez Sánchez & Ramírez Valverde, 2011; Pastor Alfonso & Gómez Lopéz, 2010); and voluntourism (Nunes & Pacheco, 2009). Scholars of these forms of tourism recognize that they are the result both of the negative outcomes of mass tourism and of the production of marketing niches based on business responsibility, ethnic market, and sustainable development discourses (Coronado, 2014). 3. Related to these concepts, cultural heritage, heritagization, intangible heritage, and museum studies are themes analyzed commonly. In these studies, the association between heritagization of culture and public policy are investigated and brought to the forefront (Guerrón Montero, 2009; Little, 2004; Scarpaci, 2004; Scher, 2011). 4. The role of tourism in nation building has received important attention from anthropological research conducted in Latin America. Overall, scholars studying nation building see it as a wide-ranging plan that includes not only economic goals, but also political, social, and ideological ones, where national identities and national interests are intertwined (Amit, 2001; Babb, 2011; Berger & Wood, 2010; Bowman, 2013; Cocks, 2007; Guerrón Montero, 2006, 2009; Hellier-Tinoco, 2011; Merrill, 2009; Sánchez & Adams, 2008).

5. Gender, sex, and romance tourism have also been explored. Most works address the complexity and multiplicity of interplays between the tourist and the client (Brennan, 2004; Cabezas, 2009; Padilla, 2007; Roland, 2011; Williams, 2013), in some cases discriminating between sex and romance tourism, while in others proposing multifaceted approaches to the category “sex worker.” As Cabezas (2004) suggested, this reinterpretation accounts for “the provisional practices and identities that constitute sexual markets and that envelop understandings of labor and sex as more a matter of continua than a hard and fast definition” (p. 992). 6. Public officials, policy administrators, and even scholars have conceived the tourism industry as the elixir to end poverty in Latin America (Croes, 2014; Hawkins & Mann, 2007). In an interesting yet somewhat predictable turn of events, worldwide poverty itself is now offered as a tourism attraction. Studies aimed to understand poverty tourism have emerged, centered more often on Brazil,9 Jamaica, and Mexico. According to Dürr and Jaffe (2012), this emerging field has the potential to connect Latin American and Caribbean Studies on tourism and urban inequality. Most studies on poverty tourism have tended to focus on tourism “as a form of consumption, rather than asking how a broader range of actors connect in the ‘slum tourist encounter’ to convert the slum into a tourism product” (Dürr & Jaffe, 2012, p. 113).10 Some of the most relevant examples of poverty tourism studies include those of favela tourism in Rio de Janeiro (FreireMedeiros, 2013), slum tourism in Mexico City’s Tepito neighborhood (Dürr & Jaffe, 2012), and Kingston’s Trenchtown reggae scene (Webster, 2008). Conclusions A few final general remarks can be made about the state of the anthropology of tourism of and in Latin America. It has developed a productive rather than a merely reactive critique and it continues to be informed by a framework rooted in global political economy and concerned with globalization, with a particular focus on hosts. However, it has moved

IP: 76.111.174.212 On: Wed, 06 Jun 2018 19:37:00 Article(s) and/or figure(s) cannot be used for resale. Please use proper citation format when citing this article including the DOI, publisher reference, volume number and page location. Delivered by Ingenta



STATE OF TOURISM STUDIES IN ANTHROPOLOGY

from viewing tourism as inherently negative to viewing tourism as a coproduction (Bruner, 2005), while considering the ways in which local populations create, cocreate, and respond to tourism.11 Another transformation refers to the emergence of comparative works. Although generally speaking comparative studies in the anthropology of tourism in Latin America are sparse (cf. Dürr & Jaffe, 2012), a growing body of comparative works has surfaced in the last 10 years (Babb, 2011; Bowman, 2013; Cabezas, 2004; Guerrón Montero, 2011; Merrill, 2009). The future looks promising for the anthropology of tourism of Latin America. The theoretical and methodological approaches, the topics explored, and the emphasis on dialogue among students of tourism of and in Latin America will continue to produce excellent academic, applied, and public scholarship. However, based on the process of reviewing the literature for this article, I propose the need for a more uniform dialogue between the Global North and South. Although there are promising alternative approaches to the study of tourism stemming from anthropology within Latin America, the location of cultural knowledge (in both physical and metaphorical terms) has not been addressed sufficiently in the study of tourism. One exception worth referencing is the “Cultura, Turismo y Sociedad” (CulTus), founded in 2002 as forum for the reflection and debate about tourism from empirical and theoretical perspectives. The objective of the group is to develop new paradigms for the study of tourism and anthropology. The group includes academics from Uruguay, Argentina, Paraguay, Chile, and Brazil (Barretto, 2011). However, in general, what transpires in the anthropology of tourism in Latin America is what Lins Ribeiro (2006) called a metropolitan provincialism and a provincial cosmopolitanism: Metropolitan provincialism means the ignorance that hegemonic centers usually have of the production of nonhegemonic centers. Provincial cosmopolitanism means the knowledge that non-hegemonic centers usually have of the production of hegemonic centers. (p. 378)

