In the preceding sub-section, it was established that interpretation can be a useful tool in the sustainable development of tourism in the Rupununi. However, successfully doing so requires the use of interpretation that is high in quality and concentrated on visitors (Moscardo, 1998: 11). Information alone can be useful, but has much more potential to give meaning to an experience based on the selection of content and the manner in which it is shared (Kuo, 2002: 92). A member of the industry (Interview I5, 2012) agreed, stating:
“Information for itself isn’t really what it’s about. It’s about using that information to enrich the experience. …It’s how you present the information…you have to figure out what information people want…because its customer centric…the whole idea is that you connect with that person on an emotional, spiritual, intellectual, physical or heart-to- heart level.”
164
She (ibid) further argued that to generate this connection involves “…creating stories around the destination”. Indeed, interpretation revolves around telling a story about a place using a variety of instruments as effective communication channels (Moscardo, 1998: 8; Kuo, 2002: 92; CI, 2010: 38). Interpretation instruments can include a wide selection of formats including tour guides, information panels, brochures, published field guides, exhibits, films, the internet and digital media (Millar, 1989: 14; CI, 2010: 38; CI, 2003: 11). Selecting the correct format depends on the context in which they are delivered as different instruments should be used on and off site (Ortega & Rodriguez, 2007: 146).
Tour guides are a common form of interpretation and considered by many to be the most effective means for educating visitors (Moscardo et al., 2004: 238). On site in the Rupununi, community-based tour guides currently act as the primary instrument for delivering the interpretation of heritage resources. One community member (Interview C1, 2012) even argued that in terms of communicating information to visitors, “…only the tour guides should tell it”. Other stakeholders, including a tourist (Interview T4, 2012), observed that “The guide is going to be a really imperative part of the success”, while a member of the media (Interview M2, 2012) commented that in Guyana “…guides play a big role because…there’s no barrier for English speakers” and they are able to communicate with a larger audience more effectively. The same media stakeholder (ibid) added that it’s important for guides to be knowledgeable because “…people would rather hear a story from a guide and have that personal touch on it than just walking down a trail and only reading signs”. An industry stakeholder (Interview I5, 2012) agreed, stating that visitors “…want to meet the local people, they want to know the local stories…creating something together”. Although many guides have undergone training programmes, many of these programmes were focused on birding and guides now need to “…develop their knowledge of other fauna, flora, culture and history of the area” (CI, 2010: 27-29).
Visiting several communities revealed that beyond tour guides, there was very little available information through alternative instruments. One of the few exceptions was a promotional poster for five of the key market-ready village communities in the North Rupununi (Figure 6.1), which are Surama, Wowetta, Annai, Aranaputa and Rewa. Some villages, such as Surama, possessed a small amount of printed information, but much more could still be done to improve the on-site interpretation. However, doing so requires funding, which many communities are struggling to acquire.
165
Figure 6.1: Rupununi Community Tourism Promotional Poster
There have been multiple conversations and plans regarding the permanent construction of visitor interpretation centres in the Rupununi. On having good on-site interpretation, a community member (Interview C2, 2012) contended, “I think here is where the distribution of information should be, apart from the internet and website, in terms of the heart of things”. He (ibid) further argued that having a permanent information centre would be a great opportunity to distribute flyers about the various communities to stimulate interest because at present, “…you’ve got a lot of people passing here but we don’t have any sort of information to give out to people”. As there are several attractions scattered throughout the region, having information centres could significantly improve the overall tourism experience by consolidating the information into a more easily accessible format. These interpretation centres include the in- development tourism information centre at Bina Hill in Annai where one stakeholder (Interview P2, 2012) asserted, “When tourists come to this tourism centre…we give them all the vital information, what they want to know”. Although the information centre remains under development and does have on-site staff, there was still very little printed information available for visitors and all logistic information provided to them
166
varied from group to group. According to CI (2010: 35), there are also plans to develop an interpretation centre, the Rupununi Wetlands Centre, in which the NRDDB has already secured financial assistance from the European Union.
The internet is an off-site tool that stakeholders believe has much potential in marketing the Rupununi and educating visitors. The internet is considered by many to be a model avenue for distributing information due to its “...global reach and multimedia capability” (Doolin et al., 2002: 557; see also Ortega & Rodriguez, 2007: 147). Websites for a destination and its attractions create a sense of place about the location before tourists ever arrive so the information stakeholders share can be critical to guest expectations and satisfaction levels (Doolin et al., 2002: 557). Currently, stakeholders admit that little information is available on the internet, but that improving this is more likely to increase visitor numbers, thus contributing to the economic sustainability of the region. Tourists explained that they “…didn’t find much on the internet” (Interview T2, 2012) and ultimately there “…seemed to be relatively little” (Interview T3, 2012). In comparison, a community member (Interview C4, 2012) argued that “I think we need to have…a window somewhere to inform people who want to travel, tourists who want to see this area”.
A public sector representative (Interview P1, 2012) argued that having a website is imperative “…because that’s their window to the world, it’s a very effective and powerful marketing tool as well”. On using the internet as a way forward, a member of the voluntary sector (Interview V2, 2012) commented, “… it’s cheap. Social networking is dirt cheap, and I try to look at the ways in which communities can utilize this but not all of them have internet in the communities” (also stated during Interview P1, 2012). Although limited access to the internet and funding are critical issues, having a website to promote their attraction will be crucial to future development. In the end, information distribution about Rupununi tourism could be improved through the development of more on- and off-site tools. Other on-site formats such as brochures and information panels within the proposed interpretation centres would be ideal, but require more funding. The successful distribution of information and interpretation of heritage resources will depend on establishing a diverse network of communication channels that promote quality and accurate content.
167