xml version 1.0 encoding UTF-8
REPORT xmlns http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitss xmlns:xsi http:www.w3.org2001XMLSchema-instance xsi:schemaLocation http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitssdaitssReport.xsd
INGEST IEID E5I580DIW_6XDD61 INGEST_TIME 2016-04-21T20:59:34Z PACKAGE AA00032185_00001
AGREEMENT_INFO ACCOUNT UF PROJECT UFDC
1 Participatory Planning: Laying the foundations for collaboration in ecotourism development in ChirripÃ³, Costa Rica Sydney Nilan A Field Practicum Report submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for a Master of Sustainable Development Practice Degree at the University Florida in Gainesville, FL USA May 2013 Supervisory Committee: Dr. Marianne Schmink, Chair Dr. Glenn Galloway, Member
2 Acknowledgements I would like to thank the University of Florida Tropical Conservation and Development program for providing the resources and support without which this project would not have been possible. I would also like to thank the UF Masters in Development Practice program for their invaluable support, in addition to the MDP program at CATIE, especially Mil dred Jimenez, for the logistical and organizational many people of ChirripÃ³ for their wonderful Tico hospitality and enthusiastic participation in the pr oject. Special thanks to Glenn Galloway for all of his help and to Marianne Schmink, my amazing committee chair who agreed to read this ridiculously long document multiple times and gave me invaluable feedback throughout this entire process. Additional tha nks to Taylor Stein for pointing me in the right direction when I needed it most and to Jon Dain for his mad skills, which he selflessly and effectively imparted upon me and legions of others .
3 Table of Contents Abstract Part I Site D escription and Context I.A ChirripÃ³, the other Costa Rica I.B The Project & Primary Stakeholders I.C Ecotourism in Costa Rica and prospects for community development Part II Planning for Sustainable Conserva tion and Development Outcomes: A r eview of key c oncepts II.A Lessons learned from Conservation, Development, and Tourism discourse II.B Ecological Planning: Adapting the model for use in community based ecotourism development Part III Theory into Practice III.A Implementation & Objectives III.B Methods and Results: Operat ionalizing participation in data collection for tourism planning Conclusion Appendices A1. Additional Documents A 2 . Propuesta de Senderismo en ChirripÃ³ A 3 . Inventario de Atractivos TurÃsticos A 4. AnÃ¡lisis de Mercado y Estudio de Viabilidad
4 Participatory Planning: Laying the foundations for collaboration in ecotourism development in ChirripÃ³, Cost a Rica Abstrac t: In my field practicum I took lessons learned from the community development and conservation discourse and sought to apply them to tourism project plannin g in an isolated indigenous initiating and facilitating a participatory process for generating information for planning. Despite progress in the fields o f development and planning towards participatory approaches, opportunities for participation are often provided too late and project design lacks flexibility to incorporate local priorities and adapt to local realities. A review of the literature highlight ed several important elements contributing to the success or failure of community based ecotourism projects in particular and conservation and development initiatives more broadly. I set out to address those key element s through developing and implementin g a participatory planning process for a sustainable project, based on the essential idea that achieving sustainable outcomes necessitates a two part definition of sustainability , which incorporates both process and substance. Procedurally, participation l eads to local ownership of the project and empowerment of local people through strengthening local institutions for cooperation as they work to highlight priority outcomes and create strategies for achieving them. Substantively, I sought to shift from the typical project focus on ecological and tourism issues to consider the important aspects related to social and economic sustainability, including a holistic approach which broadly defines resources and the ways that they can be mobilized for investment in development priorities to simultaneously value and expand existing livelihood strategies. I designed a process of generating information for planning that could be used to establish the foundations for sustainable outcomes through eliciting the participati on of local and external stakeholders. Current approaches to conservation and development highlight the need for increased consideration of the social dimensions of project planning and implementation in order to create sustainable outcomes. If we concept ualize sustainability to be comprised of not just ecological impacts but also social and economic components , then it follows that a more holistic approach is called for; one which encompasses both the procedural considerations of how projects are carried out and substantive components of what is to be included. The evolution of the conservation and development discourse towards integrated , participatory approaches has resulted in the proliferation of theories and methodologies for collaborative and sustai nable initiatives. However , these ideals are not always carried out in practice. Failure to define development holistically and create mechanisms for incorporating local level feedback all too often leads to projects that are designed with too narrow a foc us and opportunities for participation are provided too late. Likewise, approaches in the fields of planning and recreation are increasingly recognizing the need for greater attention to the human d imensions of sustainability. T hese fields provide insight into project development, but issues remain in conceptualizing participation and adapting models for use in the developing context. The updated planning model is an attempt to synthesize the lessons learned across these disciplines and provide a new appro ach combining the theories, methods, and tools into an updated process based shifted to the creation of a participatory process based on the need to first understand the local context , and then use this information to develop appropriate methods for carrying out planning activities. The
