Full text of DOI:10.1080/09669580108667386

This article was downloaded by: [New York University]
On: 12 February 2015, At: 15:19
Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number:
1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street,
London W1T 3JH, UK
Journal of Sustainable
Tourism
Publication details, including instructions for
authors and subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rsus20
An Integrative Approach to
Tourism: Lessons from the
Andes of Peru
Ross E. Mitchell & Paul F.J. Eagles
Published online: 29 Mar 2010.
To cite this article: Ross E. Mitchell & Paul F.J. Eagles (2001) An Integrative
Approach to Tourism: Lessons from the Andes of Peru, Journal of Sustainable
Tourism, 9:1, 4-28, DOI: 10.1080/09669580108667386
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09669580108667386
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all
the information (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our
platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors
make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy,
completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any
opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and
views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor
& Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and
should be independently verified with primary sources of information.
Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,
proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities
whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in
connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study
purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution,

reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any
form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access
and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-
conditions

An Integrative Approach to Tourism:
Lessons from the Andes of Peru
Ross E. Mitchell
Department of Rural Economy, Faculty of Agriculture, Forestry and Home
Economics, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada T6G 2H1
Paul F.J. Eagles
Department of Recreation and Leisure Studies, University of Waterloo, Ontario,
Canada N2L 3G1
This study compares the Andean communities of Taquile Island and Chiquian, Peru,
which differ in their level of integrationfor their respectivetourism sector. Integration
was primarily defined by percentage of local people employed, type and degree of
participation,decision-making power, and ownership in the local tourism sector. Prin-
cipally social and economic aspects were measured and evaluated, recognising that
considerable local support and participation in tourism decision making are linked to
issues of ownership and control. It was found that higher levels of integration would
leadto enhanced socioeconomic benefitsfor the community. A frameworkfor commu-
nity integration was developed that could help guide research,planning, development
and evaluation of community-based tourism projects.
Introduction
The World Tourism Organisationstates thatCentral and South America had a
combined average annual growth rate of almost 10% for international tourist
arrivals from 1995–98, and South America is expected to overtake the Caribbean
between 1995 and 2020as the second largest subregion (after North America) for
international tourist arrivals (WTO, 2000). Since the 1980s, several developing
countries such as Costa Rica, Belize and Ecuador have been promoting ‘sustain-
able’ or ‘nature-based’ tourism to take advantage of their unique ecosystems,
and to attemptto reduce or avoidnegativeimpacts.Sustainabletourismhas been
defined as a type of development that ‘connects tourists and providers of tourist
facilities and services with advocates of environmental protection and commu-
nity residents and their leaders who desire a better quality of life’ (McIntyre,
1993: 16). It is often equated with ‘ecotourism’, which The Ecotourism Society
defines as ‘responsible travel to natural areas which conserves the environment
and improves the welfare of local people’ (Western, 1993: 8).
The problem inherent to such definitions of ecotourism or sustainable tourism
is that their respective elements have yet to be considered in an
integrative
fashion. A reasonable assumption for a given tourism project is that maximising
local participation is a desirable objective, in conjunction with profitability and
protection of natural resources. If so, what is meant exactly by ‘maximisation’
and ‘participation’, and how are they interconnected? Is the level of local
involvement merely ofa consultativenatureor does thecommunity significantly
influence or even control tourism planning, development and management?
How does local participation affect the people’s means of livelihood and the
0966-9582/01/01 0004-25 $16.00/0
JOURNAL OF SUSTAINABLE TOURISM
© 2001 R.E. Mitchell & P.F.J. Eagles
Vol. 9, No. 1, 2001
4

5
Journal of Sustainable Tourism
sharing of benefits such as jobs and revenues? Perhaps the only forms of local
participation that are likely to break existing patterns of power and unequal
development ‘are those which originate from within the local communities
themselves’ (Mowforth & Munt, 1998: 240).
Although relatively few case studies in Latin America have been carried out
that have demonstrated meaningful local participation in tourism planning and
development, one notable exception is the Cofan of Zobalo, Ecuador. These
people appear to have successfully implemented a mixed cooperative approach
with community business partnerships (Borman, 1995; Epler Wood, 1998),
earning each resident an estimated US$ 500 annually (Wunder, 1996). Other
sources on local participation in Latin America tourism include works by
Brandon (1993), Lindberg
(1999).
(1996), Torres (1996), Drumm (1998) and Honey
et al.
Case study: Community integration and socioeconomic parameters
This paper examines the socioeconomic aspects of tourism in two communi-
ties distinguished by their degree of involvement in tourism planning, manage-
ment, and ownership, hence local control or
. The
community integration
hypothesis is that a community characterised as highly integrated in tourism
decision making would experience greater socioeconomic benefits over another
community distinguished by a low level of integration. In this research, the
extent of community integration in tourism management can be distinguished
by the following indicators:
(1) the extent of a broad-based, equitable and efficient democratic process;
(2) the number of participating citizens;
(3) the degree of individual participation (i.e. influence) in decision-making;
(4) theamountoflocalownershipin thecommunity-basedtourismsector;and
(5) the degree of long-term involvement in planning and management by local
communities (i.e. not a ‘one-off’ event).
Some of these indicators are described by Sewell and Phillips (1979), who state
that a high degree of participation in a given public participation process has a
correspondingly low amount of actual numbers of citizens involved (Sewell &
Phillips, 1979). In this scenario, the process would likely be of a more personal
nature with smaller groups, and individual voices would theoretically have
more influence and control; conversely, high numbers of citizens involved
would lead to a decrease in the degree of participation, on the sole basis that it
becomes increasingly harder to maximise individual participation in larger
group settings (Sewell & Phillips, 1979).
Local participation could conceivably be measured by placing a given
community on Arnstein’s (1969)
or Pretty’s (1995)
Ladder of Citizen Participation
. For example, Pretty’s typology describes the type of
Typology of Participation
involvement in seven levels of participation and offers a critique of each level.
These types rangefrom , in whichvirtually allthepower
manipulativeparticipation
and control over the development or proposal lie with groups outside the local
community,to , in which power and controloverall development
self-mobilisation
aspects rest squarely with the localcommunity. A community consistently oper-

An Integrative Approach to Tourism
6
ative somewhere in the top levels of such participation typologies may demon-
strate a mature social, psychological, and political integration (Mitchell, 1998).
Although such typologies are useful representations of the mechanisms and
effects of citizen involvement in decision-making, it may be difficult to accu-
rately place a community through empirical means. In addition, factors such as
property ownership, existence of local elite and power bases, government poli-
cies and economic leakages may complicate matters considerably. Rather than
attempt to categorise a given community using such techniques, an examination
of certain socioeconomic factors may better facilitate portrayal of integration
levels in tourism decision-making participation. Such factors may be considered
on an individual basis, albeit recognising their interconnectivity and a distinc-
tion madebetween ‘perceived’ and ‘actual’socioeconomicbenefits. For example,
residents may have a positive perception of benefits accruing from tourism, but
‘real’ benefits may be lower than perceived when direct monetary comparisons
are made and factors such as revenue leakages are considered.
in this research concern individual and community wellbeing;
Social benefits
specifically, personalsatisfactionand democratic,equitable participationin local
decision making. Such predominately qualitative benefits were measured by (1)
perceptions towardthe tourism sector (both individual and community), and (2)
equity inherent in localdecision-making power and participation.
Economic bene-
are considered as (a) local tourism-generated income, (b) direct employment
fits
related to the provision of tourism services, (c) tourism service ownership, (d)
gross sales and profits of tourism-related businesses, and (e) revenue leakages
related to the local tourism industry.
Community integration in tourism
Mitchell (1998) and Mitchell and Reid (2001) have proposed a framework for
community integration in tourism planning and management, which is partially
illustrated in Figure 1. The theory is that a tourism integration process for a given
community must be linked to three critical parameters: (1)
,
community awareness
, both local and external.
(2)
, and (3)
community unity
power or control relationships
Awareness, unity, and power for a certain tourism sector comprise an integra-
tion triangle and form a necessary part of the community’s rise to self-reliance
and local control. These variables are principally endogenous (factors internal to
the community), but they will also be influenced by the exogenous environment
(factors outside the community).
Community awareness is defined as the ‘conscientisation’ (Freire, 1970) of
people concerning the complexities and potential impacts of a proposed devel-
opment. Freire (1970) describes conscientisation as the transformation towards
empowerment. It is likely that a ‘catalyst’ such as a facilitator, educator, planner
or localleader may influence local awareness of tourism potential. In theory, this
individual or agency would provide invaluable information about the industry
and its possible positive and negative effects. Initially, the catalystwould act as a
motivating force that enables the community to reach a level of self-directed
organisation and management.
Community unity concerning tourism can be considered as collective support
for thelocaltourismsectorand communitycohesiveness (Mitchell, 1998).Lack of
unity for tourism planning and development may hinder true integration and an

