General human rights issues related to tourism
The tourism industry has undergone several performance audits in recent years. The subject of human rights has become a recurring theme in these formal and informal reviews. Advocacy groups working in partnership with representative local communities have succeeded in drawing attention to exploitative industry practices, ranging from sub-standard labour codes in
‘offshore’ destinations, to the sexual predation of women and children.
Organizations like the Ecumenical Coalition on Third World Tourism (Hong Kong) and Tourism Concern (UK) conduct ongoing campaigns to pressure for industry reform.
It is generally accepted now that a correlation exists between indicators for development and the ability of those living within a community to exer- cise their fundamental rights and freedoms. Where extreme poverty exists, it is usually accompanied by racism, repression or corruption, or a not so subtle combination of these. Individuals subject to this systemic discrimina- tion will normally contribute to the growth of national economic indexes, while experiencing increasing hardship in their own home, family and/or community life. None the less, many government ministries responsible for economic development and other aspects of social welfare continue to define their mandate in the context of narrow fiscal objectives.
In the tourism sector, there are mixed messages and outcomesvis-à-vis what governments refer to as development (see Telfer, Chapter 9 this volume). This is especially true within isolated indigenous communities of the South, where tourism companies and their local agents are subject to less international scrutiny of their conduct. What is promised is seldom delivered. Through the United Nations (UN) and other more regional or local public processes, indigenous peoples and non-governmental organi- zations (NGOs) that monitor tourism trends and the implications for host communities are reiterating concerns over the impacts of corporate and consumer behaviour on human rights. Problems identified include those discussed below.
The distorted notion of rights among consumers
In the North, holiday time is legislated and compensated for, making travel a right as opposed to a privilege in the mind of most consumers. From a sustainability perspective, feeding these holiday fantasies is a costly busi- ness. Ecological thresholds are routinely crossed by the tourism industry, and in many destinations, international human rights standards are violated daily. Indigenous peoples are particularly vulnerable to this market-driven tourism, losing access to their customary lands and
resources, their right to religious freedom at sacred sites, and as a result, their capacity for self-sufficiency. They also face accelerated cultural voyeur- ism, as tour companies search for new niches. Although most tourists simply want to buy Aboriginal art from galleries or see a 1-hour dance performance (Zeppel, 1998), there is a sizeable market segment that seeks the ‘hidden’. Third-party commercialization is now focusing on more private elements of culture, for example, knowledge of medicinal plants, or spiritual ceremonies like the sweat lodge and other cleansing practices, including hot rocks massage techniques now copied in health spas worldwide.
The wilful ignorance of consumers
The majority of tourists view holidaying as an opportunity to sample a lifestyle more lavish than their own, regardless of whether their level of con- sumption is sustainable. They will resist seeing the dynamics that facilitate affordable travel in the South, and select cocooned holiday environments to avoid confronting questions such as what constitutes a fair exchange or full-fare travel. Only about 5% of tourists seek out explicitly educational travel opportunities. Of this market segment, it is a small fraction that wants more than a surface interpretation of local experiences and perspectives.
Most tourists, therefore, would remain unaware of whether they are within the traditional territory of indigenous people or the situation of the ‘real’
host people, even if their holiday includes an explicit cultural component.
The exception would be ‘reality tours’ coordinated directly by indigenous organizations like Maya’Iq of Mexico or the Rethinking Tourism Project of Minnesota.
The high demand for ‘affordable’ travel
While household incomes in the North are declining, sales projections for the global tourism industry continue to grow, indicating not only ‘business as usual’, but an increasingly competitive business environment. In this age of warehouse and Internet merchandizing, the consumer mind is set on discount prices and ‘buy now/pay later’ options. This attitude poses a serious threat to most destination communities in the South, given that industry prices already lag far behind any realistic accounting of tourism costs and impacts. The low profit margin of most tour companies precludes much ‘giving back’. Companies that do attempt to practice an ethic of reciprocity with indigenous communities are usually unsure of how to approach partnership building or structure an enduring cross-cultural business relationship.
The prevalence of ‘unsustainable’ products
Although 60–70 per cent of developed country residents participating in consumer surveys typically profess a willingness to pay more for ‘sustain- able’ products, most will only selectively change their spending habits.