5 approach is appreciative in nature, defining existing resources holistically and establishing participation at the very out set so that local realities form the basis of project design. Activities for generating planning information are designed to simultaneously lay the foundations for collaboration and engender participation by appealing to the interests of diverse stakehold ers. The idea is to use the planning process to build capacity and mobilize resources for investments in sustainable outcomes. Acknowledging that developing communities often lack the resources and institutional capacity to implement plans, methods for eng aging external stakeholders are explicitly included in order to broaden the resource base. This document follows my journey of conceptualizing the nature of sustainable development approaches and attempting to operationalize a participatory methodology foc used on the social dimensions of planning for a community based ecotourism project in ChirripÃ³, Costa Rica. Part I Site D escription and Context I.A ChirripÃ³: T he other Costa Rica Costa Rica is often held up as an example of development success in Latin America, boasting some of the highest levels of development indicators in Central America and much of Latin America. This has been attributed to various factors such as the minimal establishment of a colonial power structure, the successful implementation of economic policies, the abolition of the military, and the early establishment of social welfare programs (Smith, 2005; Vanden & Prevost, 2002) Problems of poverty and inequality persist, with a poverty headcount ratio of 24% and a GINI coefficient of 0. 50, reflecting the fact that the wealthiest quintile receives more than half of all income, while the poorest quintile earns only 4.2% (WorldBank, 2012) . However, high levels of social spending on health and education, 6.4% and 6.3% of GDP, respectively, have contributed to outcomes well above regional averages, with literacy rates above 96% and life expectancy at 79.1 years. The Costa Rican economy has been growing faster than the regional average over the past decade, with GNI per capita reaching $11,27 0 (PPP) in 2010 (WorldBank, 2012) . Tourism, technological, and financial services are among the top industries, while agriculture comprises only 6.5% of GDP, indicating a high ors. The service industry comprises 71% of GDP and 64% of the labor force, with tourism growing in importance, bringing in $2.2 billion annually and contributing 8.1% of GDP (CIA, 2012) . Attracting 2 million visitors a year (nearly half of the actual popu effective governance of national resources (Bien, 2010) . A key component of this poli cy has been the implementation of a Payment for Environmental Services program (PSA) enacted in 1996 which pays landholders for the provision of ecosystem services, including mitigation of Green House Gas emissions, hydrological services, biodiversity cons ervation, and the maintenance of scenic beauty (Pagiola, 2008) . These high levels of economic and human development do not extend to the district of ChirripÃ³, which has the lowest indicators of human development in the country and has been declared a national priority area for institutional development. The district of ChirripÃ³ straddles the provinces of Cartago and Limon, and contains the ChirripÃ³ Indigenous Reserve and the two bordering Tico (non indigenous) communities of Grano de Oro (GDO) and San tubal (see map, Figure 1.1)
6 Figure 1.1 Map of ChirripÃ³ Reserve, Costa Rica Source: ASIS, 2010; Courtesy of Dr. Carlos Van der Laat
7 Livelihood strategies in the district are primarily agricultural and subsistence based. There is some economic diversification in GDO, which is home to several pulperÃas two new restaurants ( sodas ) which opened during my time there. The area where the town is and its surroundings were deforested during the initial settlement and converted into agricultural land which now supports several small and mid sized producers of m ilk, coffee, and bananas. language. The CabÃ©car people have maintained much of their cultural patrimony, most notably the widespread use of their local languag e and traditional architecture. Though originally a nomadic society, current livelihoods are sedentary and Indigenous households within the reserve are more directly dependent on natural resources and the forest for their subsistence. Use of forest product s for food and raw materials is common, and indigenous people have a wealth of local knowledge regarding the use of many plants and animals. Small scale subsistence agriculture is practiced, usually involving shifting plots on methods. Within the communally held reserve land is informally divided into individual family fincas which are passed along through matrilineal channels. Health and education within the district have greatly improved over the past two decades with the establishment of 68 primary schools and two secondary schools, and a local health