The literature I have surveyed points to the fact that whereas anthropologists in the North are rarely

255

aware of the theoretical and methodological contributions of anthropologists in the South, anthropologists in the South are highly conscious of the contributions of anthropologists in the North. Part of this inequality is the lack of translation of work published in Spanish or Portuguese to English, and sometimes the lack of interest among Western scholars to read works published in languages other than English. These realities derive as much from the Eurocentric nature of academia itself as from the particularities of a mostly fragmented field such as tourism studies. Cohen and Cohen (2015) stated that the field of tourism studies was a latecomer in the long-held debate about Eurocentrism in academia. This tardiness applied both to assumptions made about the role of emerging regions in the tourism phenomenon and to the power relations within the tourism academy itself “alongside other skewed variables such as gender, social class and race” with gatekeepers whose work was based on Western research traditions (Cohen & Cohen, 2015, p. 158). For the anthropology of tourism in Latin America to advance towards a more vibrant development, there needs to be an equal and multilingual dialogue among scholars, practitioners, and tourism stakeholders. Monological anthropology and tourism studies need to be replaced by heteroglossic anthropology and tourism studies (Lins Ribeiro, 2006). It is likely that this dialogue will facilitate a more comprehensive interdisciplinarity. Likewise, the conceptualization of tourism as one aspect of a larger spectrum of movements, representations, and practices (as proposed within the new mobilities framework) may become an alternative to the inherently Eurocentric bias of modernist tourism studies. A recognition of the critical turns taken by anthropology and tourism studies, coupled with an approach that “does not distinguish between a centre and periphery of tourist activity; . . . does not assume a single point of dissemination of tourism; and . . . does not prioritize a particular kind of motivation” (Cohen & Cohen, 2015, p. 163) may generate a balanced framework ideally suitable for interpreting emerging regions of the world, including Latin America and the Caribbean.

IP: 76.111.174.212 On: Wed, 06 Jun 2018 19:37:00 Article(s) and/or figure(s) cannot be used for resale. Please use proper citation format when citing this article including the DOI, publisher reference, volume number and page location. Delivered by Ingenta

256

GUERRÓN MONTERO Notes

References

An earlier version of this article was presented at the V International Conference on Critical Tourism Studies in Sarajevo, Bosnia & Herzegovina (June 2013) at the session Critical Action in Academia, moderated by Kellee Caton. I would like to thank the panelists and audience present for their valuable comments. I also would like to express my gratitude to Dr. Florence Babb for her insightful remarks and suggestions and to Dr. Lynn Minnaert for her outstanding performance as co-editor of this special issue. 2 I recognize the contentious nature of the terms “Latin America” and “the Caribbean,” and understand them as Western constructions with changing meanings and a traceable genealogy and history (Mignolo, 2005; Quijano, 2000). 3 The state of the anthropology of tourism in higher education in Latin America is beyond the purview of this article. 4 In this article, I do not make a distinction between Latin American scholars trained in the West versus those trained in Latin America. 5 In 1950, approximately 1.3 million tourists visited Latin America and the Caribbean. In 1980, Latin America welcomed 18 million tourists, and in 2006, 45 million. Tourism revenues rose from US$392 in 1950 to US$13 billion in 1980 and more than US$41 billion in 2006 (UNWTO, 2008). 6 Jafar Jafari, the founding editor of the journal, received a Ph.D. in anthropology from Cornell University in 1985. His 1973 M.A. thesis discussed issues related to the anthropology of tourism (Jafari, 1973). 7 MacCannell initiated his scholarly life as an anthropologist, moving then to rural sociology and later semiotics (Aramberri, 2015). 8 This term refers to a person of mixed Indigenous Brazilian and European ancestry. It can also denote a culturally assimilated person of full Amerindian descent. 9 The anthropology of tourism in Brazil is worth mentioning. It started at the end of the 1990s, when tourism was discussed at the III Anthropology Meeting of Mercosul in Posadas, Argentina (Barretto et al., 2009). The first symposium on the anthropology of tourism in Brazil took place in 2004 at the 24th meeting of the Brazilian Association of Anthropology in Olinda, Pernambuco. The most commonly addressed issues in congresses and publications included sexual tourism, local identity, religious tourism, cultural impact, and heritage. Generally, the focus was on acculturation processes and loss of authenticity and identity among hosts engaging in tourism. 10 However, Dürr and Jaffe believe that there are signs of movement from the single case study approach to theorizations on the intersection between what they call slum tourism, dark tourism, and urban inequality. 11 Bruner (2005) offered the very useful understanding of the relationship between tourists and hosts as coproductions to avoid falling into the assumption that tourists are “invaders” in a given location. Coproduction and encounter are helpful concepts to interpret the interactions between tourists and hosts because they both allow for the recognition of the asymmetric relations of power that exist between these regions.