7
Journal of Sustainable Tourism
Figure 1 Community integration in tourism
equitable sharing of socioeconomic benefits. However, unity may not be desir-
able if achieved through coercion or other forms of ‘muting’. In actuality, only a
few individuals may be supportive of local tourism while the rest of the commu-
nity remains indifferent or even antagonistic towards the industry. Moreover,
the perspectives and interests of the mostpowerful sections in a community may
dominate and gain legitimacy, ‘not through overt competition or confrontation,
but [ironically] through … consensus’ (Mosse, 1994: 509).
Local power in tourism policy and management issues may be highly influ-
enced by the availability of resources and support. Both local and non-local
interest groups will likely control varying amounts of power. However, local
development is generally determined by the decisions of individual private
entrepreneurs in the community who primarily make market driven decisions
(Dye, 1986;Douglas, 1989). For small, isolated communities, it is likely that ‘true’
or effective power will be held by neighbouring cities or even other countries.
Nevertheless, a higher degree of community participation in terms of both
numbers and influence of local residents should also lead to more equitable
sharing of decision-making power within the community.
Tourism in Peru
Peru is the third-largest country in South America and is bordered by five
neighbours: Ecuador to the northwest, Colombia to the northeast, Brazil and

An Integrative Approach to Tourism
8
Figure 2 Map of Peru and location of study sites
Adapted from http://www.theodora.com/wfb/peru/peru_map.html, July 19, 1998.
Bolivia to the east and Chile to the south (see Figure 2). Its totalpopulation of 22.6
million people (1993 census) includes over seven million that live in Lima, the
capital on the Pacific coast.
The combination of economic and political instability, widespread terrorist
activities and a serious cholera outbreak resulted in the virtual destruction of the
country’s tourism industry during the late 1980s and early 1990s. For example,
Peru was one of only three countries in the western hemisphere where tourist
arrivals actually declined over the 1980 to 1992 period (Blackstone, 1995). Still,
tourism has been the fastest-growing sector in Peru’s economy, expanding an
average 29% annually from 1993–96 (Boza, 1997). In 1998, international arrivals
to Peru increased 11.5%, exceeding by almost five times the world rate of 2.4%
estimated by the World Tourism Organisation for the same period (WTO, 1999).
Among the principal reasonsfor this increased tourism demand is Peru’s incred-
ible ecological, cultural and historical diversity. For example, it is likely the most
globally diverse in terms of bird species (over 1600) and third most diverse in
mammals (Blackstone, 1995). Peru also possesses some of the most exciting heri-
tage resources in the world, such as the Inca ruins at Machu Picchu, the Nazca
Lines and the Tomb of Sipan.

9
Journal of Sustainable Tourism
Study areas
The first community selected for this comparative study is Taquile Island,1
located on Lake Titicaca in southeastern Peru. The other community is
Chiquian,2 which lies just south of Huaraz in the central part of Peru. Tourism in
the Chiquian region is principally nature-based, while it is both culturally and
ecologically oriented for Taquile Island. Table 1 indicates someshared character-
istics of the study areas that enable general comparisons to be made, especially
thosebasedoncommunityparticipationin tourismplanningandpotentialbenefits.
Table 1 Research site comparison
Key characteristics
Altitude
Taquile Island
3812 m
Chiquian
3374 m
Dominant languages
Primarily Quechua, minor Spanish; minor Quechua
Spanish (especially men)
Location
Lake Titicaca; relatively iso- Central Andes; relatively
lated but accessible by boat isolated but accessible by
from Puno
road from Huaraz or Lima
Major economic activities
Number of visitors
Population
Subsistence agriculture,
Subsistence agriculture,
tourism services, weaving guiding, weaving
Est. 27,000 in 1996
Est. 1000 in 1996 to
Huayhuash
3801 (1993 census);
1204 households
1850 (1997 estimate);
350 households
Production of handicrafts
Tourism frequency
Very high; tourist-based
and functional
Year-round; high season
from June–August
Low to moderate; predomi-
nantly export-based
Mainly dry season from
May–September
Tourism economic
importance
Very high; high diversity of Low to moderate; moderate
services
services available
Tourism type
Cultural/nature
Nature/cultural
Taquile Island
For this research, two rich sources of historical context and tourism data
utilised were Healy and Zorn’s (1983) ‘Lake Titicaca’s campesino controlled
tourism’ and Prochaska’s (1990)
. Taquile Island lies on Lake
Taquile y sus tejidos
Titicaca in the extreme southeast end of Peru, about 25 km or three to four hours
by smallmotorisedboatfrom Puno (regional capital with approximately 100,000
inhabitants). Total surface area is 754 hectares with 65% of the area being culti-
vated (Valencia Blanco, 1989). Taquile has an estimated population of 1850
primarily Quechua-speaking people, who are highly industrious in agriculture,
fishing, and weaving. The administration of Taquile Island is based on unique
sociogeographical divisions that combine traditional with modern political
systems (Healy & Zorn, 1983).
Since the time of the pre-Inca Tiahuanaco culture, Taquile Island has under-
gone radical changes ranging from slavery and feudalism to private ownership
under a democratic system. The first mention of Taquile was in 1580 when the
Spaniard Pedro Gonzáles de Taquila acquired the islands of Taquile and

An Integrative Approach to Tourism
10
Amantaní from Charles V, the king of Spain (Matos Mar, 1957). From that point
on until 1930, the islanders, or
hacendados
, were ruled and forced to pay tribute to
Taquileños
or landowners. From 1917–31, the island was a place of exile for polit-
ical prisoners. One infamous prisoner who stayed on the island from 1921–24
was Luis M. Sánchez Cerro, who later served as president of Peru during
1930–31. Cerro repaid his friendship with the leader of the community,
Prudencia Huatta, by setting the process in motion for Taquileños and other
Peruvian
(peasant farmers) to gain legal title to their lands. After
campesinos
almost four centuries of persecution and a long judicial process, the inhabitants
ofTaquile finally acquired totalownershipof theisland in 1960(Valencia Blanco,
1989: 20).
Foreign tourists began arriving on the dock at Puno in the mid-1970s and
Puno-based boatowners soonadded the island to their tourist run on the lake. To
meet this growing demand, Taquile Island sailboat cooperatives were formed in
early 1978 by groups of 30 to 40 families (Healy & Zorn, 1983). By 1982, the
number of boat cooperatives had expanded to 13, with 435 Taquile residents
(virtually every family represented) sharing boat ownership and management
responsibilities (Healy & Zorn, 1983). The islanders proved to be competitive
with boatowners from Puno and eventually displaced them by obtaining an offi-
cially sanctioned monopoly. Protection of islander-controlled tourist transport
ended during the early 1990s with the advent of President Fujimori’s
privatisation and anti-monopolisation policies.
When tourists arrive on Taquile, a reception committee greets and registers
them by age, duration of stay, and nationality. The new arrivals are assigned
accommodation with a local family in an adobe hut. There are several commit-
tees on the island that help to manage the daily tasks, such as housing, weaving,
cooking and transportation.Special tasks such as building constructionor public
maintenance are handled by volunteer work groups. Each restaurant on the
island is owned and managed by groups of families. Tourist income revenues
have encouraged household improvements (such as simple bedding gear, extra
rooms, and kerosene lanterns), which are inspected and approved by another
island committee(Healy &Zorn,1983).Notably, each household approved by an
accommodation committee as suitable for tourists directly receives the lodging
fees.
One of Taquile’s principal attractions is its extraordinary weavings, skilfully
woven from sheep or alpaca wool. During the 1980s, local weavers formed two
community-run artisan stores (Manco Capac Cooperative) to sell their diverse,
and increasingly numerous, products. Today, the handicraft industry has
become a major component of their livelihood and lifestyle; most men, women,
teenagers and children over the age of seven now earn money by producing
crafts. As of 1997, there were 270 cooperative members or 77% of the population
(each member represents at least one family). Prices are set based on the quality
of workmanship and the amount of labour (Healy & Zorn, 1983). Prices are also
fixed by all members to avoidharmful competition, with a smallpercentage (5%)
retained for cooperative maintenance. Private sales to tourists are prohibited by
community law in keeping with islander traditions of equality, although these
do occur on a discreet basis. By 1990, Taquile had control over all stages of its

