This article was downloaded by: [ISMAR LIMA] On: 19 August 2011, At: 07:08 Publisher: Routledge Informa

Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Anatolia
Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rana20

Community capitals and ecotourism for enhancing Amazonian forest livelihoods

Ismar Borges Lima & Anne-Marie d'Hauteserre
a a b

Instituto de Estudos Socioambientais - IESA, Universidade Federal de Gois - UFG, Campus Samambaia (Campus II) - CEP: 74001-970 Goinia, Gois, Brazil
b

Department of Geography, Tourism and Environmental Planning, Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences (FASS), The University of Waikato, Private Bag 3105, Hamilton, New Zealand Available online: 19 Aug 2011

To cite this article: Ismar Borges Lima & Anne-Marie d'Hauteserre (2011): Community capitals and ecotourism for enhancing Amazonian forest livelihoods, Anatolia, 22:2, 184-203 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13032917.2011.597933

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions This article may be used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, re-distribution, re-selling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae and drug doses should be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.

Anatolia An International Journal of Tourism and Hospitality Research Vol. 22, No. 2, August 2011, 184203

Community capitals and ecotourism for enhancing Amazonian forest livelihoods

Ismar Borges Limaa* and Anne-Marie dHauteserreb
a s - UFG, Campus Instituto de Estudos Socioambientais - IESA, Universidade Federal de Goia nia, Goia s, Brazil; bDepartment of Geography, Samambaia (Campus II) - CEP: 74001-970 - Goia Tourism and Environmental Planning, Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences (FASS), The University of Waikato, Private Bag 3105 Hamilton, New Zealand

(Received 25 January 2011; nal version received 28 May 2011)

Downloaded by [ISMAR LIMA] at 07:08 19 August 2011

This article examines whether and how ecotourism functions to strengthen Amazonian livelihoods in remote areas and community capitals as well helping to protect the environment in rural planning and development. It focuses on the role of ecotourism as a possible enhancer of human, social and natural capitals in the Maripa community. Capitals are believed to be the mainstay for group-oriented practices, harmony, dissemination of knowledge, and maintenance of a healthy and sustainable environment. The decision of making ecotourism an avenue for regional planning and development can work better if communities make ecotourism a collective enterprise, producing collective socio-economic and environmental advantages. As a conceptual follow-up to community capitals, the authors introduce and discuss a hypothetical cycle of anxiety and elation situation in (eco)tourism development. The article is qualitatively oriented, based on participant observations and open interviews that occurred during a three-month eld trip in 2005. Updates were done until November 2010. The analysis is centered on Central Amazonia, particularly on the Puxirum s region. ecotourism project in the Arapiuns-Tapajo Keywords: community ecotourism; community capitals; anxiety and elation cycles; Hamlet, Amazonia Maripa

Introduction This article seeks to ll a gap in the literature by discussing the constructive role of ecotourism for strengthening community capitals, namely human, social and natural capitals. Fennel (1999, p. 149) has pointed out that ecotourism may be more effectively operationalized through the sharing of information, knowledge and interconnectedness between stakeholders in charge of its development, and interconnectedness and information sharing is the kernel for social and human capitals, which per se are some of the community capitals (Muldera et al., 2006); the bonds between community capitals and ecotourism implementation as part of an integrated regional planning and development in the rural region is thus a blind aspect within ecotourism study; it is a broader gap in area knowledge, and it needs to be addressed. Through interactive processes between tourists and outsiders, locals seem to become more mindful of their own culture and landscape, elements which help to raise self-esteem and expectations.

*Corresponding author. Email: ismarlima@yahoo.com.br

ISSN 1303-2917 print/ISSN 2156-6909 online q 2011 Taylor & Francis DOI: 10.1080/13032917.2011.597933 http://www.informaworld.com

Anatolia An International Journal of Tourism and Hospitality Research

185

The understanding of the interactive processes, problem solving, local views; social and environmental group assets, as well as the forms of cooperation among the stakeholders becomes critical for the success of an incipient regional development that has ecotourism as one of the socio-economic platforms for action and intervention. For meticulously understanding these dynamics, the following questions lead the discussion, (i) how does ecotourism contribute to ending the Amazonian communities feelings that they are historically a marginalized periphery? Issues of core/periphery and marginalization in Amazonia are discussed at different levels and approaches (Bartholo Jr. & Bursztyn, 1999; Browder & Godfrey, 1997; Kitamura, 1994; Pinto, 1980). (ii) How does ecotourism contribute to enhance community capitals? In order to understand the links and to problematize facts and situation with respect to the venues for an operative ecotourism and its role to enhance community capitals and rural area development, a three-month eldwork was done in three communities of Amazonia: , Maguari and Jamaraqua , situated in two Conservation Units (UCs), RESEX and Maripa s-Arapiuns, a location where FLONA, in central Amazonia, in a region known as Tapajo community-based ecotourism has been developed with the support of IBAMA, ONGs, and Community Associations. FLONA is a National Forest and RESEX refers to a Forest Products Extractive Reserve. They belong to the Brazilian National System of Conservation Units (SNUC), created in 2000, as part of the implementation of macro environmental policies in the country. The Conservation Units have been a delimitation of huge areas, especially in Amazonia, with the aim of protecting them against any overwhelming human impacts, particularly those as a result of corporate farming and ranching; the UCs have served as environmental managerial tools, land occupation planning, and one of the solutions to mitigate land tenure conicts. Ecotourism is often praised in the literature as a smoke-free industry that can reconcile two, although antagonistically positioned, economic and environmental goals. This approach is conceptually backed and problematized by the notion that community sustainability is intertwined with economic, social and environmental issues in a way it allows locals to manage their lives in a productive and healthy way. Paradoxically, economic development is directly linked to nature transformation at a non-stop rate, linking development to undesirable, irreversible, negative environmental impacts. A viable, the least impacting environmentally friendly development was then presented by the Brundtland Commission Report, in 1987, as an evocative, intriguing and somewhat enigmatic concept: sustainable development. The Report became a chief guideline, which has called for individual and collective actions (and political reections) about nding an equilibrium between society demands for natural resources and the Planets environmental carrying capacity, over the course of the century, the relationship between the human world and the planet that sustains it has undergone a profound change (Our Common Future, 1987, p. 22). In reason of species at risk of extinction and threatened ecosystems, unequivocally, the Brundtland report states that humans have ethical and moral dilemmas to deal with and to nd responses to them. Strategic imperatives for institutional and policy changes are thus enlisted as the means to give sense to the connections between sustainable and development: (i) vitalizing growth; (ii) changing the quality of growth; (iii) meeting essential needs for jobs, food, energy, water, and sanitation; (iv) ensuring a sustainable level of population; (v) conserving and enhancing the resource base; (vi) reorienting technology and managing risk; and (vii) merging environment and economics in decision making (Our Common World, 1987, p. 49).

