Turismo rural comunitario y diferenciación campesina. Consideraciones a partir de un caso andino

dc.contributor.authorGascón, Jordi (Gascón Gutiérrez)
dc.date.accessioned2020-02-17T14:23:53Z
dc.date.available2020-02-17T14:23:53Z
dc.date.issued2011
dc.date.updated2020-02-17T14:23:54Z
dc.description.abstract[spa] En los últimos años, el turismo rural comunitario se ha presentado como un instrumento adecuado para aumentar la renta de la población campesina y diversificar sus fuentes de ingresos. Pero se trata de una actividad económica que no está exenta de riesgos. A partir de un caso específico (la isla peruana de Amantaní, en el Lago Titicaca) el artículo estudia uno de ellos: el impacto del turismo en la cohesión socioeconómica comunitaria. [eng] In the last years, Community-Based Tourism has created expectations in many latin american rural communities as an strategy to increase their income and to diversify the sources of this income. But it is an activity that is not free of risks. From a specific case (Amantaní Island, Titikaka Lake, Peru), the article studies one of these risks: the impact of tourism in the socio-economical communitarian cohesion.
dc.description.abstract[eng] Community Based Tourism (CBT) has been proposed as an effective instrument to contribute to the conservation of natural areas and the sustainability of rural and indigenous economies. However, risks that may increase the vulnerability of host societies have also been identified. These critical analyses have focused on economic, socio-cultural or environmental impact. The role of the local population in the design and implementation of tourism proposals has not generated as much interest. This article asks under what conditions participatory processes allow CBT projects to assume the interests and desires of the local population, or when they are only an empty exercise aimed at legitimizing the objectives of funding agencies. The analysis of an ethnographic case (Valle de Manduriacos, Ecuador) finds that participatory processes work when two factors are present. On the one hand — as the literature on participatory processes states — when the local population has social capital and solid organizational structures. But also when they know how the sector of intervention works — the tourism sector.
dc.format.extent20 p.
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.identifier.idgrec658250
dc.identifier.issn1515-5994
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2445/150452
dc.language.isospa
dc.publisherUniversidad Nacional de La Plata
dc.relation.isformatofReproducció del document publicat a: https://www.mundoagrario.unlp.edu.ar/article/view/v11n22a01
dc.relation.ispartofMundo Agrario, 2011, vol. 11, num. 22
dc.rightscc-by-nc-sa (c) Gascón, Jordi (Gascón Gutiérrez), 2011
dc.rights.accessRightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/es
dc.sourceArticles publicats en revistes (Antropologia Social)
dc.subject.classificationTurisme rural
dc.subject.classificationDesenvolupament comunitari
dc.subject.classificationPagesia
dc.subject.classificationConflictes socials
dc.subject.classificationTiticaca (Perú i Bolivia : Llac)
dc.subject.classificationPerú
dc.subject.otherRural tourism
dc.subject.otherCommunity development
dc.subject.otherPeasants
dc.subject.otherSocial conflict
dc.subject.otherTiticaca (Peru and Bolivia : Lake)
dc.subject.otherPeru
dc.titleTurismo rural comunitario y diferenciación campesina. Consideraciones a partir de un caso andino
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/article
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion

Fitxers

Paquet original

Mostrant 1 - 1 de 1
Carregant...
Miniatura
Nom:
658250.pdf
Mida:
80.57 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format