11
Journal of Sustainable Tourism
textile manufacture and marketing, and controlled most of the tourism services
(Prochaska, 1990).
Chiquian
Chiquian was selected to compare community integration in tourism to
Taquile Island. Many trekkers that visit the nearby Cordillera Huayhuash either
start or end their treks in Chiquian. Chiquian has an urban population of 3801
inhabitants and 1204 households (1993 census). It is about 110 km southeast of
Huaraz (three to four hours by bus), 340km northeast of Lima, situated at 3374m
in the central Andean region of Peru, and relatively accessible. Still, in many
respects Chiquian remains as isolated as Taquile Island; it is surrounded by
mountains and is still a relatively arduous journey, even considering the recent
roadimprovements from Huaraz.There is a distinctpreference for tourism in the
immediate Huaraz area compared to the relatively isolated Cordillera
Huayhuash area, largely due to greater accessibility and awareness. An esti-
mated 95% of foreign visitors to the Chavín Region (to which Chiquian belongs)
visit cities in the Callejón de Huaylas, a mountain valley north of Huaraz which
includes the National Park of Huascarán; only 1% visit Chiquian and the lesser
known Cordillera Huayhuash (The Mountain Institute, 1996).
People working in local mountain-based tourism in the Chiquian area may be
hired as porters, mule drivers and cooks. In the town of Chiquian, tourism
services include restaurants, hostels and bus transportation, as well as alpaca
wool clothing production, and cheese-making. In addition to the natural beauty
of the Cordillera Huayhuash, Chiquian and its neighbouring towns offer other
attractions such as colonial churches, thermal springs and archaeological sites.
Still, most foreign tourists that come to Chiquian prefer to trek or climb moun-
tains in the nearby Cordillera Huayhuash, covering an area of 140,000 hectares
and 45 km long from north to south. The Huayhuash is ‘virtually an undiscov-
ered treasure’ with its extensive ‘hiking and trekking routes, climbing attrac-
tions, archaeologicalsites, alpine lakes, and cultural uniqueness’ (Kolff & Tohan,
1997: 29). It contains 46 alpine lakes and has six peaks greater than 6000 m,
including the second highest mountain in Peru, Yerupaja (6634 m).
The flow of visitors to theHuayhuash startedin the 1970s,reaching its peak by
the mid-1980s. From this point until approximately 1992, tourism virtually
ceased in the Huayhuash due to the terrorist activities of the Shining Path. With
increased security in the area due to the decline of terrorism, tourism levels may
now be superseding those of 10 years ago. One local expert estimated that
approximately 1000 visitors came to the Huayhuash during 1996, staying an
average of 10 days per person (Kolff & Tohan, 1997).
For this research, The Mountain Institute in Huaraz, Peru was invaluable for
historical data and helpful advice. Since 1997, The Mountain Institute has been
discussing with communities locally based tourism and the eventual designa-
tion of the Huayhuash as a nationally recognised protected area. In their explor-
atory report
, local people were
Initial Field Study of the Cordillera Huayhuash, Peru
found to perceive tourism as only a means of economic benefits (Kolff & Tohan,
1997).In addition, The MountainInstitute has encountered many concerns about
the future of the Cordillera Huayhuash with escalating demands by both foreign
mining companies and tourists.

An Integrative Approach to Tourism
Research Methods
12
Data collection
By concentrating efforts on two communities, an extensive and diverse data
collection was possible to allow for detailed analysis and discussion. It was
recognised that tourism decision-making may be influenced by other inter-
vening variables, including the degree of economic dependence on the industry
and historical–cultural–political considerations. However, given that a certain,
and likely different, level of tourism dependence was present for each commu-
nity, emphasis was placed on ‘why’ and ‘how’ individualand community partic-
ipation may affect socioeconomic benefits.
Both quantitative and qualitative data were collected from December 1996 to
September 1997 to obtain both statistical and perceptual or opinion-based find-
ings. Research techniques included household surveys, key-informant inter-
views and participant observation. In addition, some local businesses were
selected for financial comparisons and additional information obtained from
census reports, visitorrecordsand previous surveys or studies. It is worthnoting
that the qualitative data obtained from interviews with selected informants,
combined with participantobservationtechniques, provided considerable intro-
spective insights into perceived levels of revenues, decision-making participa-
tion, and other parameters. Conversely, quantitative data from surveys, visitor
records, and business comparisons were useful to refute, validate or augment
other data obtained.
Surveys
A household survey was applied to adult family members considered as a
community resident (defined as ‘any household member 16 years or older that
lives in the community for at least six months of the year’), and able to effectively
answer relevant questions. These concerned tourism history and awareness,
community unity, extent and sharing of decision-making power, tourism plan-
ning and development and satisfaction levels. The sample frame consisted of all
occupied households in both communities. A totalof 101 surveys for Taquile and
136 surveys for Chiquian were carried out, usually at the place of residence, with
a sample frame that consisted of all occupied households. The minimum confi-
dence interval was established at 90%, with a level of confidence of 10%. The
survey objective was to examine household perceptions of socioeconomic bene-
fits from local tourism activities by a combination of closed-ended (i.e. choices
provided) and Likert scale questions (i.e. a five-point scale ranging from
‘strongly agree’ to ‘strongly disagree’). Some open-ended questions were also
asked such as perceptions of tourism’s future for the community. Primarily
quantitative analytical methods were used to analyse the data, referring to the
descriptive procedures as suggested by Hunter and Brown (1991:240–241). Data
were entered using computer software (SPSS for Windows) and analysed by
various statistical tests, which generated frequency tables, bar charts, histo-
grams, chi-square statistics and Pearson’s correlations. Some means, modes and
standard deviations were produced for relevant interval data.

13
Journal of Sustainable Tourism
Key-informant interviews
Qualitative methodology was applied to ‘key-informants’ to obtain a greater
perspective of traditional values, power relationships, tourism sector parame-
ters and other related factors. The cultural significance of the role and effects of
tourism on the respective communities was examined through personalised,
informal discussions to address two main objectives: (1) to help to focus the
problem (research questions) on sociocultural meanings; and (2) to discover,
define and test categories. The interviews helped us to examine the deci-
sion-making processes in the community, especially attitudes and equitability
concerning the distribution of economic benefits from local and non-local
‘experts’ alike. Table 2 indicates the professions of nine persons for Taquile
Island and eight persons for Chiquian that were selected for their extensive
knowledge or involvement with the respective local tourism sector. The
key-informant interviews were analysed using qualitativetechniques, especially
based on McCracken’s (1988)
. All interviews were translated
stages of analysis
into English and double-checked for accuracy by triangulation similar to the
questionnaire preparation using an independent translator. Key themes and
concepts were first searched within each interview; the interviews were then
compared to each other and any themes generated were compared among each
community to examine commonalties and differences.
Table 2 Key-informants selected for long interviews
Taquile Island
Chiquian
Boat cooperative
manager
Hotel owner (Puno) Weaver
(elder)
Guide (Huaraz)
Local guide
Mayor
Varayoc
Guide and travel
agent (Huaraz)
Mayor
Weaver/tourism
founder
Hostel owner/man- Tourism promoter
ager
Priest (Puno)
Travel agent (Puno)
Weaver/tourism
promoter
Local guide
Weaving association
director
Participant observation
Participant observation often entails the researcher becoming resident in a
community for several months and observing the normal daily lives of its
members (Pratt & Loizos, 1992). These techniques help to understand relatively
complex situationsand to capture datafrom individuals who could not normally
speak, such aswomen (especially in the case of Taquile), children and distrusting
adults. A daily journal was kept to interpret, refute, verify, qualify or add to the
other data collected. Principal ways in which the participant observation tech-
nique was applied were as follows:
• attending community or tourism committee meetings;
• chatting with children and women about their activities and attitudes
towards tourism;