Downloaded by [ISMAR LIMA] at 07:08 19 August 2011

186

I.B. Lima and A.-M. dHauteserre

It is noteworthy that successful sustainability strategies are tightly linked to resilience, diversity, and long-lasting stability of social-ecological systems (Flint, 2010, p. 44), and community-based ecotourism projects because of their socio-environmental orientation and tenets can have a critical role in responding to local community demands, being complementary to existing policies and programs, to the extent they (the community-based ecotourism projects) ll institutional gaps on local grounds providing benets and socioenvironmental advances that, otherwise, would hardly exist. This is because some issues are more promptly identied, better approached, and de-bureaucratized, and addressed by those living within a community context and reality; by those who can with legitimacy take decisions over the problems, but aware of the community human and nancial capacities, and aware of a group understanding. Clearly, local community leaders and representatives are better positioned in the social milieu to realistically approach certain problems and to decide on the most suitable solutions in order to solve or mitigate them. As one talks about stability and resilience in a certain community, the interactive and communicational processes in daily routines, the decision-making and a shared approach of problems turn out to be indispensable for nurturing a valuable socio-biodiversity situation; they also help in conict resolution by facilitating the achievement of collective advantages such as the valorization and maintenance of territorial resources, food security, and income generation. This is the core for an operative participatory management of natural resources at a community level, more precisely, in forest communities through family eco-production networks. And, ecotourism comes into this realm as one more environmentally wrapped economic undertaking. As a result, the accumulation of material and immaterial assets apparently contributes to enhancing the community capitals. In order to address ecotourism as a manifold community endeavor to pursue for local development, well-being and nature conservation, community capitals must be accurately detailed and contextualized. Capitals are broadly dened here as a pooling of acquired communal properties, shared natural resources, links and networks, and values that put individuals together to achieve collective advantages (Jones, 2005; Pretty & Frank, 2000; Pretty & Ward, 2001; Woolcock, 1998) for communities in remote areas of Amazonia. Capitals are therefore not approached within economics, but as an umbrella concept: group stocks that can be nurtured in such a way that they augment social trust and cooperation. Murphy and Murphy (2004, p. 16) comment that the ability of getting things done and their strength can be the most noteworthy facet about communities, and they cite Roddicks denition of community because it gathers the grandeur and promise of communities (Murphy & Murphy, 2004, p.15). Community comes from the word communion, to share a common task together. And it is in the sharing of that task that people do bigger things than they knew they were capable of. Then there is really something to celebrate (Roddick, 2000, p. 55). The very notion of community and of capitals combined as community capitals results in a new approach that translates a view of commonality and of collective acquired assets, which can be used to benet the community itself. And, the enhancement of community capitals can bring spatial and temporal transformation for people in a place, heightening the principles of sharing, collective learning (Ponchirolli, 2000) and capacity building (Talbot & Walker, 2007). It can enable locals to foresee and approach evolving problematic issues which, if left unattended, could turn into sources of community instability (Allen, 2001). By nurturing existing capitals, local actors can be better positioned to manage social and economic limits and needs. The richness of an organized human grouping can, among

Downloaded by [ISMAR LIMA] at 07:08 19 August 2011

Anatolia An International Journal of Tourism and Hospitality Research

187

other factors, be measured by this pooling of knowledge and of networks for problem solving (Sabatini, 2008); belonging to networks with informal links to like-minded individuals can signicantly strengthen the position of those actors inspired and enabled to cooperate for changes. Interactive processes from within a group or community in rural areas can propitiate views, behavior changes and pathways, which can become benecial for integrated regional development (Allen, 2001; Panelli, 2006) as well as for the stakeholders entrusted with the accountability for sustainable management of natural heritage. Kauffman (1959) introduced the concept of community as a eld of social interactions, and with high degrees of social capital, a preliminary forum for increased acquaintanceship (Allen, 2001, p.120). Tools for conict resolution can facilitate a livelihood stability, which is essential for development. Role of community involvement in ecotourism development Tourism, and its variations such as ecotourism, has had a key role for local and regional economies, alleviation of poverty and environmental conservation (Jones & Wood, 2007); it is a powerful tool for economic development in lesser developed countries (LDCs) with a demonstrated increase of revenues per year of 154% between 1990 and 2000 (Roe et al., 2004, p. 7). Ecotourism has enabled turning biodiversity into tourist attractions [which] provides an opportunity to bridge the gap between natural resource conservation and community development (Lai & Nepal, 2006, p. 119). In the literature, ecotourism is viewed as a clean industry (Gossling, 1999; Gunn & Var, 2002; Hakim & Nakagoshi, 2010; Honey, 1999), but its implementation is not a smooth and stress-free process (Wearing & Neil, 1999; Weaver, 2001a, b); it cannot be taken for granted, neither a panacea, nor a guaranteed wealth generator (DMello, 2008). Neither does it imply that the whole community will be receptive and participative, nor welcome by all communities (DMello, 2008). Its implementation is in fact a gradual process of assimilation of new routines by the locals, motivation for capacity building, and wishes to get involved. Moreover, locals need time to learn how to deal with outsiders. The assumption is that ecotourism can shape social practices through interplays among stakeholders affecting positively or negatively any pre-existing human, social and natural capitals. This article seeks to contribute to tourism geography by contextualizing community capitals, (eco)tourism and culture enhancement as a fact in Central Amazonia. In brief, this article seeks to nd some evidences on whether and how ecotourism functions to reinforce Amazonian values, cultures and protection of the environment. The denition of ecotourism is not exhaustively discussed in this section because the general lack of agreement on a universal denition is well-known (Page & Dowling, 2001, 25). In small communities, with an incipient and less structured economy, an ecotourism project for example can become the stimulus for positive turns in the dwellers life (Jones, 2005). When locals are fully involved in ecotourism activities, with direct engagement in decision making and autonomy for management, a situation experienced community since 2005, they realize the need for certain skills (Jones, 2005) by the Maripa to cope with new realities and routines. So, many locals attend training courses organized de e by government capacity building bodies and by the civil society sector, such as Sau Alegria, a non-governmental organization, and SEBRAE, a private-public organization that supports small businesses in Brazil. With a skilled labor force, new ancillary enterprises and ideas come up, strengthening even further the human demand and human supply cycles (Woolcock, 1998). They then fuel the expansion of income

Downloaded by [ISMAR LIMA] at 07:08 19 August 2011

188

I.B. Lima and A.-M. dHauteserre

Downloaded by [ISMAR LIMA] at 07:08 19 August 2011

sources, availability of nancial resources for the locals as well as state and federal government investments and policies for marginalized communities in the Amazonian basin. Although ecotourism has been hyped as the provider of strong sectorial connections, endorsed as an option for restraining leakage of benets outside a local ecotourism geographical area, and taken as a fosterer of sustainable development (Jones, 2005), it entails some drawbacks. The capitalist-centric orientation in (eco)tourism development can turn into an adverse commodication of rural spaces, culture and lifestyle, since commodication is an integral part of these processes and social arrangements and therefore underpins the establishment of new rural geographies (Perkins, 2006, p. 243). The commodication of the countryside ideal (Mitchell, 1998) can be further explained as a cause-effect of cultural and social displacements (Lai & Nepal, 2006), if the involved communities are not properly assisted and the tour operators have not been regulated and , Maguari and Jamaraqua are monitored by pertinent authorities and organizations. Maripa special cases because they are ruled and abide by an environmental normative framework. In the RESEX and FLONA, two ofcially created Conservation Units (UCs) in Brazil, there are regulations that establish the limits for human intervention. In the 1990s, moved by this notion of commodication of inner land areas, the Brazilian government with the support of the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) began an ambitious national ecotourism program, called Proecotur, to build the needed infra-structure to make ecotourism an attractive sector for business. It would then create sources of income in poor and isolated areas in Amazonia (Lima, 2002, 2008). Ecotourism is introduced as a symbolic nexus of development, social welfare and conservation (Bjork, 2007; Higham, 2007; Lima, 2008) with economic promises for the dwellers in the jungle areas of Amazonia. A community ecotourism project does not replace the role of government and institutions for poverty alleviation, neither is it a self-governing system per se. In fact, ecotourism is mostly reliant on tourists and the money they circulate locally:
Ecotourism development differs from mainstream development efforts in that, aside from start-up loans, much or all of the continuing nancial support comes from tourists rather than from governments or development agencies. (Schaller, 1996, p. 2)