Tourism, marketed as escapism, is an area where such pledges are highly inconsistent. So-called ecotourists will normally take a short ‘ecotourism’
excursion within a larger mainstream holiday. Alternatively, they will buy a costly safari that supports local parks and conservation initiatives for one holiday, and then for the next trip book a generic tour package to a hotspot such as Hawaii, where indigenous land rights and related issues are conten- tious. For most tourists, the desire for prestige or adventure is more of a fac- tor in purchasing patterns than altruism. Travel companies position their products and deliver services accordingly.
The absence of effective regulation
Tourists shopping for escapism generally abide by one fundamental consumer ethic: receipt upon payment. Consumer advocates like Conde Nast Traveler magazine may intervene where inferior customer service is delivered. However, the actual sustainability of corporate practices is self-regulated. This conflict of interest within industry, and consumers’ low awareness of tourism impacts, have led to widespread abuse of ‘green’ label- ling on the market. ‘Authentic’ offerings of culture rarely involve the prior informed consent of the targeted indigenous community. Where consent is said to exist, it has normally been obtained outside the customary protocol of the indigenous people concerned and is thus misleading to visitors and
‘hosts’ alike. Once an industry presence is established, there is little a community can do to prevent escalating intrusion, unless it has recourse to asserting and exercising customary land rights. In very few instances do indigenous peoples have partial or full recognition of land rights, places like Vanuatu and Canada being the exception.
The misrepresentation of ‘ecotourism’
Consumer demand for ecotourism is growing at 3–4 times the pace of regular tourism. Although much promise initially surrounded the eco- tourism concept, most ecotourism today is merely a market brand, with the same damaging characteristics as other forms of mass tourism. In fact, ecotourism impacts can be even more acute, due to the ecologically and culturally sensitive areas targeted. Consequently, the majority of ecotourism destinations are irreversibly damaged within 15 years (Ashton, 1999). Consumers, meanwhile, become desensitized to what constitutes a viable ecosystem or community. For example, they are left with the impres- sion that indigenous peoples perceive the availability of jobs as a beneficial
or adequate trade-off for visitation. In most cases, indigenous leadership would object to both the quality of employment offered and the relegation of their people to a sideline role. They would cite the absence of royalties to communities and/or credible business partnerships as an impediment to stewardship of the land.
These types of issues can be described and categorized in different ways, using a variety of examples, but the theme of human rights is a contin- uum. Where a tourism economy is promoted in the midst of marked social inequity, the true story about a project’s success is always more complex than what standard indicators suggest. Globalization has only intensified the hardship that the tourism industry causes for many indigenous peoples (de Chavez, 1999).
Human rights issues specific to indigenous peoples
The wilful or circumstantial involvement of indigenous peoples in tourism is bringing into focus many of the human rights issues associated with the travel industry. The general human rights problems documented tend to be most pronounced in indigenous communities of the developing world, because indigenous peoples rank as the poorest of the poor globally. Their communities also encounter severe political and social barriers to securing fair terms of trade. Illustrating this is the situation of most indigenous peoples living in areas of high biological diversity, particularly in or around parks and other protected areas, where ecotourism is concentrated. Even in the midst of government and corporate commitments of participation or an equity role, they find themselves unable to regulate the type or quantity of tourism conducted within their traditional territory. Instead, they find that so-called ‘development’ is passing them by. The ‘jobs for the Indians’
approach is convincing few at the community level otherwise.
A common dilemma is the disruption of traditional food harvesting to take up employment as porters along popular ecotourism corridors like the Inca Trail in Peru. The average porter wears unstable sandals for footwear along steep and rocky paths, is fed white bread or its nutritional equivalent for stamina, is denied access to the official trip first aid kit, and earns a sub-minimum wage. He will take home needed currency, but each day away from home breaks the transmission of cultural knowledge to the next generation. In indigenous communities, where it is believed that ‘it takes a whole community to raise a child’, the cost of this seasonal employment cycle for the next generation is significant. Skills vital to food security, health and cultural survival are lost. None the less, this sequence of events is not experienced by indigenous peoples alone. Variations of this trend are seen in non-indigenous host communities worldwide.
What is unique for indigenous peoples is how the different types of rights recognized within international law intertwine. For instance, over time, market forces like those described above can undermine an entire people’s continuous occupancy of the land. Since occupancy is key to defending ancestral land under post-colonial property law regimes, and since indigenous rights flow from land title, the effect is to strip away any prospect of justice under international law. Therefore, what first appears as simply another case involving individual human rights, actually has another layer which involves the infringement of the collective rights of a people (discussed below).