Amit, V. (2001). A clash of vulnerabilities: Citizenship, labor, and expatriacy in the Cayman Islands. American Ethnologist, 28(3), 574–594. Anderson, M. (2012). Notes on tourism, ethnicity, and the politics of cultural value in Honduras. In J. L. Burrell & E. Moodie (Eds.), Central America in the new millennium (1st ed., pp. 276–292). Oxford, UK: Berghann. Aramberri, J. (2015). Roaring tiger, sweet pussy cat: The education of Dean MacCannell. Tourism Recreation Research, 40(2), 234–247. Arana, M. (Ed.). (1983). Medio ambiente y turismo. Buenos Aires, Argentina: CLACSO. Aspelin, P. (1977). The anthropological analysis of tourism: Indirect tourism and political economy in the case of the Mamainde of Mato Grosso, Brazil. Annals of Tourism Research, 4(3), 135–160. Ateljevic, I., Harris, C., Wilson, E., & Collins, F. L. (2005). Getting “entangled”: Reflexivity and the “critical turn” in tourism studies. Tourism Recreation Research, 30(2), 9–21. Ateljevic, I., Pritchard, A., & Morgan, N. (2007). Introduction: Promoting an academy of hope in tourism enquiry. In I. Ateljevic, A. Pritchard, & N. Morgan (Eds.), The critical turn in tourism studies (pp. 1–11). Oxford, UK: Elsevier. Babb, F. (2011). The tourism encounter: Fashioning Latin American nations and histories. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. Barretto, M. (2011). Turismo, cultura y sociedad. Pasos, 9(3), 1–6. Barretto, M., Grünewald, R. D. A., Graburn, N., Santos, R. J. D., & Steil, C. A. (Eds.). (2009). Turismo e antropologia: Novas abordagens. Campinas, Brazil: Papirus. Barretto, M., Grünewald, R. D. A., & Otamendi, A. (2010). RAM- Reunión de antropología del MERCOSUR “Diversidad y poder en América Latina.” Pasos, 8(2), 403–409. Baud, J. M., & Ypeij, J. L. (Eds.). (2009). Cultural tourism in Latin America: The politics of space and imagery (Vol. 96). Leiden, Netherlands: Brill Publishers. Berger, D. (2006). The development of Mexico’s tourism industry: Pyramids by day, martinis by night. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan. Berger, D., & Wood, A. G. (Eds.). (2010). Holiday in Mexico: Critical reflections on tourism and tourist encounters. Durham, NC: Duke University Press. Bowman, K. S. (2013). Peddling paradise: The politics of tourism in Latin America Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner Publishers. Brennan, D. (2004). What’s love got to do with it? Transnational desires and sex tourism in the Dominican Republic. American Anthropologist, 107(2), 279–279. Bruner, E. (1996). Tourism in the Balinese borderzone. In S. Lavie & T. Swedenburg (Eds.), Displacement, diaspora, and geographies of identity (pp. 157–179). Durham, NC: Duke University Press. Bruner, E. (2005). Culture on tour: Ethnographies of travel. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

1

IP: 76.111.174.212 On: Wed, 06 Jun 2018 19:37:00 Article(s) and/or figure(s) cannot be used for resale. Please use proper citation format when citing this article including the DOI, publisher reference, volume number and page location. Delivered by Ingenta