The problem is the way ecotourism has been discursively clothed (Lima, 2008) which can raise high levels of expectations in communities that are seldom fullled (Drumm & Moore, 2005, p. 4), so stakeholders and local actors are disappointed when promises have are not fullled (Bjork, 2007; Weaver, 2001a). For example, residents of Maripa been skeptical about ecotourism because of underpaid guiding services and local m and Alter-doartifacts by most tour operators of nearby cities, particularly in Santare o. Tourism seasonality adds to their disenchantment, with few occasional tourists Cha appearing for short-stays, which do not pay back group and individual time spent on preparations. However, the article sustains Silveiras (2005) viewpoint that ecotourism counts positively for rural development as it bridges the gap of cultural understanding between well-off metropolitan tourists and poor riverbank dwellers in Amazonia. The article does not posit a romantic and naive viewpoint about ecotourism, because as largely discussed in the literature ecotourism development is not an impact-free activity, and it also faces the same stagnation cycles and seasonality as other forms of tourism have (Fennel, 1999; Honey, 1999; Lima, 2002, 2008; Page & Dowling, 2001; Weaver, 2001a, b); even the most well-planned ecotourism activity involves impacts on nature and culture (Hall & Boyd, 2005). What makes ecotourism a particular case here are the interactive dynamics between

Anatolia An International Journal of Tourism and Hospitality Research

189

Downloaded by [ISMAR LIMA] at 07:08 19 August 2011

outsiders (visitors) and locals. The case studies show that for hosting communities, presenting their folklore, handicrafts, tales and daily life stories to tourists can reduce feelings of inferiority, enhance identity, raise awareness about the importance of the self and revive traditions. , Maguari and Jamaraqua cases serve to indicate whether and how The Maripa subjective events and interactions between locals and outsiders in the practices of ecotourism work to improve self-esteem, networks, interactions and associations, human capacity building (Eade, 1998), social cohesion, socio-environmental justice and equity (Becken & Schellhorn, 2007) within a certain geographical area. Issues of scale (Hall, 2007) are not applied to this investigation because the case studies are managed as selfcontained units for data collection and analysis, thus not being crosscut with macro government initiatives for development and social inclusion. Ecotourism development is complex (Bjork, 2007; Hall, 2007) and the current case studies do not serve as a standardized model to explain similar occurrences in other regions (Higham, 2007). The efcacy of ecotourism for conservation, development and bottom-up participatory management depends on the integration of many elements: norms, regulation, monitoring, funding, scal incentives, engagement of individuals and institutions, as well as integrated sectorial actions and well-delivered public policies (Gossling, 2007; Lima, 2008; Weaver, 2001a). For those involved in ecotourism activities, economic benets can introduce new challenges, with the erosion of traditional relations of cooperation and reciprocity (Stronza & Gordillo, 2008, p. 459). Within the community, internal disputes, misunderstandings about the distribution of ecotourism revenues and taxes, and about the division of tasks, can disrupt hierarchies and erode local structures (Lai & Nepal, 2006) mostly because not all stakeholders are always equally well represented. This could result in issues of unbalanced power, unequal distribution of benets or neglect of interests of some party (Bjork, 2007, p. 41), which can make the residents refuse to work collectively and collaboratively. Methodology The aim of the paper is not to measure any type of capital or to nd proof that ecotourism creates forms of capital. Instead, the focus is to uncover how ecotourism development can enhance existing capitals at a community level. To reach this goal a qualitative methodology was used to capture the social world under investigation as a human creation. A qualitative methodology enabled an understanding of the phenomena studied, through attention to detail and use of intimate knowledge about specic situations. It focused on meanings and on the interests that socially construct the conditions studied (Stedman, 2003, p. 824). The participant observation added substantially to the interviews and analysis. It helped in three distinct ways (i) it facilitated my approach and relationship with locals, building and strengthening trust; (ii) it provided leads and ndings that helped to elaborate more well-focused interview questions; (iii) information provided by interviewees could be contrasted on the ground. On other occasions, the opportunity for talks, interviews and sharing a place as a participant observer allowed one to grasp routines and the social fabric, which otherwise, would have been hard to determine from the outside. The article is mostly based on structured participant observations and open/in-depth and semi-structured interviews with around 27 community dwellers and local leaders, and 42 local stakeholders involved directly in nature tourism activities, during a three-month

190

I.B. Lima and A.-M. dHauteserre

eld trip to Amazonia: 10 interviewees of private sector (tour operators); 10 people belonged to NGOs, and 22 people of government environmental agencies: IBAMA, County Tourism and Environmental Departments, State Tourism Promoting Agencies, and the coordinators and staff of the national ecotourism program (Proecotur), which has been implemented since 1994 for promoting a regional development. The interview process was elaborated in order to produce as much descriptive data as possible. It constituted of questions related to their daily lives, their perceptions on the ecotourism and on the visitors. The focus of the interviews was about their forms of collaboration, the partnerships, and how and when they were getting together to approach community issues and taking decisions; another focus was about subjective aspects related to the community views about themselves; that is, their self-involvement, perspectives, and enthusiasm and deception regarding ecotourism as a new activity for the group. The identication of internal conicts, of demanding issues, of group benets and collective advantages and of frustrations was also part of the mission in the interviews.

