Critiques of tourism have also addressed the notion of power within the context of tourism. The arguments relating to power in the development discourse have implications for how tourism development takes place, particularly when related to developing countries, where power relationships. This occurs through the developing countries being dependent on the developed for tourists, capital for investment, technology and product design (Brohman, 1996). Power therefore lies with the developed world and as Mowforth and Munt (2009, p333) state:
64
“It has been argued that an understanding of issues of power is essential to an analysis of tourism developments and the role of governments in these. The necessity for such an understanding is as great for analyses of new forms of tourism to Third World destinations as it is for mass tourism developments – perhaps even more so given the relationships of new forms of tourism development. The action and policies pursued by national governments are often circumscribed at best and are sometimes dictated by the influence of external organisations. This includes the inevitability that tourism must increase, as well as the contest over which forms of tourism development should take place. It is especially so for Third World governments, weighed down by a burden of debt – a burden that was fostered on them by First World banks and governments as well as their own incautiousness resulting from the unnecessary risk from western style development.”
Therefore, how an externally controlled industry which is forever searching for new developments, often in countries with the lowest forms of production is difficult for developing countries to control. Add in top-down approaches to planning from government elites having Western values and connections, it can be seen that the tourism development process is an unequal one, hence the call for alternative or community-based approaches to tourism development. While there have been some developing countries who have followed alternative models of tourism development, notably Costa Rica and Belize, the continuation of unequal power relations in the tourism industry between the developed and developing worlds is still evident (ibid).
While there may be ‘success’ stories, however that may be measured, the political economy of tourism is on a trajectory that tends to favour the powerful stakeholders such as TNCs and governments. This is evidenced by research by Theuvsen (2004) on increasing integration of travel and tourism companies and concentration within sectors whereby the TNCs market share increases as companies merge or are involved in takeovers (Dwyer, Forsyth and Dwyer, 2010). These business practices have generally positive effects for the organisations involved through economies of scale and increased power to influence the scale and direction of their operations, but communities have little control over these practices and resultant effects.
65
Two of the most cited works related to power and tourism are those of Hall (1994) who examines power in the policy arena, and Urry (1990)15 who examines the power of the tourist which is inherent in their gaze. Hall (2003) and Scheyvens (2002) assert that power in tourism development is both relative and absolute and particularly affects local populations. In a development of Hall’s work, Hollinshead (1998) recognises the importance of analysing the norms and ideologies which underpin the policy platforms of the dominant groups in tourism development. However, while Simpson (2008) notes that these works on power, while relevant, omit the fact that the balancing of power between tourism stakeholders is difficult to achieve and what is needed is a more comprehensive analysis of the various powers and influences of stakeholders, collaborators, partners, competitors and external organisations. This has specific implications for this work and hence why power is a central theme to this thesis.
Other perspectives on power have been examined by Marzano and Scott (2009) who identify and provide an inventory of the forms of power that stakeholders exert within the destination branding process in the Gold Coast, Australia, conceptualising what power means in a multi-stakeholder decision making process. Their work, along with that of Beritelli and Laesser (2011) examines power from differing perspectives. Notably, their work examines vertical power, horizontal power and the resource dependency approach, showing that power is perceived by various actors in different ways. These networks between connected organisations, businesses, governmental bodies, civil society and individuals exist for three fundamental reasons: first and most significantly, to plan tourism destinations; second, to stimulate economic development and third; to provide the tourist with a comprehensive experience (Morrison, Lynch and Johns, 2004). How destinations develop is resultant on these networks and when communities are viewed as networks of individuals, enterprises and stakeholders, issues of power also arise (Beritelli
15 While Urry’s work is much cited in tourism studies it has been critiqued, notably by MacCannell (1999) and Crouch (2000)
66
and Laesser, 201116). They continue by stating that where actors in the tourism development process are positioned, how they are linked to other actors, as well as the quality of these links, and the formation of groups and/or clusters are examples of network-related concepts which give rise to power issues. Therefore an understanding of the power differentials between actors and the various opportunities that actors have to partake in the development process are important in determining strategies to encourage engagement and to harness the contributions. Collaboration between stakeholders is required whereby consideration should be given to each stakeholder group without one being given priority over others (Byrd, 2007; Jamal and Getz 1995; Sautter and Leisen, 1999; Yuksel, Bramwell and Yuksel 1999) the goal of which is to balance power between the various stakeholder groups.
Tourism development is therefore shaped within complex social and political environments and influenced by power relations. Some actors in the process will attempt to control or influence the process through deploying strategies to either support or block the actions of others. This can be through power resources such as access to state apparatus, knowledge and authority, and power mechanisms such as compromise, trade-offs, manipulation, persuasion, reward, exclusion and alliance formation (Few, 2000). Power is therefore not just wielded by interest groups, but is rooted in social relations and can be used to set social norms and wield influence over other social groups (Morgan and Pritchard, 1999).
While the theoretical constructs surrounding stakeholder development are conceptually appealing, the realities of the real world are not as clear-cut. Three aspects of the tourism development process that are difficult to explore and that those studying tourism have failed to engage with are those of corruption, transparency and accountability (Coles and Hall, 2008). Abuses of power and favouratism exist in the tourism planning process state Timothy
16
Beritelli and Laesser (2011) examine five aspects of power in the literature; 1) Dimensions of power, focusing on typologies of power; 2) Influence reputation in network research, examining prominent actors; 3) Power dimensions as determinants of influence, linking the two previous areas; 4) Influence as collective perception, examining individual perceptions of others; 5) Influence and power in tourist destinations, focusing on influence and power in tourism networks.
67
and Nyaupane (2009) while Church (2004) argues that corruption is apparent in both the developing and developed worlds. So while collaboration is necessary, collusion and corruption also exist, reinforcing power structures, although as Church (2004) also asserts, these power structures that shape tourism development are also driven by the broader economic and political processes, which incorporate wider political economy perspectives.
Tourism has since the 1950s with the advent of mass tourism, been a tool for development, with the economic aspects emphasised as the primary reason behind this. The industry fits well with the dominant neoliberal paradigm and although there have been critiques, it is an industry that is set to continue to grow, particularly in developing countries, where the UNWTO predicts that much of the growth in the twenty first century will come (UNWTO, 2013). It is these critiques that have led to the concept of STD which is discussed below.