STATE OF TOURISM STUDIES IN ANTHROPOLOGY

Burns, G. L. (2004). Anthropology and tourism: Past contributions and future theoretical challenges. Anthropological Forum, 14(1), 5–22. Cabezas, A. (2004). Between love and money: Sex, tourism, and citizenship in Cuba and the Dominican Republic. Signs, 29(4), 987–1015. Cabezas, A. (2009). Economies of desire: Sex and tourism in Cuba and the Dominican Republic. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press. Callimanopulos, D. (1982). The tourist trap: Who’s getting caught? Cultural Survival Quarterly, 6(3), 1–35. Castañeda, Q. (1996). In the museum of Maya culture: Touring Chichen Itza. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press. Castellanos, M. B. (2010). A return to servitude: Maya migration and the tourist trade in Cancun. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press. César Dachary, A., & Arnaiz Burne, S. M. (2009). Pueblos originarios y turismo en América Latina. Estudios y Perspectivas, 18, 69–91. Chambers, E. (2009). Native tours: The anthropology of travel and tourism (2nd ed.). Long Grove, IL: Waveland. Chernela, J. (2011). Barriers natural and unnatural: Islamiento as a central metaphor in Kuna ecotourism. Bulletin of Latin American Research, 30(1), 35–49. Clifford, J. (1997). Routes: Travel and translation in the late twentieth century. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Cocks, C. (2007). The pleasures of degeneration: Climate, race, and the origins of the global tourist south in the Americas. Discourse, 29(2/3), 215–235. Cocks, C. (2013). Tropical whites: The rise of the tourist south in the Americas. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press. Cohen, E., & Cohen, S. (2015). Beyond Eurocentrism in tourism studies: A paradigm shift to mobilities. Tourism Recreation Research, 40(2), 157–168. Coronado, G. (2014). Selling culture? Between commoditisation and cultural control in indigenous alternative tourism. Pasos, 12(1), 11–28. Crick, M. (1995). The anthropologist as tourist: An identity in question. In M. Lanfant, J. Allcock, & E. Bruner (Eds.), International tourism: Identity and change (1st ed., pp. 205–223). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Croes, R. (2014). Tourism and poverty reduction in Latin America: Where does the region stand? Worldwide Hospitality and Tourism Themes, 6(3), 293–300. Da Silva Leal, R. E. (2009). O turismo desenvolvido em territórios indígenas sob o ponto de vista antropológico. In R. Bartholo, D. G. Sansolo, & I. Bursztyn (Eds.), Turismo de base comunitária (1st ed., pp. 240–248). Rio de Janeiro, Brazil: Letra e Imagem. Dann, G. M. S. (1996). The language of tourism: A sociolinguistic perspective. Wallingford, UK: CABI. Dos Santos Filho, J. (2008). Política nacional de turismo: Descaso e desrespeito para com o povo brasileiro. Revista Espaço Acadêmico, 86.