Downloaded by [ISMAR LIMA] at 07:08 19 August 2011

Conceptual approach Generally, capital connotes the idea of resource or stock, which individuals, organizations and institutions might be interested to develop and invest, so as to create a ux of benets. However, in this article, capital is understood as a set of resources material and immaterial assets acquired by individuals or group(s) through learning and observation of events within a period of time. Three capitals, human, social and natural are introduced and analyzed as micro burgeoning social endowments. As for social capitals, tourism ruralities are approached and investigated as social networks to be nurtured for institutional and organizational capacity in its most primary sense. Thus, social capital refers to societal interactions shaped by relationships, institutions and norms that construct and weave meaning in peoples lives. It implies an attribute of individuals in a social context and the way they transform their participation in networks and in groups into economic gains (Boxall & Purcell, 2008; Flora & Flora, 2003, 2004; Judge, 2003; Sobel, 2002). Social capital consists of horizontal associations (agencies linked to communities linked to individuals) and vertical associations (across sectors and agencies) and networks that underpin actions and decisions in a way that facilitates wellbeing and production. Social capital for example develops as collective interests prevail over individual ones (Flora & Flora, 2003, 2004; Jones, 2005; Putnam, 1995, 2001). Falk and Kilpatrick (2000) afrm that social capital is the cement of societys goodwill, building up social cohesion through networks and trust for the groups deliberate actions. Human capital can be concisely explained as formal and non-formal education, training and knowledge transfer with the means to have skilled human stocks; it basically refers to human capacity building at a community level, as discussed in this paper. Natural capital is normally understood as the biophysical systems that local communities are settled in and depend upon for their survival. These natural assets are the fauna and ora, and the ecosystems that can be directly affected by human presence and intervention; they are habitats that must be managed in a sustainable way, but on the ground local actors have faced problems in applying sustainability as a concept (Lima, 2008). Flora and Flora (2003, 2004), in their investigation on building a community in rural areas of the Andes, designed an analytical framework that has been a tool for better understanding how communities function. According to them, it is not only a tool for analysis but it has also helped to assist project leaders and coordinators to identify key boundary partners such as agencies and organizations that can be connected to each

Anatolia An International Journal of Tourism and Hospitality Research

191

community capital. The analytical framework is composed of three major sections: (i) the context: pre-existing conditions and structures; (ii) processes; (iii) outputs and outcomes: results and actions. Their framework was adapted to the purposes of this paper and focused on ecotourism development, Amazonian livelihood endurance, and enhancement of natural, social and human community capitals. Floras studies and some aspects of the analytical framework were adapted to methodologically support the current analysis (refer to Table 1). Community ecotourism projects s/Arapiuns polygon, in Para state. The polygon The chosen cases are located in the Tapajo m city and Alter-do-Cha o village as well as the communities of encompasses Santare , Maguari e Maripa , which belong to two distinct Brazilian conservation units Jamaraqua s/Arapiuns, with 677,000 hectares, (CUs), called RESEX, Extractive Reserve of Tapajo s with 545,000 hectares. Currently, Brazil has 292 and FLONA, National Forest of Tapajo CUs: 126 of them are fully environmentally protected areas with rigid regulation restricting human presence; 166 have more exible rules and norms, allowing human settlements and sustainable use of forest resources. s region, Santare m is by far the largest urban concentration at the heart of In the Tapajo the Amazonian rainforest, with approximately 170,000 inhabitants. It is 50 km distant from the case studies, a trip of around 2 , 6 hours by small power-driven boat, known as by boat. o is about one and half hours from Maripa voadeira and rabeta. Alter-do-Cha s River is the communities lifeblood and the main highway which interlinks Tapajo , Maguari and Jamaraqua have community ecotourism projects and serves them. Maripa supported by the Brazilian Institute for Environment and Renewable Resources (IBAMA), de Alegria, and by some international local and state governments, civil society such as Sau hosts the Puxirum ecotourism project nancially supported donors and partners. Maripa through a partnership between the Brazilian and Finnish governments. , Maguari and Jamaraqua are regulated and monitored by IBAMA. The Maripa communities can only have low impacting activities such as latex extraction, fruit gathering, subsistence agriculture, subsistence hunting and sustainable management of forest resources. A limited number of dwellers are allowed to live in the RESEX and in the FLONA. They are usually families who were already living in the region before it got the status of Extractive Reserve. Because the families live in an environmental protection area, they are expected by IBAMA and the Ministry for the Environment to look after their own environmental assets and forest food sources. The territory is a public state land under permanent concession for the families. Most are of mixed European and indigenous ethnicity. The economy is extremely fragile. The families survive by cultivating cassava, shing, raising domestic animals such as chickens, ducks, pigs, processing honey, producing handicrafts, wooden kitchen utensils, straw m and Alterartifacts, manufacturing ecological leather as well as selling our in Santare o. The better-off people seem to be the retired ones because they have a monthly do-Cha salary guaranteed by the government, which means they always have cash to purchase goods. During the rainy season, most families have less available land for crops; because it consequently, they do not have much for balanced meals, particularly in Maripa is settled in a strip segment of forest. Some of the families do risk starving as they struggle daily for their well-being. This is because sh their main source of animal protein becomes very difcult to catch with the river owing 10 m above the original banks. In the RESEX, large-scale agriculture is absolutely prohibited.

Downloaded by [ISMAR LIMA] at 07:08 19 August 2011

Downloaded by [ISMAR LIMA] at 07:08 19 August 2011

192

Table 1. Analytical framework for assessing the natural, social and human community capitals. Processes Actions, investments, intervention Outputs and outcomes (results of actions) Positive changes in community characteristics Changes in human capital Indicators: increased use of the skills and abilities of local people (critical thinking, innovation, problem solving); increased initiative, responsibility and innovation. Changes in social capital Indicators: increased networks, communication, cooperation, trust.

Context (pre-existing conditions and structures)

I.B. Lima and A.-M. dHauteserre

Community characteristics Impetus for Community Economic Development (CED) efforts Human capital Population, education, skills, health, creativity, youth, diverse groups. Human capital investments Human capital building, work expertise, training, formal and non-formal education, area knowledge transfer, learning and educational projects, leadership formation. Social capital investments Organizations involved; involving youth; public participation and inputs; organizational links; actions linking community to the outside; local and non-local organizations involved; organizational representative on decision-making board; number of different groups on board.

Social capital Trust, norms of reciprocity, network structure, group membership, cooperation, common vision and goals, leadership, depersonalization of politics, acceptance of alternative views, diverse representation.

Natural capital Air quality, land, water and water quality, natural resources, biodiversity, scenery

Natural capital investments Preserving, restoring, enhancing, conserving environmental features.

Measures: new groups involved and partners; more community cooperation; increased local and nonlocal participation; local strategic plan formed; new leaders; more effective leaders. Changes in natural capital Indicator: healthy ecosystems with multiple community benets. Measure: landscape, scenery, outdoor recreation opportunities, soils, air quality, water quality, wildlife, vegetation preserved, conserved or restored; land development policies adopted.

Source: Ismar Lima (2011). The table was based on Flora & Floras Analytical Framework of 2003 and 2004.