An Integrative Approach to Tourism
14
• becoming an active tourist (e.g. staying in local accommodations,going on
guided tours, bargaining for handicrafts and trekking); and
• taking part in community festivals.
Other methods
Relatively simple financial analyses were carried out for three typical tourism
businesses on Taquile Island (restaurant, tourist boat and handicraft coopera-
tive) and two typical tourism businesses in Chiquian (guiding operation and
restaurant). Secondary data were also obtained from visitor and census records,
as well as previous research findings, to verify or reject information gathered
from the other techniques, and to provide additional information.
Results
The research findings concerning community integration in tourism have
been grouped as follows: (1)
, (2)
tourism awareness and planning
community unity
, (3)
, and (4)
.
and action
community power or control
socioeconomic benefits
Predominantthemesfrom thekey-informantinterviews havebeen summarisedin
Table 3.
Tourism awareness and planning
Community awareness of tourism potential and its subsequent development
share similarities with tourism planning. For example, a community may
become cognisant of its present situation (e.g. impoverished people) and its
possibilities for tourism (e.g. unique natural and culture features such as a rich
rainforest). Consequently, interested residents and leaders may prepare for
tourism due to this state of awareness. This is assuming, of course, that favour-
able conditions exist (e.g. accessibility, basic services, competitive prices,
marketing strategy, financial resources). More often than not, however, such
‘planning’ may be of a haphazard nature as funding becomes available and
increased demand by tourists occurs.
This research found thatindividuals in both communities have played impor-
tant roles in tourism development. However, key-informant interview data
clearly demonstrated a much greater level of personal involvement and influ-
ence on Taquile Island. These persons were considered by several interviewees
to be the principal ‘catalysts’ or driving forces that helped prepare residents to
determine their desired kind and degree of tourism. Shared characteristics of
such catalystsincluded: (1) achieving legitimacy in the community, (2) assuming
an activist or advocate role, (3) building on community strengths, and (4) clari-
fying possibilities.
On Taquile Island, several key-informants felt that initial reluctance changed
to outright support when the economic benefits of local tourism became
apparent from community-wide participation in handicraft sales and lodging
provision. Until the 1970s,‘handicrafts’were mostlyclothes to be worn and tour-
ists were considered as unwanted strangers, not as potential clients. Many
respondents felt that it was the determination of ex-governor and expert weaver
Francisco Huatta Huatta and a Belgian priest, Father Pepe Loits, that persuaded
residents of the economic advantages of tourism. Both made it clear from the
start that equitable participation could be obtained by providing tourism

15
Journal of Sustainable Tourism
Table 3 Major themes from tourism key-informants
Theme
Taquile Island
Chiquian
Catalysts
Several local and non-local Two individuals responsi-
figures, including three for- ble for increasing national
eigners and three local resi- attention with recent ad-
dents
venture tourism events
Types of tourists
Tourism changes
Mostly foreigners; mixture Mostly foreigners to
of backpackers and conven- Huayhuash and Peruvian
tional tourists
tourists to Chiquian; back-
packers and mountain
climbers
Started mid-1970s; highest Started mid-1950s; highest
levels reached in 1990s;
tourism has increased to
near mass proportions
levels reached by
mid-1980s; tourism return-
ing after years of terrorism
Tourism plan or strategy
Participation in tourism
No formal plan but collec- No formal plan or strategy
tive and basic strategic
decision-making
Diverse, high participation; Local businesses and spe-
collective decision- making; cial events only, i.e. selec-
but starting to organise
equitable participation
highly encouraged
tive participation
External factors
Tourism control
Puno travel agencies,
Fujimori-led development gional government and pri-
vate organisations
Huaraz travel agencies, re-
Formerly high control has Low control with outside
decreased to moderate level domination of local tourism
partly due to privatisation industry
and ineffectual leadership
Community unity
Strong but declining unity Divided opinion over unity
linked to diminished
control
but marked pattern of dis-
harmony and conflict
Social effects or impacts
Modernisation due to de-
mands of tourism have af- tourism often negative; sus-
fected traditional lifestyles; picion mixed with adverse
Community feelings about
emergence of individual-
ism; some begging by
children
inter-community relation-
ships, less openness
Environmental effects or
impacts
Increasing litter affecting
Mining exploitation in Cor-
consumer demand; neglect dillera Huayhuash; need to
of agriculture due to handi- protect natural and cultural
craft production
environment
Economic changes
Most residents benefiting; Some revenues and jobs
opportunism linked to high from tourism, but most resi-
revenues for shrewdest is- dents not benefiting; poten-
landers; Puno agencies
blamed
tial for community-wide
benefits
Future of local tourism
Highly optimistic, but con- Guarded optimism; tourism
cern to maintain traditional in early stages of develop-
ways; regaining control,
training youth as guides,
educating tourists impor-
tant
ment; community aware-
ness and outside support
needed

An Integrative Approach to Tourism
16
services locally without drastically changing traditional ways. Many inter-
viewees noted that Taquile was able to accommodate tourism with a degree of
success due to these awareness-raising efforts.
In comparison, the research found that tourism workers, residents and local
authorities of Chiquian are relative novices in the planning and development of
tourism. Starting in the 1950s and 1960s, adventurous mountain climbers began
arriving to tackle the many peaks of the beautiful Cordillera Huayhuash. One
interviewee suggested that trekking started to take off in the early 1980s, partly
due to the availability of improved hiking equipment such as lighter boots and
tents. Roberto Aldave, considered by many respondents and interviewees to
have put Chiquian on the map for its excellent opportunities in adventure
tourism, was personally involved in early documentary film-making of
Chiquian and the Huayhuash in the 1970s. Trekkers and mountain climbers
came in increasingly greater numbers during 1980–85, but dropped off
completely during the nation-wide terrorism period of the late 1980s to early
1990s.
With the decline of terrorism, a new festival called ‘Ecoventura’
(Eco-Adventure) began in 1994. Its founder also attributed the creation of
Ecoventura to the enthusiastic but unorthodox ex-mayor of Chiquian, César
Fernandez Callupe. The first Ecoventura ran for a weeklong period in May of
1994 and essentially reopened the Huayhuash to trekkers and climbers.
Ecoventura was an ideal venue to promote the area for outdoor activities such as
trekking, climbing, horseback riding, and mountain biking. Chiquian and
nearby communities were also given the opportunity to show themselves as
worthy places to visit for their unique customs, excellent cheese, and other heri-
tage tourism possibilities. In 1996, a dispute between the Ecoventura founder
and the new Chiquian Municipal Council resulted in the municipality taking
over the festival management, but many residents feared this would lead to
poorly organised and marketed events.
Several persons interviewed (both household respondents and
key-informants) pointed out that tourism planning by local residents has
favoured those already involved in the local tourism industry. Recently, some
Chiquian residents working in the nature-adventure industry have attempted to
organise themselves. In 1997, local guides, porters and donkey drivers joined
together with the Municipality of Chiquian and its newly created Tourism
Commission to form the Cordillera Huayhuash Mountain Climbing Provincial
Association.
Community unity and action
The research dataindicated thatboth communities differ substantiallyin their
respective level and intensity of community unity and action (participation) in
the local tourism industry. On Taquile, community unity and communal action
are considered on equal terms by most respondents. One interviewee asserted
that the Taquileño nature may be best stated as ‘humble but collective assertive-
ness’. In addition, certain events have demonstrated the high degree of unity
amongst Taquile residents. For example, their solidaritywas exemplified during
a 1990 fight on the Puno docks with travel agencies trying to wrest control over
the right to take passengers to the island. Although the tourist agencies sued in

