Origen del Movimiento Social de Ex Braceros

A study conducted by Kennedy (1998) reveals that two groups that are already culturally similar are more likely to interact, and therefore to become even more culturally similar. While on the contrary, two societies with no cultural similarity are unlikely to interact, and therefore will have no tendency to become more culturally similar. Robinson and Nemetz (1988); Reisinger and Turner (2003) also agree and support Kennedy‟s proposition by affirming that cultural similarities bring people together and dissimilarities separate people. However, Vergunst (2008) argues that at the present time when society is becoming more industrialised, there is an

53

increased demand for resources, such as human resources, and need for employment opportunities, as a result, there is an increased degree of interaction between people from urban and rural areas despite the similarity or dissimilarities in culture.

Wilson et al. (2001) indicate that community members and outsiders play an important role in tourism development and promotion and it cannot work without the participation and collaboration of outsiders directly and indirectly involved with the community members in tourism. Some researchers (e.g., Freeman 1984; Gunn 1994; Donaldson and Preston 1995; Keen 2004) believe that in order for the community to become a successful and well developed tourism destination, it will often need help and support from a number of stakeholders not only by local residents but also entrepreneurs, middlemen-minorities, government sectors. Moreover Murphy (1985); Gunn (1994); Palmer and Bejou (1995) and Wilson et al. (2001) offer a similar notion that most tourism destination in remote areas do not have the individual resources and abilities to promote either themselves or the community as a tourist product. According to Keen (2002) these interactions in tourism business between local and ETAs are emerging for several reasons:

 It is difficult for communities to develop their assets on their own, as they lack access to capital, tourism expertise and marketing skills etc.

 In a context where tourism is growing in a new destination, ETAs need access to new opportunities, and hence to the assets owned by communities.

 Tourism is increasingly being seen as an option to enhance quality of life of local communities

 There are many initiatives to support tourism in the community, one of them is through working with ETAs in the area.

Moreover, Shaw and Shaw (1999) offer the following reasons for why the interactions of community and ETAs occur:

 Developing countries are poor, so they often need help from tourism to attain economic prosperity.

 Developing countries generally have magnificent natural resources and unique culture than many developed countries.

 Because of their poor economic conditions, the development of tourism in developing countries does not have sufficient capitals, so they need help from the outsiders such as:

foreign investment.

54

The recommendations of Keen (2002) and Shaw and Shaw (1999) are very similar. Another study conducted by Benbow (2008) proposes the significance of the following perspectives in regard to the creation of interactions between local and ETAs:

 The limitations of local infrastructure

 Small number of local entrepreneurs

 External funding and the focus on a particular market segment

Despite the fact that tourism development can be expensive and local people may have limited capabilities to do so in certain cases such as large resort and hotel, some other researchers (e.g., Shaw and Williams 1994; Fesenmaier et al. 1995) however, disagree with the aforementioned reasons, and point out that the development of rural tourism is not necessarily dependent on ETAs because with the help and participant from local community members is enough to develop rural tourism to be successful with less cost in the development process. Therefore, rural tourism need not involve dependency on the outsiders. According to Paengnoy (2007) due to the fact that their main occupation is still farming linked to a rapid growth in their population, there is a need for alternative ways to earn more income. Tourism happens to be known as the means to stimulate local economy as well as providing job opportunities. Therefore, local people who are in need tend to allow ETAs to come into their area, with hope to find employment opportunities offer by them, which mostly are businesses related to tourism (Paengnoy 2007).

However, Prachachart (2008) notes that in reality the tourism industry in hill tribe area is mostly dominated by outside investors. These groups of people have the ability to set up a business, yet they still need help from the local to provide tourists with a typical hill tribe experience. A study by Ashley and Jones (2001) supports this argument by pointing out that the involvement of tourism business activities between communities and private non resident investors are an emerging trend in Southern Africa as well, because of the aforementioned reasons. Therefore, it can be logically concluded that without the help from one another, rural tourism cannot be successfully developed because it requires several components from both local and the outsiders which include:

 Attractions: the natural and manmade features both within and adjacent to a community.

 Promotion: the marketing of a community and its tourism attractions to potential tourists.

 Tourism infrastructure: access facilities (roads, airports, trains, and buses), water and power services, parking, signs, and recreation facilities.

55

 Services: lodging, restaurants, and the various retail businesses needed to take care of tourists‟ needs.

 Hospitality: how tourists are treated by both community residents and employees in tourism businesses and attractions.

 Tourism entrepreneurs: their role in fostering these components.

Gunn (1988 in Wilson et al. 2001, p.133) Therefore, the interaction between the local and ETAs in the community is evident in two ways.

The first dimension of this dynamic is the way that ETAs utilise the community as part of their tourism product and the way they manage community to ensure the smooth running of the business. The second way reflects the reality that rural communities are often in a relatively weak position in relation to other stakeholders in the tourism process, as they usually lack the information, power and resources especially when finance is not available locally (McLaren 1998). As a result, they often permit outsiders to step in and help out with what the community lacks and gain positive impacts from the success of an enterprise owned by the outsiders (Woodley 1993). In conclusion, a diverse range of reasons frequently creates a complex environment in which tourism activities are developed and operated. This complexity ensures that the interaction between the ETAs and local in the community is inevitable (Wilson et al.

2001).