Anatolia An International Journal of Tourism and Hospitality Research

193

Ecotourism is one of the commercial activities allowed by IBAMA in the RESEX and FLONA. It is statutory that the activity must be coordinated by the native population and is expected to bring economic benets to the riverbank families by increasing their individual and collective assets and income. Visiting communities in the environmental protection areas requires researchers, tourists and tour operators to apply for an ofcial m. There is a government entry fee of about authorization from IBAMA in Santare US$3.00 per day. Long-term stays for visit, study or research require further assessment and permission because of possible impacts on the traditional lifestyle in the communities. Professional photography and lming incur an additional fee of approximately US$30. These fees go to a government fund to buy fuel and equipment to monitor ofcially established conservation areas such as RESEX. was the community selected out of 68 in the extractive reserve to host an Maripa ecotourism pilot project. The project is called Projeto Puxirum de Ecoturismo and has e Natureza tour operator and from technical and marketing support from IBAMA, Ma m. The project was initially nanced by the Finnish government. travel agencies in Santare Puxirum, which means volunteerism in a local indigenous dialect, is a comprehensive s region and ecotourism is program for sustainable development in the Arapiuns-Tapajo o, its one of its components. The criteria for selection were its proximity to Alter-do-Cha spectacular landscapes and fauna, and its existing trails. community has adopted ecotourism with optimism. The project has The Maripa created plenty of expectations. They hope the activity can turn into a steady income source. The community devoted time and sweat as its contribution to the Puxirum project. In an atmosphere of keen volunteerism, they worked for months to build up a straw and wooden shelter called in Portuguese Maloca for lodging the tourists. The Maloca is a two-storey edice that can host up to 30 people in the hammock space (see Figure 1). s river ood in 2007, which Unfortunately, it was destroyed by an unprecedented Tapajo also badly affected other basic structures of the community, but it was gradually rebuilt. In order to start up ecotourism activities, some locals attended guide training courses managed jointly by the Brazilian Micro and Small Business Support Service (SEBRAE), a non-prot organization, and by the Brazilian government environmental agency (IBAMA). The locals got together to set up eight trails that cover 98 km as one of the requirements for the community to become part of the Puxirum. As of April 2005, there were nine trained guides aged 20 to 50. There are no female guides. Usually the women themselves allege that they do not feel condent to take groups inside the forest. They stress that it is better to have men dealing with any unexpected situation (wild animals or accidents) in the jungle areas. They prefer to get involved in handicraft and souvenir production, and the provision of basic services for the tourists. The community economically benets from ecotourism in two ways. There is a US$4.00 fee for visiting/entering the community area. The tourists also pay about US$4.50 per night to sleep over in the Maloca. This money is kept in a collective community fund for public benets. Those families that host tourists also get paid for providing food and accommodation. The guides receive about US$12.00 for conducting the tourists no matter the size of the group (usually 6 , 10 people). IBAMA and the community have plans to adjust the guide fees in order to make them fairer. Tourists can buy homemade sweets and handicrafts, which become a source of income. The communitys leaders and a guide conrm that ecotourism is a complementary earning that strengthens family budgets by up to 40%, but only of those families directly involved with village and daily life. ecotourism. Figures 4(a) 4f illustrate Maripa

Downloaded by [ISMAR LIMA] at 07:08 19 August 2011

194

I.B. Lima and A.-M. dHauteserre

Downloaded by [ISMAR LIMA] at 07:08 19 August 2011

Figure 1. Lima.

. Puxirum Ecotourism. Picture taken by Ismar Maloca for sheltering visitors in Maripa

Foundation of an embryonic social capital has been the Puxirum ecotourism project. It has The major partnership for Maripa functioned as a catalyst of members attention and efforts. The importance of Puxirum is evident for harnessing community integration and for generating income. The project is the result of community and institutional efforts to broaden locally their economic and income horizons through ecotourism. There are many direct and indirect partners involved in the Puxirum at local and regional levels. However, interaction is sporadic; it mostly happens in a fragmented way, not involving all dwellers. The intra-community networks seem to be much stronger than the links the villagers have with outsiders. The reason may be that community members share opinions and know each other well in terms of personality, behavior, way of thinking; they share the same customs, culture and identity, and make decisions jointly over small or major themes on a daily basis. , the intra-community networks become a continuum for reafrming and In Maripa reinforcing them as a unit a sense of belonging with relations based on intense trust and reliability, as one of the natives explains their daily life and interaction, we are part of this land for generations; we know each other, the families and our next of kin very closely; we have a way of things and this makes us the whole here one supporting the other, because we need it to overcome daily difculties. Conversely, it was observed in and Maguari that there were levels of anxiety between locals and outsiders when Maripa initiating an interactive process; it was mostly manifested in the form of silences (a refusal by the locals to talk and interact), shyness and reclusion. Although the methodology used is not entirely ethnographic, it is possible to assert that the networks (see Figure 1) contribute at different levels to increase human capital within because they bring a variety of benets to the community. This accumulation of Maripa human capital, in turn, seems to make the networks more resilient and durable.

Anatolia An International Journal of Tourism and Hospitality Research

Networks in Marip IBAMA Tapajoara
Fishermen association Young group

195

CNS

Community radio

Mae Natureza eco-tour Puxirum ecotourism project

CAAM
Catholic church

Marip Community

CNPT
Baptist church Schools Guides group

Travel agencies in Santarem

Downloaded by [ISMAR LIMA] at 07:08 19 August 2011

SEBRAE

Finnish Government

Saudee Alegria (NGO)

. Figure 2. Key existing networks in Maripa

The assumption is that human capital and social capital are inseparable elements of a family, group, community and society. It is said that each network can contribute to strengthening an area of knowledge of the community (Jones, 2005). For instance, Projeto de e Alegria is a non-governmental organization with more than 20 years working in Sau s-Arapiuns polygon (central Amazonia). It has improved the communities the Tapajo quality of life by providing knowledge, techniques, and equipment for the communities , Sau de e Alegrias contribution during the eld trip was the technical activity. In Maripa and physical support to install the community radio station with speakers on the street light poles as well as the two windmills for producing clean energy. s connections with Another example of how networks enrich social capital is Maripa labor and class associations (see Figure 3). It has links with the Rubber-tappers National Council (CNS), the RESEX Communities Association, Amazonian Agro-Extractive Center (CAAM) and CPT Association. This type of networks helps communities like get informed and updated about issues pertinent to them. They also favor Maripa accumulation of knowledge when community members productively get together for open discussion on social, emotional and subjective issues. This was observed to occur in the Young Groups and Church. Within their group they feel stronger and can overcome limits while they get others views before making personal decisions. In fact, these associations become forums for debate and decision-making over personal, group, labor and class matters. Such networks promote segmented gains directly or indirectly for those linked to them. Networks are the basis for social capital to exist, and social capital functions as a cross-sectorial platform through which decisions are made, advancing regional development and peoples well-being. s networks has demonstrated how networks help to constitute Deconstructing Maripa social capital and can serve the purpose of problem solving; thus, networks if legitimated

196

I.B. Lima and A.-M. dHauteserre

Downloaded by [ISMAR LIMA] at 07:08 19 August 2011

village, landscapes, context and daily life. Figure 3. Maripa

by the group can expand interpersonal trust, optimism and participation. The community has a combination of types of social capital because of the internal and external dynamics of retains both characteristics of bonding and bridging capitals with its networks. Maripa vertical and horizontal links; the cognitive and structural social capitals are intertwined in with on-going cooperation because of continuous reinforcement of trust, values, and Maripa seems to have more continuous networks than short-lived ones; this provides norms. Maripa the basis for strong social capital. It seemed, during the course of Limas stay, that there was and this fact indicates principled social much solidarity among the members of Maripa capital as well. Its networks are predominantly within the delimited area of RESEX, which as a circumscribed social capital. This aspect conrms that a networked sets Maripa community, supported by civil society, can be a changing place.
A dynamic network is not just a cosy club. Its participants are active and keen not merely to reinforce their existing knowledge and beliefs, but also be introduced to new ideas . . . To scale-up or enhance their impact depends on optimising the effectiveness and efciency for

Anatolia An International Journal of Tourism and Hospitality Research

197

the benet of the poor . . . Many people and organisations draw real strength and condence just from knowing that they are not alone in their struggles. (Eade, 1998, p. 165)