17
Journal of Sustainable Tourism
court, Taquile won transport rights to the island through a Ministry of Tourism
directive (Stone, 1996). However, this victory for Taquile residents was later
thwarted by Fujimori’s anti-monopolisationlaws of the early 1990s,which effec-
tively prohibited Taquile boatcooperativesfrom maintainingtransportcontrol.
As for Chiquian, the perceived high level of community support for tourism
felt by a few key-informants was not matched by the expressed lack of unity and
support from household representatives. For example, only 30% of survey
respondents in Chiquian compared to 79% in Taquile felt the local (i.e. munic-
ipal) government supports tourism. Certain tourism events in Chiquian such as
the combined adventure and cultural tourism event Ecoventura (1994–96) have
created a perception of high community participation when in reality only a
select few have been involved in its management.
Community participation in tourism
Taquile has a very high level of individual involvement in participation in
tourism service administration (79%) and community tourism meetings (96%).
Most respondents agreed (93%) that local authorities encourage participation in
tourism meetings. Likewise, there is a strong traditionof consensual, democratic
decision making on Taquile, at least for men. For example, 92% of men partici-
pate (or have participated) in two or more tourism meetings compared to only
57% of women. Representatives of the various tourism committees and the local
government are annually elected by all residents of legal voting age. Most posts
cannot be held for more than a year, creating greater opportunities for participa-
tion as community leaders. Authorities are not only expected to lead but to
participate in the very decisions they make, and any leader can be dismissed for
incompetence or other factors. Tourism on Taquile has become such an impor-
tant part of daily life thatit has become interwoven with localpolitics, which was
verified by attending local meetings. For example, most residents belong to the
Manco Capac Cooperative, which requires a minimum three weeks of adminis-
trative work from every member (this can be substituted by a close relative of a
member). Also, handicraft sales are communally operated with weekly rotation
of cooperative members and annual elections held for the cooperative adminis-
trative posts.
In contrast,few Chiquian respondents hold any kind of administrativerole in
the community (15%), few have ever attended tourism meetings (18%), only 8%
are involved in some capacity in tourism administration and most of those
employed in tourism, apart from local restaurant and hostel owner-operators,
work foroutsideagencies from Huarazor elsewhere. Moreover, only15%ofmen
and 5% of women participated somewhat in two or more meetings. Many
respondents and interviewees alike felt thatthe current municipal government is
neither supportive of tourism nor the community in general, and that only those
already working in tourism are invited to participate in meetings and planning
of events (only 65% agreed thatlocalauthoritiesencourage participationin meet-
ings). Furthermore, several respondents commented that most people are either
too busy working in agriculture or are simply disinterested. Certain respondents
felt that greater community participation in tourism was a distinct yet still
distant possibility for Chiquian. One respondent summed up the lack of partici-
pationasa consequence ofterrorism,but thatgreat potential existed fortourism.

An Integrative Approach to Tourism
18
It is obvious, then, that adult Taquile residents participate to a much higher
degree in the overall administration of social and political aspects of their
community. However, this high participation level does not say much about the
intensity of individual involvement or the type of participation. It was noted
through participant observation that public meetings on Taquile tend to be
mainly information-sharing by local leaders on upcoming projects and recent
achievements. Also, simply attendinga tourism meeting wasfelt to be ‘participa-
tion’, regardless of whether a respondent had actively contributed to the discus-
sion.
Local economic benefits of tourism
Distribution of tourism income and employment
On Taquile Island, almost everyone on the island receives some remuneration
from occasional handicraft sales or providing lodging. Most adult residents
(83%) make less than US$ 400 annually from tourism and the median gross
income was US$ 187 for 1996. Although this amount seems low, it has to be
considered in the cultural context. There are few money-making alternatives in
thearea and many residents had to migrateto other partsof Peru in the1960sand
70s to find temporary, low-paying employment. Now, most residents prefer to
stay on the island where they have opportunities to earn cash for housing mate-
rials or to purchase ‘luxury’ foodstuffs such as dried noodles and cooking oil.
Handicraft production is gender specific on Taquile Island; men knit wool
clothing articles (e.g. hats, gloves, vests) whereas women do most of the weaving
(e.g. blankets, bags). Most children seven years of age or over work at least
part-time on handicraft production.
A totalof 98% of adult residents are employed on a casualor part-time basis in
a tourism-related activity on Taquile. Residents that gross more than US $1000
annually from tourism comprise only 10% of the adult population, mainly local
restaurant owners (nine family-owned and one community-owned) or private
boat owners. Nevertheless, only four of 19 tourist boats in operation are still
considered as ‘cooperative’, or are owned by as many as 50 families. On the plus
side, there were a total of 1594 combined direct and indirect4 jobs related to the
local tourism sector (Puno Region) for Taquile Island; 75% of these positions
were held by Taquile residents, including provision of lodging and food, tourist
transportation, and handicraft sales.
Chiquian, in comparison, has only an estimated 90 direct and mainly
part-time or seasonal jobs related to tourism or 10% of all adult residents (about
2% of the total population). There are five basic hostels in Chiquian, although it
was observed that most foreign trekkers bypass Chiquian or camp on its
outskirts. Of the eight or so restaurants in Chiquian, most foreign tourists use
only one. In addition, there are approximately 180 formal retail or service estab-
lishments (e.g. clothing, dry goods, restaurants) in town and 20 informal ones
(e.g. market vendors). Apart from trekking service provision, government posi-
tions, retailsales and agriculture, onelocalhandicraftindustry is theSanMarcelo
Association. This textile business employs over 70 local people and shares some
similarities to the Taquile Island handicraft cooperative in its product line, if not
in the sharing of revenues (the San Marcelo workers are hourly paid). Alpaca

19
Journal of Sustainable Tourism
woolblankets, sweaters,ponchosandother clothing articleshavebeen produced
since 1973. The association initially sold its clothing to foreigners who came to
trek or climb in the Huayhuash, but now exports mostly to Europe, with only an
estimated 5–10% of total sales to Chiquian residents and visitors. Finally, local
events thatattractprincipally domestictouristsarevery importantbotheconom-
ically and culturally for the town and surrounding villages of Chiquian.
Ecoventura festivals that ran from 1993 to 1996 brought in an estimated 1000
tourists annually and provided income for several residents in the provision of
lodging and food.
The trekking industry for the Cordillera Huayhuash begins in May and runs
through the end of September, or the dry season. As of 1997, only four or five
formal travel agencies from Huaraz, at least two from Lima, and several from
Europe took clients to the Cordillera Huayhuash. Most agencies use their own
guides but may hire local porters and donkey drivers from Chiquian, or more
frequently from the nearby mountain villages of Llámac or Pacllón. However,
one Huaraz agency felt that local guides from Llámac or Chiquian were not reli-
able, so hiring cooks and guides from Huaraz helped to ensure quality.
Overall, there was a greater perception of direct economic benefits from
tourism for Taquile compared to Chiquian. While both communities generally
felt tourism to be a beneficial sector of their economy, only 40% of households
claimed direct benefits in Chiquian, whereas 89% of adult respondents on
Taquile claimed individual benefits. Moreover, a clear majority of Chiquian
respondents (65%) believed that only those already providing tourism services
should be responsible for its decision-making, whereas only 33% of Taquile
respondents felt this way. Perhaps this reveals a greater desire by Taquile
respondents to be more directly involved in management decisions pertaining to
the local tourism industry.
Still, the free market trend in Peru has deprived some Taquile residents of
some income and has reduced localcontrolover how tourists travel to the island,
where to eat and where to stay. Even residents offering accommodation have
seen their income reduced, especially those living far away from the main plaza.
Participant observation noted that certain residents have taken advantage of
their ideal location and contacts. In addition, local restaurant and boat owners
have captured a disproportionate share of local tourism-related income (74% of
totalannual revenues, compared to only 16% for lodging and handicraft sales). It
appears that over time the distribution of benefits has shifted from very
broad-based to an increasingly individualistic, free market approach.
As for Chiquian, the few economic benefits accruing from tourism are not
widely distributed within the community. Recent organisationalefforts with the
town council and some local guides were ‘to improve the quality of service to the
client’, rather than detailing how the entire community could be involved or
benefited. Those lacking previous experience in adventure tourism tend to be
excluded from membership in such organisations or from receiving specialised
training. A few local guides benefit from having established connections with
Huaraz or European-based agencies, but are generally dependent on such
non-local sources for their clientele and associated revenues.