257

Duccini, L. (2009). No lugar de Exu: Os guias de turismo no candomblé em Salvador, BA. Revista de Antropologia, 56(2), 477–508. Dunkel, D. R. (1985). Tourism as a form of demographic imperialism: A comparison of the Bahamas and Virgin Islands. Unpublished Ph.D., Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI. Dürr, E., & Jaffe, R. (2012). Theorizing slum tourism: Performing, negotiating and Transforming inequality. European Review of Latin American and Caribbean Studies, 93, 113–123. Evans, N. H. (1981). The process of mediation in tourism interaction: A case study of Puerto Vallarta, Jalisco, Mexico. Unpublished Ph.D., University of California, Riverside, Riverside, CA. Fabian, J. (2001). Anthropology with an attitude: Critical essays. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. Ferreira de Faria, I. (2009). Ecoturismo, cultura e participação: Gestão do território indígena no Alto Rio Negro. In R. Bartholo, D. G. Sansolo, & I. Bursztyn (Eds.), Turismo de base comunitária (pp. 261–276). Rio de Janeiro, Brazil: Letra e Imagem. Fields, G. S. (1984). Employment, income distribution and economic growth in seven small open economies. Economic Journal, 94, 74–83. Fierro Reyes, I. G. (2015). Turismo de hacienda e intervención comunitaria en el contexto rural yucateco. Desacatos, 47, 54–71. Fitó, M. (2009). Las religiones y culturas de origen africano (Brasil, Cuba, Venezuela) a prueba de políticas turísticas y rivalidades. Études Caribéennes [Online], 13–14. Freire-Medeiros, B. (2013). Touring poverty. London, UK & New York, NY: Routledge. Friedman, J. A. (1983). From plantation to resort: Tourism and dependency in a West Indian island [St. Lucia]. Unpublished Ph.D., Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ. Glazier, S. D. (1983). Caribbean pilgrimages: A topology. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 22, 316–325. Glick Schiller, N., & Salazar, N. B. (2013). Regimes of mobility across the globe. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 39(2), 183–200. Goldberg, A. (1981). Commercial folklore and voodoo in Haiti: International tourism and the sale of culture. Unpublished Ph.D., Indiana University, Bloomington, IN. Graburn, N. H. H. (1977). Tourism: The sacred journey. In V. L. Smith (Ed.), Hosts and guests: The anthropology of tourism (1st ed., pp. 17–31). Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press. Graburn, N. H. H. (1983). Special issue: “The anthropology of tourism.” Annals of Tourism Research, 10(1), 1–192. Graburn, N. H. H., & Jafari, J. (1991). Introduction: Tourism social science. Annals of Tourism Research, 18(1), 1–11. Greenwood, D. J. (1976). Tourism as an agent of change: A  Spanish Basque case. Annals of Tourism Research, 3(3), 128–142.

IP: 76.111.174.212 On: Wed, 06 Jun 2018 19:37:00 Article(s) and/or figure(s) cannot be used for resale. Please use proper citation format when citing this article including the DOI, publisher reference, volume number and page location. Delivered by Ingenta

258

GUERRÓN MONTERO

Gregory, S. (2006). The devil behind the mirror: Globalization and politics in the Dominican Republic. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. Guerrón Montero, C. (2006). Tourism and Afro-Antillean identity in Panama. Journal of Tourism and Cultural Change, 4(2), 65–84. Guerrón Montero, C. (2009). The “three roots” of Panama’s cultural heritage: The construction of racial and national identities in simulated tourism. In M. Baud & A. Ypeij (Eds.), Cultural tourism in Latin America: The politics of space and imagery (pp. 45–68). Boston, MA: Brill Academic Publishers. Guerrón Montero, C. (2011). On tourism and the con­ structions of “Paradise islands” in Central America and the Caribbean. Bulletin of Latin American Research, 1, 21–34. Guerrón Montero, C. (2012). Peer-reviewed entry: “Tourism.” Oxford Bibliographies in “Anthropology”. Hawkins, D. E., & Mann, S. (2007). The World Bank’s role in tourism development. Annals of Tourism Research, 34(2), 348–363. Hellier-Tinoco, R. (2011). Embodying Mexico: Tourism, nationalism and performance. Oxford, UK: Oxford UP. Hollinshead, K., & Jamal, T. (2007). Tourism and “the third ear”: Further prospects for qualitative inquiry. Tourism Analysis, 12, 85–129. Husbands, W. C. (1983). The genesis of tourism in Barbados. Caribbean Geography, 1, 107–120. Husbands, W. C. (1986). Periphery resort tourism and touristresident stress. Leisure Studies, 5, 175–188. Jafari, J. (1973). The role of tourism in the socio-economic transformation of developing countries. Unpublished Master of Arts, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY. Jafari, J. (1979). Tourism and the social sciences: A bibliography: 1970–1978. Annals of Tourism Research, 6(2), 149–194. Jafari, J. (1980). Special issue: “Tourism and development: Anthropological perspectives.” Annals of Tourism Research, 7(1), 5–158. Jafari, J. (2001). Scientification of tourism. In V. Smith & M. Brent (Eds.), Hosts and guests revisited (1st ed., pp. 28–41). Elmsford, NY: Cognizant. Juárez Sánchez, P., & Ramírez Valverde, B. (2011). Turismo rural: Experiencias y desafíos en Iberoamérica. Texcoco, México: Colegio de Postgraduados en Ciencias Agrícolas. Jurdao, F. (1992). Los mitos del turismo. Madrid, Spain: Endimión. Lange, F. W. (1980). The impact of tourism on cultural patrimony: A Costa Rican example. Annals of Tourism Research, 7(1), 56–68. Leite, N., & Graburn, N. H. H. (2009). Anthropological interventions on tourism studies. In T. Jamal & M. Robinson (Eds.), Sage handbook of tourism studies (1st  ed., pp. 35–64). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Levi-Strauss, C. (1992). Tristes tropiques (Reprint ed.). New York, NY: Penguin.