In May 2010, the researcher obtained updated information about the community-based ecotourism. The local leaders1 indicate that ecotourism was progressing, and they informed me as follows. . They have received about 40 tourists per month. . Community has full control of the ecotourism project. Tour operators and agencies are not allowed to mediate business between them and the tourists. The community deals directly with the tourists and, consequently, has increased prots. . Maloca was improved and has sheltered tourists as planned by the group. . Local production has contributed to family income. . Tourists money has circulated in the whole community; locals have improved their economic assets by selling traditional food, handicrafts, offering their house for tourists to experience their routines and life. . There are four tracks. They are better equipped for supporting tourists nature appreciation and ecological experiences. has 350 people (60 families) as of May 2010. . Maripa . The natives have mobile phones. At the implementation phase of ecotourism, locals who were interested but did not hold the required abilities and knowledge, struggled to the fullest to learn the new skills. The effort for improving pushed locals to interact more and more, strengthening their personal and group networks. Activities that link the locals around ecotourism development were seen to reinforce existing personal connections (cognitive) that directly reproduce the community level connections (structural). It gives the impression that social capital becomes a collective asset deriving from many aspects of peoples lives and from their associative goings-on (Jones, 2005). Understanding how social ties and their dynamics constitute an additional means or resource for individuals and communities, and the way in which they can be accessed and used productively, is an avenue that could have signicant public policy impact (Jones, 2005; Scheyvens, 2002). However, ecotourism implementation was a homogeneous stress-free process, and over the months enthusiasm and involvement varied with regard to elation and anxiety. In view of such a situation, the authors, based on their observations, on the interviews and on the literature, designed a hypothetical diagram illustrating a cycle variation in terms of anxiety and elation in ecotourism development. This cycle is detailed in the next section. Cycles in ecotourism development: elation and anxiety case helped to outline a hypothetical diagram of the elation Observations of the Maripa and anxiety cycles a proxy for positive or negative impacts of the implementation of a community ecotourism project (Figure 4). It is important to highlight that the diagram tries to identify the main phases or stages of ecotourism development and it may not describe universally applicable patterns. It was not built empirically, but, solely on the basis of observation in loco. Thus, the diagram is an attempt to graphically illustrate different `. sentiments and expectations of the Amazonian natives dealing with ecotourism in Maripa Doxeys irridex (1975) illustrates the social and cultural impacts that host communities face with tourism development. According to it, residents responses will change in a predictable manner, passing through . . . euphoria, apathy, annoyance and antagonism stages (Page & Dowling, 2001, pp. 171 172). The proposed diagram tries to capture the

Downloaded by [ISMAR LIMA] at 07:08 19 August 2011

198

I.B. Lima and A.-M. dHauteserre

, and may serve as a mixed feelings related to [eco]tourism implementation in Maripa reference to understand the same cycles in localities and communities where (eco)tourism has been practiced. Analysis of the diagram Figure 4 represents the oscillation of feelings and expectations of locals and coordinators of ecotourism projects at the community level along two dimensions: elation and anxiety. People who are involved directly and indirectly in the project can experience moments of high enthusiasm and euphoria for ecotourism mixed with phases characterized by problems to solve, lack of direction, disappointments and frustration. Internalization (stage 2) characterizes the starting up in ecotourism. It is the hands on period to get prepared for hosting tourists following the socio-environmental principles of ecotourism. Optimism characterizes the internalization stage of ecotourism. It can be regarded as a learning process of attitudes and of values that become embodied within oneself. Powering (stage 3) and interfaces (stage 7) are phases in which local enthusiasm with ecotourism reaches the top. Powering refers to the initial phase when locals get together for planning, structuring and executing the needed work and training for ecotourism management. At this stage, locals were seen to be fully euphoric with the novelty and with the expectation that they will receive and work with tourist groups. They were attending guide and cookery courses, working in the construction of buildings and demarcating the trails. Later, in the interfaces, locals have the opportunity to put into practice months of training and preparation. They begin to host the rst tourist groups. Interfaces is the moment for interaction with outsiders, to know each other; thus, it is replete with satisfaction, curiosity, contemplation and high levels of eagerness. On the other hand, in between powering and interfaces are two phases of opposite feelings: constraint (stage 4) and uncertainty (stage 6). Constraint is linked to physical, material difculties and lack of expertise faced by the locals and coordinators. Practical matters for implementing ecotourism become barriers to overcome, requiring extra dedication and energy. Uncertainty is a phase during which locals despite overcoming the main barriers still feel unprepared to work with outsiders. They want to perform their best but feel they may not be skilled enough. It is a period of lack of condence over the unknown. It may also be a period of hesitation because some members think ecotourism may not be the best are aware that ecotourism choice for them. The traditional dwellers in Maripa
ELATION Powering 3 1-Ecotourism: Project Outset 2 Internalization 4 Constraint ANXIETY Overcoming 5 9 10 6 Uncertainty 8 Disappointment Stalemate Withdrawal (12) Interfaces 7 Revitalization Continuation (11)

Downloaded by [ISMAR LIMA] at 07:08 19 August 2011

Figure 4. Elation and anxiety cycles in ecotourism development (Source: Ismar Lima, 2011).

Anatolia An International Journal of Tourism and Hospitality Research

199

development faces an array of limitations and they have asked their leaders to develop alternative sectors in the district. They also fear the activity will corrupt their traditions and values. They want to safeguard their lifestyle and their cultural identity. Denitely, constraint, uncertainty and disappointment (stage 8) are permeated with intense anxiety. Disappointment specically refers to the locals perception of impacts and of problems at interacting with the tourists. It also includes frustration about nancial gains. Locals - at this phase become conscious that ecotourism usually takes longer than other economic activities to provide the economic gains they expect. What is more, not all members will get benets, as the literature explains (Weaver, 2001a,b). Locals impression at this stage may be that ecotourism is a demanding and stressful activity that requires too much for dwindling returns. Tourism in the area will not solve all the problems admitted the chair of a Sustainable Tourism 2015 workshop. The diagram shows, though, that these anxiety phases are interpolated with recovering phases. They are called overcoming and revitalization. Overcoming (stage 5) is the period when locals are able to solve the most basic problems (either of structure or of personal skills). Revitalization (stage 9) is of utmost importance for securing group cohesion, relying thus on existing social and human capitals. Both overcoming and revitalization may require external interventions, in the form of renewed interactions and/or new links with other networks. They can avoid premature refusals or withdrawal from the project. Revitalization is a pertinent phase for ecotourism project prolongation; it may not guarantee the long-term. Locals may disagree over minor and major issues moving towards what is called here stalemate (stage 10). In the stalemate phase, decisions can lead to cancellation of the project. To avoid it, external interventions, creativity, good communication ow, partnerships with NGOs, nancial inputs of the government and investment in human capacity are necessary if there is a general desire to continue with the project. The diagram helps to illustrate local feelings and involvement in ecotourism, how the community responds to the project throughout its implementation and how capitals can contribute to the project. It was observed that ecotourism became a leading motive for improving skills and acquiring knowledge, by getting involved in the activity, Amazonian dwellers showed more ready to work closely with outsiders to an extent that such involvment might help to reduce the various human gaps between peripheral Amazonian people and metropolitan visitors; ecotourism can thus help the locals to overcome uncertainties and a sense of inferiority, but an opposite effect has also been reported in the literature in which the contact of locals with wealthy visitors may make the locals feel socially marginalized, for example, in reason of not having access and the nancial means to buy fashion clothes, shoes, etc. Case study limitations Despite it providing a substantial share and contribution to the literature, the case study presented here was not based on long-term ethnographic research, which brings with it some limitations in data collection and participant observation. Because the elation and anxiety cycles have been hypothetically outlined, a more comprehensive comparative research can provide additional elements for a better understanding of the different levels of stakeholder involvement in ecotourism and community capitals enhancement. Yet, further investigations can help to determine the external factors: nancial, political and intellectual ones as well as the internal factors: trust, reliability, lack of skills, and emotional stress, which are inuential on the success or failure in community-based ecotourism implementation.