An Integrative Approach to Tourism
Leakages
20
On Taquile, leakages are occurring in many tourism services with the excep-
tion ofentrancefees (if paid), localaccommodationand certainfood items served
in local restaurants (e.g. fish, potatoes). Taquile’s boats are islander-built but
needed parts and supplies (e.g. motors, fuel) are purchased off-island. From the
questionnaires, 53% of those residents involved in the handicraft industry
purchase their wool or synthetic fibre from either a mainland community or
visiting vendors. Leakages also transpire from the Puno travel agency control of
visitor flows to and from Taquile Island, since they generally hire Puno-owned
and -operated boats and guides. In 1996, Taquile boats had a greater share of
passengers when compared to private boats from Puno (58% compared to 42%).
However, private boats tend to gross more revenue by charging higher fees than
thecooperativeTaquile boats.For 1996,and by ignoring other possiblesourcesof
leakages or revenues such as sundries and locally produced food, leakages from
Taquile were estimated at 91% of gross tourism revenues.
In Chiquian, a lack of local travel agencies has created a dependency on
outside firms (generally from Huaraz, but also Lima, Europe, and North
America). Local residents with trekking experience are bypassed if qualified
help is available elsewhere. It was noted through informal conversations with
tourists and tourism providers that food and other supplies for trekking and
climbing expeditions are rarely purchased in Chiquian due to the convenience
and reliability of purchasing beforehand in Huaraz and Lima. Restaurants also
purchase mostof their food and fuel from outside of the community. By ignoring
other possible sources of leakages and revenues from tourists or indirect sales by
local business to those selling directly to tourists (such as sundries and locally
produced food), a rough estimate of tourism leakages for Chiquian was calcu-
lated to be 92% of gross tourism revenues in 1996.
Discussion
Reed (1997) feels that tourism development requires a slow process of
community-building, particularly when conventional stakeholders, including
residents, entrepreneurs, politicians and tourism advocates, do not view it as a
productive activity.The principal stakeholder for Taquile wastheentire commu-
nity, but several years passed until people became convinced of the economic
advantages of tourism. Still, the results demonstrate that Taquile has incorpo-
rated community tourism awareness and planning in a relatively integrated
manner. The community has directed its own tourism development through
self-awareness and self-reliance. Several individuals did more than promote the
island and its unique culture to the outside world – they employed a deliberate
process of awareness-raising or
(Freire, 1970). In contrast, the
conscientisation
average resident in Chiquian has minimal awareness of the local tourism
industry and few opportunities to participate in its management and potential
benefits.
Since its beginnings in the 1970s,tourism planning on Taquile wasa participa-
tory,albeitunstructured,process.A tourism‘dialogue’ wasconceived and estab-
lished through public discussions and entrenched by community laws, and most
residents willingly accepted such laws due to their traditional sense of duty.

21
Journal of Sustainable Tourism
Local planning was not confined to operational issues but included normative
(value-based) planning as well. The islanders took the initiative and decided for
themselves what type of services to offer tourists, who would be involved, how
everyone could participate, and to what extent benefits would be shared.
The participatory nature of the Taquileños was described by one
key-informant as ‘collective consciousness’. This perhaps approximates the
‘organic solidarity’ described by Galjart (1976), in which gratification is sacri-
ficed to preserve the unity of the group. Until recently, tourism benefits have
been shared by most community residents for the ‘sake of the community’. This
collective action for self-reliance concurs with Galjart’s assertion that an obvious
common opponent can also underline the identity of interests and lead to
increased solidarity. However, tourism employment and control is becoming
more selective on Taquile. Community solidarityhas deterioratedin the pastfew
years due to a trend towards individualism, consumerism, and globalisation. As
Chodak (1972) observes, a growth in individualism is often accompanied by a
decline in traditionalsolidarityor a transitionfrom ‘brotherhoodto otherhood’.
In this research, it was hypothesised that high integration of a given commu-
nity in tourism decision making would lead to greater socioeconomic benefits.
What was less clear initially, however, was how to explain respective levels of
integration. Sewell and Phillips (1979) mention three measures or ‘fundamental
tensions’ of public participation that could lead to community control:
(1) degree of citizen involvement (defined as both numbers of citizens and
degree of individual participation);
(2) equity in participation (i.e. equitable decision making), and;
(3) efficiency of participation(i.e. the degree of influence on decision making or
planning).
These measures can be applied to Taquile and Chiquian to compare their respec-
tive levels of citizen participation in tourism decision making (hence, citizen
power).
First of all, the
of citizen involvement in tourism decision making on
degree
Taquile Island compared to Chiquian is very high, not only in terms of numbers
involvedbut alsoin thelevel ofparticipationin administrativepositions.Second,
there appears to be greater
in community decision making and sharing of
equity
economic benefits on Taquile, including cooperative management of tourism
services, profit sharing, and regular public meetings to discuss tourism matters.
An example of equity that was mentioned in this paper is the Taquile handicraft
cooperative; as of 1997, there were 270 members (77% of the population) with
prices fixed by all members. Still, the equitability of public participation in
community politics is debatable since few Taquile women have a role in public
decision making. It is a male dominated administrativeprocess, although with a
strong female component in tourism employment such as weaving and food
preparation. If there were true equity in decision making, more women would be
encouraged to speak out on issues such as tourism service improvements
(although it wasnoted thatwomen maysignificantly influence decisions ‘behind
the scenes’).
Third, participation on Taquile appears to be more
than Chiquian
efficient
when considering how the public’s view of interest may have influenced plan-

An Integrative Approach to Tourism
22
ning decisions. Local authorities may be quickly removed from their positions if
poor decisions are made, and annual democratic elections on Taquile reduce the
possibility of autocratic decision making power. In addition, the Taquile public
has been, and continues to be, consulted on issues that may affect their liveli-
hood, traditions or values.
Expanding on this crucial issue of equity in tourism integration, Brandon
(1996), de Kadt (1979, 1992) and others suggest that community control may not
be an equitable process or lead to widespread distribution of benefits. At first
glance, the case of Taquile would appear to reject the notion that benefits from
tourism arenot equally distributed. Almosteveryone ontheisland receives some
remuneration for tourism, albeit relatively low income from occasional handi-
craft sales or provision of lodging. As Healy (1994) observes, more opportunities
for entry by the poor are possible in a local handicraft industry than with capi-
tal-intensive tourism such as transport, and lists several advantages:
(1) Artisans obtain cash income while remaining in the rural setting (this has
alleviated pressure for permanent migration to Lima and other Peruvian
cities as occurred in the 1950s and 1960s).
(2) Handicraft production on the island is episodic, allowing the producer to
work during slack periods between other tasks (on Taquile, local residents
are often able to knit clothing and tend animals at the same time).
(3) It tends to be equitable by providing a cash return for women, children, the
handicapped, and the elderly (all segments of Taquileño society work in
handicraft production; there are gender distinctions only in the kind of
handicrafts produced).
Interestingly, the tourism industry on Taquile developed as a result of handi-
craft sales, not the reverse (i.e. the birth of a handicraft industry to meet the
demand of tourists for souvenirs). Daily sales in the cooperative stores would
justify the argument that even the poorest participant in the local economy has
the opportunity to benefit.
In Chiquian, there is a sense of ‘collective indifference’ rather than the
‘increased hostilities’ that Theophile (1995) states as a possible outcome if most
residents are excluded from tourism revenues. Many Chiquian residents recog-
nised that local and non-local elite have captured most of the benefits, including
government officials, former residents, and single families from smaller commu-
nities of the Huayhuash zone. Brandon (1996) feels that non-cohesive communi-
ties have little decision-making input and decisions made usually favour the
needs of the tourist and the operator/owner of the site rather than the needs of
the community. The unequal distribution of benefits in Chiquian also support
Theophile’s (1995) claim that if citizens feel left out of the process they may not
contribute to its potential success.
One possible reason for fewer economic earnings in Chiquian compared to
Taquile is the lack of tourism opportunities. Visitation is lower compared to
other more accessible areas such as the Cordillera Blanca. Therefore, for many
local residents and most certainly for investors, there may be little incentive for
increased community participation. Additionally, greater integration and
sharing of economic benefits may not be desirable from the perspective of the