outpost which houses indigenous primary care workers (ATAPs) who travel throughout the reserve. Despite these recent gains, ChirripÃ³ still has the highest rates of illiteracy , and infant mortality is seven times greater than the national average. Basic services and infrastructure are woefully inadequate. There are no paved access roads to the reserve, and within the reserve there are only footpaths which are often impassable due to rain. In good conditions Inhabitants of communities deep within the reserve still must walk for an entire day to reach the town of Grano de Oro, where they can obtain basic medical care and access bus service to Turrialba. There are no improved wate r or sanitation services within the reserve, and the electrical grid does not penetrate its borders. This dismal situation within the reserve stands out in stark comparison to the town of Grano de Oro (GDO), which is the terminus of vehicle access and sel f indigenous) Costa Ricans (subsequently referred to as th century, converting the forest to pasture and farmland. Nearly all households have access to electricity and improved water, and many are engaged in small enterprises which afford them a level of material well being far exceeding that of their indigenous neighbors. Given these inequalities it is not surprisin g that undercurrents of discrimination and potential conflict exist between the Tico and CabÃ©car populations of ChirripÃ³. Ethnic divisions are manifest in the local governance structure comprised of local government associations, cooperatives, producer as sociations, and other community based organizations. Indigenous and Tico communities have separate governing bodies and institutional structures. Local cooperatives play an important role in local governance and have developed as a result of national polic ies which promote the formation of cooperatives for economic development. There are currently two cooperatives, one smaller and based in the CabÃ©car community of NimarÃ (CoopeOroNimarÃ), the
8 other much larger and including mixed Tico and CabÃ©car membership (CoopeduchÃ), which was the organization that I partnered with for the practicum project. economic policies and programs. Their progressive policies on health, education, and the en vironment are complemented by innovative programs that target community development. Capacity building and collective action are key components, drawing on the complex array of institutions at the local, regional, and national level. In addition to the sta ndard ministries found throughout Latin America, Costa Rica also has an institution dedicated to capacity building (Instito Nacional de Aprendizaje) which provides courses and trainings throughout the country. It is not uncommon to see representatives from multiple institutions, and in collaboration with the civil and private sectors, working together to implement projects at the community level. The ubiquitous capacitaciones , or trainings, seek to provide opportunities for expanding livelihood strategies in diverse areas, from the raising of locally endangered tepezquintles to international export marketing. The approach also includes attention to the promotion of cooperativism, with many opportunities available for community cooperatives and the majority of projects available not to individuals, but restricted to organized groups within the community. Additionally, all rural communities have their own water committees (ASADAs), development associations (ADIs), parent teacher organizations, and many other civic groups. An outgrowth of these policies is that communities often have complex layers of institutions and mechanisms for governance and decision making. I. B The Project & Key Stakeholders My involvement with tourism planning in ChirripÃ³ developed th rough an initial contact with the MDP program at the Tropical Agricultural Research and Higher Education Center (CATIE) based in Turrialba, who then connected me with the Talamanca Central Volcanic Biological Corridor (CBVCT) in Costa Rica. T he CBVCT had i dentified a need for assistance with a community based evaluation of local resources, including possible sites for tourism development in the district of ChirripÃ³. In order to carry out the project the CBVCT Managing Committee introduced me to the leaders of CoopeduchÃ, who are working on promoting tourism development in the district. CoopeduchÃ is a recently formed cooperative with broad membership throughout the Tico and CabÃ©car populations of ChirripÃ³. The organizational leadership is comprised of an E xecutive Committee, and experiencing various issues associated with organizational structure, leading to the resignation of many committee members from the public sector. The leadership structure is largely dominated by non indigenous Ticos from surroundin g areas with higher than average levels of income and education. The co op leadership is dedicated to promoting development opportunities for all ethnicities in the region, however they lack established mechanisms of communication with their affiliates, le ading to growing frustration among local members who would like to play a more active role in co op activities and decision making. My role in the project consisted of designing a more inclusive and participatory planning process to reflect a broad array of local interests and priorities. Prior research had highlighted the importance of holistic and participatory development approaches which build local capacity for collaborative