Downloaded by [ISMAR LIMA] at 07:08 19 August 2011

200

I.B. Lima and A.-M. dHauteserre

Conclusion and implications When cosmopolitan people come and share space and time with the locals, paying attention to their culture, life-style and environment, a new paradigm takes place: Amazonians in remote areas gain an inner feeling of social ascension and importance, enhancing both social and human capitals. When the [eco]tourists come to support the locals in their own environment, to listen to their stories, myths, day-to-day challenges and difculties, and set the locals at centre stage during the visit, the tourists have a crucial role in helping these communities overcome social exclusion and feelings of inferiority. Festivals, dance, songs, stories, rituals, customs and any aspect of local folklore became issues to satisfy the cultural demand of (eco)tourists. All these elements have made local residents perceive details of their culture as distinct. With ecotourism, riverbank communities have the chance to broadly expose their uniqueness to outside viewers who will be there paying for it. In this sense, ecotourism development signicantly contributes to enhancing the human, social, and natural capitals in Amazonian communities. This process of hosting tourists makes them feel less marginalized less peripheral as they acknowledge that local values and culture are integral to an Amazonian identity. In a nutshell, ecotourism has a role as an enhancer of human, social and natural capitals s region, particularly in Maripa hamlet. It has as observed in the communities in the Tapajo s networks of cooperation and trust; it expands income contributed to strengthening Maripa generation by opening up opportunities for services and businesses such as handicraft ecotourism project validates the Falk and selling, and ecotourism guidance. The Maripa Harrison (1998) assumption that it is possible to have social capital in the short term as a form of capacity building. Ecotourism has instigated local communities to improve their pre-existing capitals, at least in the initial stages, and improved capitals promote well-being (Anderson et al., 2004; Carpenter et al., 2004; Koka & Prescott, 2002). But it is still not clear whether social capital can instigate or not individuals into more sustainable practices in land management. Since improved social capital results in powerful social cohesion and networks, these links could be explored to successfully promote environmental education. As observed by Scheyvens (1999, p. 247), self-esteem of many community members is enhanced [with ecotourism] because of outside recognition of the uniqueness and value of their culture, their natural resources and their traditional knowledge. Self-esteem becomes one of the key ingredients to be worked by planners, community leaders and project managers who can use it to overcome the most problematic stages in ecotourism implementation. If these phases are well-managed, they can lead to increasing collaborative attitudes, resulting in a positive scenario for poverty reduction and environment maintenance as well as allowing a successful management of the elation and anxiety cycles in the ecotourism communities. Acknowledgements
The research project and doctoral studies was fully sponsored by the New Zealand Agency for International Development (NZAID), managed by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Our thanks is also addressed to the New Zealand Embassys staff in Brasilia, in particular to Heloisia Fontes, Research Ofce and Interpreter, because of their support and assistance.

Downloaded by [ISMAR LIMA] at 07:08 19 August 2011

Note
, Ascopram, Isaac as well as Maria Isolina, Raimundo, 1. The president of the Association of Maripa s/ArapiunsRaimundinho, Manduca, e Beto. The Ibamas staff and the coordinator of the Tapajo Tapajoara Associations Organization, Cleida Santos, also contributed signicantly with the research by providing updated information in May 2010.

Anatolia An International Journal of Tourism and Hospitality Research References

201

Allen, J.C. (2001). Community conict resolution: The development of social capital within an interactional eld. The Journal of Socioeconomics, 30, 119120. Anderson, C.L., Locker, L., & Nugent, R. (2004). Microcredit, social capital, and common pool resources. World Development, 30, 95 105. nia sustenta vel: Estrate gia de desenvolvimento, Bartholo, R.S. Jr., & Bursztyn, M. (1999). Amazo lia: Edic nia 2020. Bras es IBAMA. Rondo o Becken, S., & Schellhorn, M. (2007). Ecotourism, energy use and the global climate: Widening the local perspective. In J. Higham (Ed.), Critical issues in ecotourism: paradoxes, problems and pathways for the future (pp. 85 101). Oxford: Elsevier. Bjork, P. (2007). Denition paradoxes: from concept to denition. In J. Higham (Ed.), Critical issues in ecotourism understanding a complex tourism phenomenon (pp. 23 45). Oxford: Elsevier. Boxall, P., & Purcell, J. (2008). Strategy and human resource management. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Browder, J.O., & Godfrey, B.J. (1997). Rainforest cities: urbanization, development and globalization of the Brazilian Amazon. New York: Columbia University Press. Carpenter, J.P., Daniere, A.G., & Takahashi, L.M. (2004). Cooperation, trust, and social capital in Southeast Asian urban slums. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 55, 533 551. Carroll, J. (1996). Escaping the information abattoir: critical and transformative research in drama education. In P. Taylor (Ed.), Researching drama and arts education: Paradigms and possibilities (pp. 72 84). London: Falmer Press. DMello, C. (2008). Transforming reforming tourism: perspectives on justice and humanity in tourism. Chiang Mai, Thailand: ECOT. Drumm, A., & Moore, A. (2005). Ecotourism development: a manual for conservation planners and managers: an Introduction to ecotourism planning, Vol. II, (2nd ed.). Arlington, Virginia, USA: The Nature Conservancy. Eade, D. (1998). Capacity-Building: an approach to people-centered development. Oxford: Oxfam Publications. Falk, I., & Harrison, L. (1998). Community learning and social capital: just having a little chat. Journal of Vocational Education and Training, 50, 609 627. Falk, I., & Kilpatrick, S. (2000). What is social capital? A study of interaction in a rural community. Sociologia Ruralis, 40(1), 87 110. Fennel, D. (1999). Ecotourism. Policy and governance: managing stakeholders interests. Routledge: New York. Flint, R.W. (2010). Seeking resiliency in the development of sustainable communities. Human Ecology Review, 17(1), 44 57. Flora, C.B. (2004). Community dynamics and social capital. Agroecosystems Analysis, 93 107. Flora, C.B., & Flora, J.L. (2003). Social capital: challenges for rural America in the twenty-rst century. In D.L. Brown & L.E. Swanson (Eds.), Challenges for rural America in the twenty-rst century (pp. 214 227) University Park, PA: The Pennsylvania State University Press. Flora, J.L., & Flora, C.B. (2004). Building community in rural areas of the Andes. In R. Atria & M. Siles (Eds.), Social capital and poverty reduction in Latin America and the Caribbean: towards a new paradigm (pp. 523 542). Santiago Chile: Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean and Michigan State University. Gossling, S. (1999). Ecotourism: a means to safeguard biodiversity and ecosystem function? Ecological Economic, 29, 303 320. Gossling, S. (2007). Ecotourism and global environmental change. In J. Higham (Ed.), Critical issues in ecotourism (pp. 70 84). Oxford, UK: Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann. Gunn, C.A., & Var, T. (2002). Tourism planning: basic, concept and cases. Oxford, UK: Routledge. Hakim, L., & Nakagoshi, N. (2010). Ecotourism in Asian tropical countries: planning a destinations site-plan to meets education objectives. Journal of International Development and Cooperation, 16(1), 13 21. Hall, C.M. (2007). Scaling ecotourism: the role of scale in understanding the impacts of ecotourism. In J. Higham (Ed.), Critical issues in ecotourism: understanding a complex tourism phenomenon (pp. 243 255). Amsterdam: Elsevier. Hall, C.M., & Boyd, S. (2005). Tourism and nature-based tourism in peripheral areas: development or disaster. Clevedon: Channelview Publications.