Lew, A., Hall, C. M., & Williams, A. M. (Eds.). (2004). A companion to tourism. Oxford, UK: Willey-Blackwell. Lins Ribeiro, G. (2006). World anthropologies: Cosmopolitics for a new global scenario in anthropology. Critique of Anthropology, 26(4), 363–386. Little, W. (2004). Mayas in the marketplace: Tourism, globalization, and cultural identity. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press. MacCannell, D. (1976). The tourist: A new theory of the leisure class (1st ed.). New York, NY: Schocken. Merrill, D. (2009). Negotiating paradise: U.S. tourism and empire in twentieth-century Latin America. Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press. Meyer-Arendt, K. (1990). Geographic research on tourism in Latin America, 1980–1990. Conference on Latin Americanist Geographers, Benchmark, 17/18, 199–207. Mignolo, W. (2005). The Idea of Latin America. Oxford, UK: Blackwell. Mings, R. C. (1980). Tourism development in Latin America and related research needs. Proceedings of the Conference of Latin Americanist Geographers, 8, 336–346. Molina E. S. (1982). Turismo y ecología. Mexico: Trillas Publishing. Nash, D. (1979). The rise and fall of an aristocratic tourist culture: Nice 1763–1936. Annals of Tourism Research, 6(1), 61–75. Nash, D. (1989). Tourism as a form of imperialism. In V. L. Smith (Ed.), Hosts and guests: The anthropology of tourism (2nd ed., pp. 37–53). Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press. Nash, D. (1996). The anthropology of tourism (1st ed.). Bingley, UK: Emerald. Nash, D. (Ed.). (2007). The study of tourism: Anthropological and sociological beginnings (1st ed.). Amsterdam, Netherlands: Elsevier. Nunes, F., & Pacheco, J. (2009). Solidariedade e lazer? A  experiência dos “Turistas-voluntários” no Rio de Janeiro. Graduate dissertation, Fundação Getúlio Vargas, Brazil. Nuñez, T. (1963). Tourism, tradition, and acculturation: Weekendismo in a Mexican village. Ethnology, 2(3), 347–352. Nuñez, T. (1977). Touristic studies in anthropological perspective. In V. Smith (Ed.), Hosts and guests: The anthropology of tourism (pp. 207–216). Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press. Padilla, M. (2007). Caribbean pleasure industry: Tourism, sexuality, and AIDS in the Dominican Republic. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Passariello, P. (1983). Never on Sunday? Mexican tourists at the beach. Annals of Tourism Research, 10(1), 109–122. Passariello, P. (1986). Novelty’s pilgrims: Change and tourism in a Mexican beach community. Unpublished Ph.D., University of California, Berkeley, CA. Pastor Alfonso, M. J., & Gómez López, D. (2010). Impactos socioculturales en el turismo comunitario: Una visión desde los pueblos implicados. Salamanca, Spain: Agua Clara.

IP: 76.111.174.212 On: Wed, 06 Jun 2018 19:37:00 Article(s) and/or figure(s) cannot be used for resale. Please use proper citation format when citing this article including the DOI, publisher reference, volume number and page location. Delivered by Ingenta