23
Journal of Sustainable Tourism
early tourism pioneers and (now) established guides in the region, clearly reluc-
tant to share their higher levels of economic earnings.
The situationis much more positive for tourism potential and support by local
residents on Taquile Island. High public involvement in local decision-making
regarding tourism and the combined financial and promotional assistance
provided by President Fujimori in recent years have likely contributed to
community support. These results concur with the findings of Prentice (1993),
who maintains that beneficiaries of tourism revenues are more likely to support
its development. If most residents perceive themselves to benefit from tourism,
they may feel a greater sense of ownership and need to ensure its continued
growth (albeit, on a sustainable basis), particularly if their livelihood depends
upon its survival. Still, not all is positive concerning increased earning potential
that tourism revenues have brought to Taquile Island. The concept of private
ownership is relatively new to a society characterised by traditional sharing of
benefits. Although local elite were not overtly obvious, certain individuals were
perceived as responsible for causing disharmony through materialistic wants.
Interestingly, there was little evidence to suggest that a highly integrated
community would be able to prevent excessive leakages of income. Even consid-
ering that Taquile Island is largely in control of transportation, food and accom-
modation for tourists, they must now largely rely on mainland sources for parts
and supplies, food and beverages, and even the tourists themselves. This would
support Butler’s (1992) assertion that alternative tourism areas are typified by
relatively simple economies with high levels of leakages. Obviously, leakages
would be reduced if more local products and services were used. In addition,
collaborative linkages with outside government and marketing agents could
help curtail leakages (Lindberg & Huber, 1993). Another alternative would be to
reintroduce local food and other products or services into the Taquile Island
economy. For example, imported goods could be replaced with wholesome
locally grown products such as potatoes and local corn bread.
Conclusions
A summary of the major findings in this research is presented in Table 4,
which consists of a ranking of three main factors: (1) community integration in
planning and administration, (2) social benefits and (3) economic benefits. Each
of the factors identified has been mentioned in this paper with supportive quan-
titative and qualitative data.
Major findings from this research are as follows:
(1) The influence of both local and non-local catalysts in raising awareness
about tourism potential has been much stronger on Taquile.
(2) With the notable exception of women that are officially excluded from local
government roles, participation in tourism decision making is a relatively
democratic process on Taquile. In contrast, decision-making participation
remains highly selective in Chiquian to those already working in the local
tourism industry.
(3) Local ownership and management of the tourism industry is high for
Taquile (except for guides and boattransport)and low for Chiquian. Collec-

An Integrative Approach to Tourism
Table 4 Summary of major findings
Comparison parameter
24
Taquile Island
Chiquian
(1) Community integration in planning and
administration
(a) Supportive tourism catalysts or facilitators
(b) Democratic process for tourism administration
(c) Equitable decision-making
(d) Number of citizens in tourism decision-making
(e) Individual influence in tourism decision-making
(f) High longevity of tourism (perceived)
(2) Social benefits from tourism
(a) Individual perceptions
5
4
3
5
4
4
3
2
2
1
2
3
5
3
4
2
2
2
(b) Community perceptions
(c) Municipal support
(3) Economic benefits from tourism
(a) Direct employment
(b) Indirect employment
(c) Balanced distribution of employment
(d) Household income (real)
(e) Household income (perceived)
(f) Balanced distribution of income
(g) Local ownership
5
4
4
5
5
3
4
5
1
-
1
1
2
1
1
5
(h) Revenue leakages
Key: 5 Very high (81–100%); 4 High (61–80%); 3 Moderate (41–60%); 2 Low (21–40%); 1 Very Low
(0–20%); - unknown.
tive management of local services such as handicrafts and accommodation
is also high on Taquile.
(4) Local control in tourism decision making is still relatively high on Taquile
compared to Chiquian, although it has diminished lately. Taquile has
minimal external interference (i.e. greater independence) in local politics
and decision making. Its residents also have greater individual influence
and participation in local administration and politics compared to most
Chiquian residents.
(5) Nearby tourist centres have had positive and negative effects for both
communities. While attracting tourists, creating employment, and
supplying needed resources on one hand, the larger centres are partly
responsible for high revenue leakages.
(6) There is a more equitable distribution of economic benefits for Taquile resi-
dents, partially due to greater community unity and participation in
tourism decision making as well as higher employment. The local handi-
craft industry offers opportunities for
to participate, even if only
all citizens
on part-time or occasional basis. Conversely, the trekking industry in
Chiquian has developed into a male-dominated industry that favours those
with connections to non-local agencies.

25
Journal of Sustainable Tourism
(7) There is a greater perception of economic benefits on Taquile due to
tourism, even among those that receive little income from tourism.
However, some business owners receive more income than most other resi-
dents in both communities. Individualism and consumerism are negatively
affecting community unity and equitable distribution of benefits on
Taquile.
Tourism linked to community integration
The results indicate that cultural and economic componentsof tourism will be
influenced by the respective degree of community integration. That is, one
community characterised as highly integrated in its local tourism industry may
experience significant and positive socioeconomic differences when compared
to another community with a low degree of integration in tourism. Specifically,
greater perceived and actual socioeconomic benefits directly correspond to
greater levels of community participation and control in the provision of local
tourism services and products.
Participation in the local tourism industry may be defined by numbers of
people involved, equitability (i.e. balanced and non-discriminatory), and the
general public degree of influence in decision-making processes. In general, the
integrated community should also have a significant degree of local control in
the provision of tourism services and products. However, this control may be
negatively affected by external forces such as regional competition, travel agents
and suppliers of materials. Internally, increased individualism and consum-
erism in previously isolated communities may erode community harmony and
be responsible for diminished control of the local tourism scenario.
This study also found that greater community integration in tourismplanning
and management enhances local socioeconomic benefits. Economic benefits
include direct and indirect employment, revenues, ownership and profitability.
The kind of employment and degree of influence within the local tourism
scenario is as important as the distribution of economic benefits. Social benefits
encompass positive perceptions and attitudes towards the local tourism
industry, as well as changes in traditional lifestyles. In the latter case, greater
integration in tourism may decrease potential impacts since the community
would conceivably have direct control in setting the terms and conditions for
tourism development.
Nevertheless, it was found that integration elements – awareness raising and
equitable sharing of benefits – may be congenitallyeasier to achieve in communi-
ties characterised by a long tradition of solidarity. This research has also demon-
strated that influential local (and often non-local) dominant interest groups may
circumvent overall community needs or wishes, but at the same time providethe
semblance of consensual decision-making. Perceptions and possibly conflicting
views of non-dominant members of the community may be largely ignored or
sacrificed for the sake of unanimity, whereas overt conflict can bring out legiti-
mate differences and opportunities for resolution. Likewise, facilitating input in
public decision-making by marginalised community members such as women
may be difficult yet critical to attain, especially if equitable sharing of power and
other benefits are desired.