9 management of tourism. Additionally, research had indicated that weaknesses and threats to successful community based ecotourism development could be mitigated through the establishment of networks of support and the collection of detailed information for planning, including careful attention to the economic feasibility of the var ious options for tourism development. My preliminary objectives were designed around these main ideas. I. C Ecotourism as a development strategy conserves the environment and sustains the well incorporates three main components: Based in the natural environment Includes environmental and cultural education Is sustainably managed (Blamey, 2001) Costa Rica is recog nized as an international leader in ecotourism. Its innovative environmental policies and impressive system of protected areas have allowed the country to develop a tourism strategy that ts the opportunity to experience the real natural beauty, culture, and pura vida way of life of the country (AcuÃ±a & Villalobos, 2001) . This is in demands by c reating a more fantasy inspired experience that does not reflect local realities, requiring heavy investment in infrastructure and facilities and resulting in environmental degradation. (AcuÃ±a & Villalobos, 1999) . This idea is aimed at developing a tourism infrastructure and approach that can work to promote conservation by adding value to natural resources, thus providing an impetus for sustainable touris m as a major component of their economic strategy has placed economic priorities over other social and environmental objectives. Policies to promote FDI and tourism investments have led to the construction of large resorts and hotels, and visitation levels above the carrying capacities of many protected areas have resulted in excessive strain on the natural resourc e base and environmental damage . Due to the fact that definitions of sustainability and ecotourism are subject to much debate in the cutting corners in the planning and implementation processes (Honey, 2008) . Despite the long term impacts of unsustainable tourism installations, i t often pays in the short run to establish an ecotourism faÃ§ade and without proper institutional mechanisms of accountability providers are likely to continue to take advantage and act in accordance with their short term economic interests. Honey (2008) di scusses outlines 7 primary characteristics which are important to consider in planning and designing sustainable projects: 1) Involves t ravel to n atural d estinat ions: Usually in remote areas which retain much of their ecological integrity and enjoy some sort of protection from development activities.
10 2) Minimizes i mpact : Infrastructure and facilities for meeting the tangible needs of tourists, related to transportati on, energy, waste management, etc., should be constructed in environmentally friendly ways utilizing local knowledge and materials; tourists should be managed to minimize impact. 3) Builds environmental a wareness : Educational aspects should be provided for bo th tourists and local populations about the natural, cultural, and social resources of the area. 4) Provides direct financial benefits for conservation: a portion of the proceeds from tourism should be directed towards research and conservation activities. 5) Pr ovides financial benefits and empowerment for local people : the project should be planned and managed by, or in partnership with, local communities and mechanisms should be set up to promote an equitable distribution of benefits. 6) Respects local culture : Ef forts should be made to revalue the local or indigenous culture, limit cultural degradation, and minimize the exploitative nature of the commoditized tourist indigenous relationship. 7) Supports human rights and democratic movements: Capacity building and in stitutional strengthening should be explicit in the project goals and investments should be made in the provision of basic services in accordance with local priorities. Ecotourism has the potential to be used as a tool for sustainable development. The e mphasis on the natural environment, coupled with raising awareness of environmental threats and the value of conservation, promote ecological sustainability. The social component seeks to involve local stakeholders in the process of planning and implementa tion, creating positive spillover in building local institutional capacity, while simultaneously promoting cultural preservation (Koens et al., 2009) . Tourism however, does require substantial investments in infrastructure in order to promote accessibility and provide facilities that fulfill tangible needs of tourists. In order for tourism to be sustainable, these investments must be made responsibly and inclusively, assuring that local people also benefit from investments and are not denied access. Investm ents in physical capital, such as roads and water and sanitation infrastructure, should be made in tandem with balanced investments across the community capitals asset base in accordance with local priorities . An integrated approach can be used to harness investments in ecotourism for holistic development and promote the overall well being of local people. In order to explain the methodologies employed in desig ning the process and activities used in ChirripÃ³, the next section will discuss the theoretical ba ckground and conceptual frameworks used to develop the project. The section begins with an overview of concepts from the conservation and d evelopment literature, focusing on sustainable livelihoods and participatory development approaches. I then examine c integrating the goals of conservation and holistic community development. The second subsection planning and adapts it to the context of community based devel opment projects, incorporating and building upon highlighted concepts .
