EVALUACIÓN DE COSTOS DE PROCESOS

Another significant goal of empowerment is illustrated through the impact of CBE development on the lives of community members (Timothy, 2007; Scheyvens, 2002). Scheyvens (1999) proposed an empowerment framework for assessing the effectiveness of ecotourism initiatives on local communities (see Figure 2.3). The framework determines the impacts of ecotourism under four dimensions: economic, social, psychological and political empowerment (Scheyvens, 1999).

Figure 2.3 Community empowerment in CBE development Source: Adopted from Scheyvens (1999)

The economic dimension considers the extent to which a host community is economically empowered by ecotourism development and, in order to do this, it is necessary to consider the long-term fiscal benefits reaped by community members in terms of direct and indirect economic advantages (Scheyvens, 1999; Timothy, 2007). Economic empowerment is achieved when the money earned is shared among many community households through community distributional networks (Scheyvens, 1999; 2009) and economic gains are widely distributed in indigenous communities and, in particular, to disadvantaged groups, including women and poor of these communities, rather than to the local elite and external investors (Timothy, 2007; Scheyvens, 1999). This form of empowerment is also achieved when indigenous community members are able to be involved in ecotourism activities in their

CBE Development Economic empowerment Economic gains; community development Polical empowerment Decison-making authority Social empowement Community cohesion Psychological empowerment Self-esteem; pride

communities, and/or their agricultural products and handicrafts are consumed by tourism enterprises and tourists. This is often referred to as ‘pro-poor tourism’, wherein all community members reap direct and indirect tourism benefits (Timothy, 2007; Ashley, Roe & Goodwin, 2001). In addition, economic empowerment is acheived when funds from CBE activity are used for community development projects including the improvement of the infrastructure (i.e. roads, electricity, water supplies, sewage system) and other community services (i.e. schools, social welfare and health care) (Timothy, 2007; Scheyvens, 1999).

The social empowerment dimension in Scheyvens’ (1999) framework refers to the condition where social cohesion and integrity is recognized and strengthened (Scheyvens, 1999). It involves the existence of strong community groups including women’s, youth and elderly groups (Scheyven, 1999). This dimension of empowerment also refers to community members having a sense of solidarity and a sense of social obligations for the common good (Timothy, 2007). The sense of communality can contribute to the growth of confidence in a collective social identity and stewardship over resources (Timothy, 2007). In other words, the reinforcement and preservation of cultural traditions and the conservation of natural resources may increase social empowerment of host communities.

Psychological empowerment appears when community members have self-esteem and pride in their cultural traditions and natural values and have an optimistic faith about their future (Scheyvens, 1999). Psychological empowerment is visible when there is outside recognition and respect of the value of cultural traditions and natural heritage of indigenous communities as this recognition may increase pride among community members and makes them enthusiastic about sharing their traditional knowledge and experience with visitors (Timothy, 2007). This enhanced pride and enthusiasm can lead to a growth of confidence among community members to participate in social activities and engage with other people. In contrast, frustration and confusion about access to resources important to livelihoods, such as lands, among community members in CBE initiatives are signs of psychological disempowerment (Scheyvens, 1999).

The final dimension of political empowerment contends that a community is politically empowered when all community stakeholders have a substantial voice in the decision-making over the development process, from its conception to its implementation (Scheyvens, 1999; Timothy, 2007). Political empowerment involves all community stakeholder groups, including ethnic groups, women and the poor, having equal opportunities to decide their own future by expressing their concerns and points of views about decisions that affect their lives (Timothy, 2007; Cusack & Dixon, 2006). To provide these stakeholders with opportunities,

implementing agencies should invite them to provide suggestions, concerns and opinions through various public participation methods (Timothy, 1999). However, Arnstein (1969) contended that these public participation methods (i.e. public hearing, attitude survey, meetings) may represent a degree of tokenism (see Section 2.5.2.1). Consequently, political empowered of local communities is considered when community stakeholders’ views are incorporated into decision making for CBE development (Scheyvens, 1999; Sofield, 2003), and when these decisions are made in accordance with the interests and needs of community members (Sofield, 2003; Cusack and Dixon, 2006).

These four dimensions of empowerment are critical indicators for evaluating the effectiveness of CBE development within indigenous communities. However, evaluating the actual extent of the effectiveness of CBE in these four dimensions can be complicated, given the complexity of the variables of the impact of CBE development. As such, many studies on the impacts of tourism development use community perception as the main method to investigate those impacts (Liu & Var, 1986; William & Lawson, 2001; Lankford & Howard, 1994; Haralambopoulos & Pizam, 1996; Husbands, 1989; Ap, 1992; Tosun, 2002; Long, Perdue & Allen, 1990)

While evaluating actual impacts of CBE development is complex and time-consuming, community perception of the impacts of CBE is a crucial reference for investigating the real significance of the four dimensions of empowerment in CBE. Since indigenous communities are all such persons who are potentially empowered or disempowered by the development of CBE, they are the only persons who can tell which impacts will provide acceptable benefits and which have serious problems (Andereck, Valentine, Knopf & Vogt, 2005). Furthermore, Stronza (2001) argued that to analyse rigorously the pure effects of tourism development in facilitating empowerment of indigenous people, indigenous perceptions about these effects are indispensible. The perceptions of those impacts are “likely to be an important planning and policy consideration for the successful development, marketing and operation of existing and future programmes and projects” (Ap, 1992, p. 665).