STATE OF TOURISM STUDIES IN ANTHROPOLOGY

Pereiro Pérez, X. (2015). Reflexión antropológica sobre el turismo indígena. Desacatos, 47. Pereiro Pérez, X., & De León Inawinapi, C. (2007). Los impactos del turismo en Kuna Yala: Turismo y cultura entre los Kuna de Panamá (1st ed.). Madrid, Spain: Ramón Areces. Phillimore, J., & Goodson, L. (Eds.). (2004). Qualitative research on tourism: Ontologies, epistemologies and methodologies. New York, NY: Routledge. Quijano, A. (2000). Colonialidad del poder, eurocentrismo y América Latina. In E. Lander (Ed.), La colonialidad del saber: Eurocentrismo y ciencias sociales (1st ed., pp. 201–246). Buenos Aires, Argentina: CLACSO. Reis, A., & Shelton, E. (2011). The nature of tourism studies. Tourism Analysis, 16, 375–384. Rojek, C., & Urry, J. (1997). Touring cultures: Transformations of travel and theory. New York, NY: Routledge. Roland, L. K. (2011). Cuban color in tourism and la lucha: An ethnography of racial meanings. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. Rufino, M., & Rufino, D. (2009). Turismo solidário e comunidades do entorno das águas em Manaus (AM). Natal, Brazil: Natal Press. Ruggles-Brisse, O. (2012). Tourism: Latin America’s travel boom and challenges. Americas Quarterly, 6(3), 5–6. Salazar, N. B. (2013). Imagining mobility at the “End of the world.” History and Anthropology, 24(2), 233–252. Sammarchi, M. (2001). Situación actual del turismo en la Argentina. Cuadernos de Turismo, 8, 129–144. Sánchez, P. M., & Adams, K. (2008). The Janus-faced character of tourism in Cuba. Annals of Tourism Research, 35(1), 27–46. Santana Talavera, A. (1997). Antropología y turismo: Nuevas hordas, viejas culturas? Barcelona, Spain: Ariel. Scarpaci, J. L. (2004). Plazas and barrios: Heritage tourism and globalization in the Latin American centro histórico. Tucson, AZ: University of Arizona Press. Scher, P. (2011). Heritage tourism in the Caribbean: The politics of culture after neoliberalism. Bulletin of Latin American Research, 30(1), 7–20. Schluter, R. (1988). In search of cultural identity: Latin American tourism literature. Annals of Tourism Research, 15(2), 285. Schwartz, R. (1999). Pleasure island: Tourism and temptation in Cuba. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press. Selebri, J. J. (1970). Mar del plata, el ocio represivo. Buenos Aires, Argentina: Tiempo Contemporáneo.

259

Sheller, M., & Urry, J. (2006). The new mobilities paradigm. Environment and Planning A, 38(2), 207–226. Smith, V. L. (1977). Recent research on tourism and cultural change: 1976 symposium. Annals of Tourism Research, 4(3), 129–134. Smith, V. L. (1979). Women the taste-makers in tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 6(1), 49–60. Smith, V. L. (Ed.). (1989). Hosts and guests: The anthropology of tourism (2nd ed.). Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press. Spoor, M. (2000). Two decades of adjustment and agricultural development in Latin America and the Caribbean. Santiago, Chile: CEPAL. Stronza, A. (2001). Anthropology of tourism: Forging new ground for ecotourism and other alternatives. Annual Review of Anthropology, 30, 261–283. Stronza, A., & Durham, W. H. (Eds.). (2008). Ecotourism and conservation in the Americas. Wallingford, UK: CABI. Swain, M. B. (1989). Gender roles in indigenous tourism: Kuna Mola, Kuna Yala, and cultural survival. In V. Smith (Ed.), Hosts and guests: The anthropology of tourism (pp. 83–104). Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press. Toniol, R. (2011). “O caminho é aqui”: Um estudo antropológico da experiência do caminho de Santiago de Compostela em uma associação de peregrinos do Rio Grande do Sul, Brasil. Pasos, 9(3), 69–82. Tribe, J. (2006). The truth about tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 33(2), 360–381. Turner, L., & Ash, J. (1975). The golden hordes: International tourism and the pleasure periphery. London, UK: Constable & Robinson. United Nations World Tourism Organization. (2008). Tourism highlights. Madrid, Spain: Author. United Nations World Tourism Organization. (2012). Tourism highlights. Madrid, Spain: Author. Van den Berghe, P. L. (1980). Tourism as ethnic relations: A case study of Cuzco, Peru. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 3, 375–392. Vivanco, L. (2001). Spectacular quetzals, ecotourism, and environmental futures in Monte Verde, Costa Rica. Ethnology, 40(2), 79–92. Webster, D. (2008). Jamaican vinyl tourism: A niche within a niche. In M. Daye, D. Chambers, & S. Roberts (Eds.), New perspectives in Caribbean tourism (1st ed., pp.  61–78). New York, NY: Routledge. Williams, E. L. (2013). Sex tourism in Bahia: Ambiguous entanglements. Champaign, IL: University of Illinois Press.

IP: 76.111.174.212 On: Wed, 06 Jun 2018 19:37:00 Article(s) and/or figure(s) cannot be used for resale. Please use proper citation format when citing this article including the DOI, publisher reference, volume number and page location. Delivered by Ingenta

Suggest Documents