Downloaded by [ISMAR LIMA] at 07:08 19 August 2011

202

I.B. Lima and A.-M. dHauteserre

Higham, J.E.S. (2007). Critical issues in ecotourism: understanding a complex tourism phenomenon. Oxford: Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann. Honey, M. (1999). Ecotourism and sustainable development: who owns paradise? Washington, DC: Island Press. Jones, S. (2005). Community-based ecotourism: the signicance of social capital. Annals of Tourism Research, 32, 303 324. Jones, T., & Wood, D. (2007). Calculating the tourist expenditure generated by natural and heritage areas: the valuing places toolkit. Conference proceedings, Tourism: Past Achievements, Future Challenges, 11/02/2007 . Sydney, Australia: University of Technology. Judge, R. (2003). Social Capital: building a foundation for research and policy development. Policy Research Initiative Feature Articles, Government of Canada, Policy Research Initiatives 6. Kaufman, H.F. (1959). Toward an interactional conception of community. Social Forces, 38(1), 8 17. lia: EMBRAPA. nia e o desenvolvimento sustenta vel. Bras Kitamura, P.C. (1994). A Amazo Koka, B.R., & Prescott, J.E. (2002). Strategic alliances as social capital: a multidimensional view. Strategic Management Journal, 23, 795816. Lai, H.-P., & Nepal, S.K. (2006). Local perspectives of tourism development in Tawushan Nature Reserve, Taiwan. Tourism Management, 27, 1117 1129. Lima, I. (2002). Deforestation in Amazonia and local environmental governance, Unpublished master thesis, School of International Relations, The University of Japan IUJ, MinamiUonuma, Japan. Lima, I. (2008). The macro geopolitics of ecotourism: competing discourses and collaboration in New Zealand and Brazil, Unpublished doctoral thesis, The University of Waikato, Hamilton, New Zealand. Mitchell, C. (1998). Entrepreneurialism, commodication and creative destruction: a model of postmodern community development. Journal of Rural Studies, 14, 273 286. Muldera, K., Ericksonb, J., & Costanza, R. (2006). The contribution of built, human, social and natural capital to quality of life in intentional and unintentional communities. Ecological Economics, 59, 13 23. Murphy, P.E., Murphy, A.E. (2004). Planning. In P.E. Murphy & A.E. Murphy (Eds.), Strategic management for tourism communities (pp. 86 112). New York: Channel View Publications. Our Common Future (1987). World Commission on Environment and Development. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Page, S., & Dowling, R.K. (2001). Ecotourism. Themes in tourism. New York: Prentice Hall. Panelli, R. (2006). Rural health and wellbeing. In B.B. Bock & S. Shortall (Eds.), Rural gender relations (pp. 317 344). Oxfordshire: CABI. Perkins, H. (2006). Commodication: re-resourcing rural areas. In P. Cloke, T. Marsden, & P. Mooney (Eds.), Handbook of rural studies. London: Sage. nia: no rastro do saque. Sa o Paulo: Hucitec. Pinto, L.F. (1980). Amazo gico na economia da sociedade do Ponchirolli, O. (2000). Capital humano como elemento estrate o, conhecimento sob a perspectiva da teoria do agir comunicativo., Engenharia de Produc a Florianopolis, Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina, 78. Pretty, J., & Frank, B.R. (2000). Participation and social capital formation in natural resource management: achievements and lessons., In Proceedings for International Landcare 2000 Conference, 6 9 March 2000, Melbourne, Australia. Pretty, J., & Ward, H. (2001). Social capital and the environment. World Development, 29, 209227. Putnam, R.D. (1995). Bowling alone: Americas declining social capital. Journal of Democracy, 6, 65 78. Putnam, R.D. (2001). Social capital: measurement and consequences. Canadian Journal of Policy Research, 2(2), 41 52. Roe, D., Page, C.A., & Meyer, D. (2004). Tourism and the poor: analysing and interpreting tourism statistics from a poverty perspective. PPT partnership working paper, 16, ODI, IIED and CRT, London. Roddick, A. (2000). Business as Unusual. London: Thorsons. Sabatini, F. (2008). Does Social Capital Improve Labour Productivity in Small and Medium Enterprises? International Journal of Management and Decision Making, 9(5), 454 480.

Downloaded by [ISMAR LIMA] at 07:08 19 August 2011

Anatolia An International Journal of Tourism and Hospitality Research

203

Downloaded by [ISMAR LIMA] at 07:08 19 August 2011

Schaller, D.T. (1996). Indigenous ecotourism in the ecuadorian Amazon: a case study., University of Minnesota, USA. Retrieved 1 October, 2007, from: http://www.geog.umn.edu/, schaller/index. html Scheyvens, R. (1999). Ecotourism and the empowerment of local communities. Tourism Management, 20, 245 249. Scheyvens, R. (2002). Tourism for development: empowering communities. New York: Prentice Hall. o social no Amazonas. Revista de Silveira, I. (2005). Ecoturismo: etnodesenvolvimento e inclusa nio Cultural, 3(1), 63 77. Turismo y Patrimo Sobel, J. (2002). Can we trust social capital? Journal of Economic Literature, 50, 139 154. Stedman, R.C. (2003). Sense of place and forest science: toward a program of quantitative research. Forest Science, 49, 822 829. Stronza, A., & Gordillo, J. (2008). Community views of ecotourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 35, 448 468. Talbot, L., & Walker, R. (2007). Community perspectives on the impact of policy change on linking social capital in a rural community. Health and Place, 13, 482 492. Wearing, S., & Neil, J. (1999). Ecotourism: impacts, potential and possibilities. Oxford, UK: Butterworth Heinemann. Weaver, D.B. (2001a). The encyclopedia of ecotourism. New York: CABI Publishing. Weaver, D.B. (2001b). Ecotourism. Melbourne: Wiley. Woolcock, M. (1998). Social capital and economic development: toward a theoretical synthesis and policy framework. Theory and Society, 27, 151 208.