11 Part II Planning for Sustainable Conservation and Development Outcomes: A review of key concepts A Sustainability and Livelihoods: Lessons learned from conservation, development, a nd community based ecotourism Sustainable Development A pproaches seek to understand the many interrelated causes and contexts of poverty and prosperity. Frame works that appreciate the interrelated nature of the components which impact success or failure are more suited to develop holistic strategies that create synergies across sectors. Such initiatives mobilize varied resources towards holistic end goals and s eek not only to increase income or improve health outcomes, but to positively impact the well being of a community and the individuals within it. Too narrow a focus not only creates a limited perception of desired outcomes, it also constrains the strategie s used to achieve development goals. Broadly conceptualizing objectives and what is to be done must also incorporate how it is done. Approaches that create agency through mobilizing communities to be the stewards of their own development lead to more feasi ble strategies, and more successful and sustainable outcomes. Building community capacity to recognize opportunities and collaborate to plan The Sustainable Livelihoods Framework (SLF) provides a tool for holistically evaluating the broad social, current livelihood strategies are and what aspects of their context lead to vulnerability. It include s a focus on what resources, or capitals, people have access to and how they are utilized to attain livelihood outcomes and resilience in dealing with shocks and vulnerabilities. Another key component of SLF is the resources and the ability to implement livelihood strategies. Chambers and Conway note that a activities required for a means of living. It is sustainable when it can cope with and recover from stresses and shocks and maintain or enhance its capabilities and assets both now and in the future, while not (Chambe rs & Conway, 1992) . beginning with a focus on the vulnerability context and moving through to livelihood outcomes. However, there is growing criticis to the initial development assessment seek to frame the situation within a more positive and empowering structure, focusing first on what we have and what is working well. The Appreciative Inquiry approach utilizes this strategy by recognizing the value of the assets a community already possesses and building upon what works for them. Traditional development approaches, in which solve problems, have been criticized for not only maintaining the structures of poverty and dependency, but also for promoting solutions biased by (Mehta,
12 2001) . Inquir ing, as opposed to telling people, about what of value exists in their community and what their priorities are for the future is a first step in creating the conditions for agency and empowerment. The focus on livelihood assets, in conjunction with App reciative Inquiry, promotes participation not only by allowing community members to decide what has value, but also because the broad conceptualization of assets means that everyone has something to offer. Inclusively defining what an uy in, as individuals from varied socio economic or demographic groups can all have value, promoting cooperation in the effort to mobilize assets for development. The Community analyze community and economic development efforts from a systems perspective by identifying the assets in each capital (stock), the types of capital invested (flow), the interaction amo ng capitals, and the resulting impacts across (Emery & Flora, 2006) . The CCF outlines 6 types of capitals, including Political, and Cultural capitals, in addition to the five outlined in the SLF. Emery and Flora present a CCF approach in which, by starting with investments of social capital, communities are able to invest across the entire range of capitals to put in motion a improvements for the whole community (2006). While the CCF provid es for the components of Appreciative Inquiry and holistic community based development, it lacks attention to the issues of inclusion and equity that are inherent in multi stakeholder development activities. In addition to the what and how of project pla nning and implementation, who participates is also important. The active involvement of varied stakeholders allows for the creation of strategies that are viable within the local context and address the expressed priorities and goals of the whole community . Participatory development approaches help to create ownership of the project and build local capacities. However, communities are not homogenous units. Assessment of the local context should focus on understanding differences in access to and control ove r resources and the different roles and needs of stakeholder groups within the community or related to the project. The process can be made more inclusive by promoting the involvement of marginalized groups, helping to achieve community cohesion and more e quitable outcomes. Evolution of Conservation and Development: A holistic approach to sustainability The evolution of conservation and development discourse has reflected the growing need for a more holistic, multi disciplinary approach. One that accounts for the interconnectedness of human ecological systems and the multiple drivers across sectors and scales that impact interactions between people and their environment. Developments within planning have reflected this broadening of the knowledge Fig ure 2.1 The Community Capitals Framework ( Emery and Flora, 2006 p.21 )