An Integrative Approach to Tourism
26
This research has also shown the importance of encouraging community inte-
gration at the onset of tourism development, perhaps by the support of local
tourism champions working closely with residents in creating a community
designed and delivered product. This may avoid an unpopular redistribution of
wealth afterwards if a long implementation delay occurs in the integration
process, allowing local entrepreneurs and power holders to solidify and
augment their personal stakes. It must be recognised that tourism is an industry
frequently led by individuals with ‘vision’, especially at the community level.
The downside to encouraging such tourism visionaries or leaders is that a
concentration of power could be enhanced. This is why it is so critical that
communityresidents be involved in all tourismdevelopment stages, but particu-
larly early in the process, and broad-based participation encouraged whenever
possible.
Acknowledgements
This paper is based on the MSc thesis
Community Integration in Ecotourism: A
, University of Guelph, R.E.
Comparative Case Study of Two Communities in Peru
Mitchell, 1998. Our appreciation is extended to the residents of Taquile Island,
Chiquian and many others who contributed their time and assistance to this
effort. A debt of gratitude is owed to Martha Mitchell, Pablo Huatta Cruz and the
Mountain Institute of Peru for their assistance with data collection and interpre-
tation. The reviewers of this paper also merit our most sincere appreciation for
their insightful comments. This research was made possible by grants from the
international Development Research Centre (IDRC) and the Arthur D. Latornell
Graduate Scholarship.
Correspondence
Any correspondence should be directed to Dr Ross Michell, Department of
Rural Economy, Faculty of Agriculture, Forestry and Home Economics, 515
General Services, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta T6G 2H1, Canada
(ross.mitchell@ualberta.ca).
Notes
1. Pronounced ‘Tah-key-lay’.
2. Pronounced ‘Chee-key-an’.
3. Percentages related to the survey results are based on = 101 for Taquile Island and
n
n
= 136 for Chiquian.
4. Direct employment is defined as those who sell to tourists; indirect employment are
those that sell to tourism businesses.
References
Arnstein, S.R. (1969) A ladder of citizen participation.
Journal of the American Institute of
3, 216–224.
Planners
Blackstone Corporation (1995)
Ecotourism and Environmental Linkagesin Peru: A Framework
. Toronto: World Bank.
for Action
Borman, R. (1995)
Ecuador: UICN.
Boza, B. (1997)
. Pro-Bona, Quito,
Ecoturismo en el Ecuador: Trayectorias y Desafios
No. 6, January–March. Untitled magazine article.
Peru El Dorado

27
Journal of Sustainable Tourism
Brandon, K. (1993) Basic steps toward encouraging local participation in nature tourism
projects. In K. Lindberg and D.E. Hawkins (eds)
Ecotourism: A Guide for Planners &
(pp. 134–151). North Bennington, VT: The Ecotourism Society.
Managers
Brandon, K. (1996)
. Global
Ecotourism and Conservation: A Review of Key Issues
Environment Division, The World Bank. Paper No. 033.
Butler, R.W. (1992) Alternative tourism: The thin edge of the wedge. In V.L. Smith and
W.R. Eadington (eds)
Pennsylvania Press.
(pp. 31–46). Philadelphia: University of
Tourism Alternatives
Chodak, S. (1972) From brotherhood to otherhood: Some aspects of social change in
modernizing rural Africa.
12 (3/4), 302–314.
Sociologia Ruralis
de Kadt, E. (1979)
New York: OxfordUniversity Press.
Tourism:PassporttoDevelopment?
de Kadt, E. (1992) Making the alternative sustainable: Lessons from development for
tourism. In V.L. Smith and W.R. Eadington (eds)
Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
(pp. 47–75).
Tourism Alternatives
Douglas, D. (1989)Community economic development in rural Canada: A critical review.
29, 28–46.
Plan Canada
Drumm, A. (1998) New approaches to community-based ecotourism management:
Lessons from Ecuador. In K. Lindberg, M.E. Wood, and D. Engledrum (eds)
(pp. 197–213).North Bennington,
Ecotourism:A Guide for Planners & Managers:Volume 2
VT: The Ecotourism Society.
Dye, T.R. (1986) Community power and public policy. In R.J. Waste (ed.)
Community
(pp. 29–51). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Power
Epler Wood, M. (1998) Meeting the global challenge of community participation in
ecotourism: Case studies and lessons from Ecuador. America Verde Working Paper
No 2, Latin American and Caribbean Division. Arlington, VA: The Nature
Conservancy.
Freire, P. (1970)
. New York: Herder and Herder.
Pedagogy of the Oppressed
Galjart, B.F. (1976)
. Assen/Amsterdam: van Gorcum.
Peasant Mobilization and Solidarity
Healy, K. and Zorn, E. (1983) Lake Titicaca’s campesino controlled tourism.
Grassroots
6 (2)/7 (1), 5–10.
Development
Healy, R.G. (1994)
Developing Countries
N.C.
Ecotourism, Handicrafts and the Management of Protected Areas in
. Center For Tropical Conservation, Duke University, Durham,
Honey, M. (1999)
Ecotourism and Sustainable Development: Who Owns Paradise?
Washington, DC: Island Press.
Hunter, I.R. and Brown, R. (1991) The application of inferential statistics with
non-probability type samples.
Ontario Research Council on Leisure.
Kolff, A. and Tohan, A. (1997)
Evaluation of the Ecotourism Potential in the Area
(TMI).
16 (3), 234–243.
Journal of Applied Recreation Research
Initial Field Study of the Cordillera Huayhuash, Peru: An
. Huaraz, Peru: The Mountain Institute
Lindberg, K. and Huber, R.M. (1993) Economic issues in ecotourism management. In K.
Lindberg and D.E. Hawkins (eds) (pp.
Ecotourism: A Guide for Planners & Managers
82–115). North Bennington, VT: The Ecotourism Society.
Lindberg, K., Enriquez, J. and Sproule, K. (1996) Ecotourism questioned: Case studies
from Belize. 23 (3), 543–562.
Annals of Tourism Research
Matos Mar, J. (1957) La propiedad en la Isla de Taquile.
250–271. Lima, Peru.
26,
Revista del Museo Nacional
McCracken, G. (1988)
. University
The Long Interview; Qualitative Research Methods, Vol. 13
of Guelph: Sage.
McIntyre, G. (1993)
. Madrid:
Sustainable Tourism Development: Guide for Local Planners
World Tourism Organization.
Mitchell, R.E. (1998) Community integration in ecotourism: A comparative case study of
two communities in Peru. MSc thesis, The University of Guelph, Ontario.
Mitchell, R.E. and Reid, D.G. (2001) Community integration: Island tourism in Peru.
28 (1), 113–139.
Annals of Tourism Research

An Integrative Approach to Tourism
28
Mosse, D. (1994)Authority, gender and knowledge; theoretical reflections on the practice
of participatory rural appraisal.
25, 497–526.
Development and Change
Mowforth, M. and Munt, I. (1998)
Tourism and Sustainability: New Tourism in the Third
. London: Routledge.
World
Pratt, B. and Loizos, P. (1992)
Choosing Research Methods: Data Collection for Development
. Oxford: Oxfam.
Workers
Pretty, J. (1995) The many interpretations of participation.
Prentice, R.C. (1993) Community-driven tourism planning and residents’ preferences.
16, 4–5.
In Focus
14 (3), 218–227.
Taquile y Sus Tejidos
Tourism Management
Prochaska, R. (1990)
(p. 127). Lima: ARIUS S.A.
Reed, M.G. (1997) Power relations and community-based tourism planning.
Annals of
24 (3), 566–591.
Tourism Research
Sewell, W.R.P. and Phillips, S.D. (1979) Models for the evaluation of public participation
programmes. 19 (April), 337–358.
Natural Resources Journal
Stone, M.L. (1996) Indigenous culture brings development.
Aymara Qhichwa, Revista
, 3 (Julio–Setiembre), 21–23.
Intercultural
Theophile, K. (1995)The forest as a business: Is ecotourism the answer?
93 (3), 25–27.
Journal of Forestry
TMI (The Mountain Institute) (1996)
Plan de Uso Turistico Recreativo del Parque Nacional
. Lima: PRO-NATURALEZA, FPCN.
Huascarán, Vol. 1
Torres, M. (1996) Participatory planning for ecotourism development in the Peruvian
highlands. In J.A. Miller and E. Malek-Zadeh (eds)
The Ecotourism Equation: Measuring
. Number 99. New Haven: Yale University.
the Impacts
Valencia Blanco, D.S. (1989) La mujer en el proceso productivo en la comunidad de
Taquile. Unpublished Bachelor of Anthropology thesis, Universidad Nacional de San
Antonio Adad del Cusco, Peru.
Western, D. (1993) Defining ecotourism. In K. Lindberg and D.E. Hawkins (eds)
(pp. 7–11). North Bennington, VT: The
Ecotourism: A Guide for Planners & Managers
Ecotourism Society.
WTO (1999)World Tourism Organization. Tips Press: News Bits from Peru. Year 1, No. 7,
February 1999. Webpage www.tips.org.uy/tips/eng/news/noti181.htm.
WTO (2000) World Tourism Organization. WTO database July 2000.
Wunder, S. (1996)
.
Ecoturismo, ingresos locales y conservación: el caso de Cuyabeno, Ecuador
Quito, Ecuador: Ediciones Abya-Yala.