13 base, ado landscape. Likewise, tourism and recreation planning has broadened from a narrow focus on ecological impacts and experience based management to managing for a wide array of opportunities and benefits related to both the human and environmental outcomes. Key themes that have emerged from these paradigm shifts include: 1) the centrality of sustainability, 2) the need for expanded and integrated information for planning, 3) an emphasis on decentralized participatory processes for planning and management, and 4) the importance of governance and effective institutional arrangements. The following sections will begin with an analysis of these key issues in conservation and deve lopment that identifies common constraints and strategies to overcome them. Drawing from the tourism literature, the second section analyzes the potential of community based ecotourism as a natural resource management strategy to promote conservation and d framework and a new framework presented which emphasizes the human elements of participatory planning in the developing context. Key Issues in Conservation and Development The centrality of sustainability: growing emphasis on livelihoods and process The evolution of the sustainability discourse has entailed an expansion from a focus on the ecological components of sustainability to integrating the human a spects and interactions with the environment. Approaches focusing on ecological carrying capacity or maximum sustainable yield are increasingly expanded to include the people who utilize natural resources and the social and economic drivers of environmenta l degradation. These integrated approaches have also come to emphasize the processes which contribute to sustainability, embodied in participatory approaches that seek to empower communities and build capacity for collective governance and adaptation to ch ange within complex systems characterized by uncertainty. The sustainable livelihoods approach provides an example which places livelihood capitals in the foreground, examining access to these resources and processes of transformation (Chambers & Conway, 1 992) . SOCIAL The organization and distribution of responsibilities and benefits is equitable, & the process serves to strengthen communities and improve the well being of the population. ECONOMIC The incomes maintain the project into the future and contribute to the livelihoods of local people. ENVIRONMENTAL Resource use activities and investments in physical capital contributes to the conservation of natural resources and not their destruction. Figure 2 . 2 The three pillars of sustainability
14 Livelihood security and wealth generation are important links in the relationship between development and conservation, and initiatives that neglect to include attention to economic well being have proven insufficient (Brown, 2002) . Some approach es (Datta, Anand, & Naniwadekar, 2008) or add economic value to nature in order to avoid its degradation; however, many favor more nuanced approaches that work to provide opportunities to harness the value and productive capacity of natural resources in a sustainable fashion that contributes to social and economic well tiatives (Cashore et al., 2010) (Coria & Calfucura, 2011) . ends of Taken together, these assessments highlight the importance of livelihood capitals and point to the need for holistic approaches that are able to har ness the synergies across disciplines, realizing that the Expanded and integrated information for planning This evolution in the conceptualization of sustainability has come about thr ough increasing appreciation of the complexity of human ecological systems and led to the realization of the need for expanded and integrated information for planning and management. Integrated Conservation and Development Programs (ICDPs) are often marked interconnections (Russell & Harshbarger, 2003) (Datta, 2007) . These failures have brought about an expansion of scale and scope. Increasingly multidisciplinary efforts to collect and analyze information for planning help to elucidate the interconnected nature of factors that drive success and failure and understand local (Gezon, 1997) . Figure 2 . 3 The Conceptual Framework The framework reflects that sustainabili ty entails both content and process, and that by taking a holistic view of what we are doing and incorporating participation into how it is done the planning process can contribute to improving livelihoods and capacity for local governance.
15 Processes for generating information have also evolved and gained a respect for local knowledge systems and participatory data collection methods that form a collaborative process of shared learning. understanding of existing environmental and social trajectories, action research, and (Sayer & Campbell, 2003) . Growing emphasis on social learning to bridge gaps between local and technical knowledge involves a n ecessary process of translation in which new information is organized and communicated effectively. The creation of ing through a mediated process of iterative dialogue between producers and users of scientific knowledge for mutual comprehension and credibility (CASH). Participatory processes for planning and management Growing attention to methods for data collection and information generation reflect the trend towards participatory approaches throughout the conservation and development arena. Participation is based upon the idea that promotion of agency and local ownership leads to empowerment, enhanced program effect iveness, and long term sustainability. West and Brechin (1991) found collaboration with locals at all stages of project development to be the single most important factor related to the long term suc cess of ICDPs . This growing consensus has dev eloped despite the drawbacks of participatory approaches: they require larger investments in time, and successes are not easily translatable across contexts or appropriate for widespread replication. However, this lack of a recipe for participation is one of its key strengths; allowing for development based upon local realities results in solutions that address (Tos un, 2006) . Equity is a basic tenet of participatory approaches based not only on concerns about social justice but also the realization that neglecting the input of marginalized groups can lead to failure to develop successful strategies and anticipate unf oreseen constraints and negative impacts. Limitations of democratic participation that stem from inequality based on gender, socio economic status, or ethnicity often impact who participates and the quality of their participation. Attempts to elicit local participation (Tosun, 2000) , and practitioners must (Gezon, 1997) . Alternatively, participation can lead to redistribution of power (Tosun, 2000) . These realities highlight the need for efforts to build local capacity to negotiate among both internal and external stakeholders and establish mechanisms for equitable participation in dialogue and decision making processes with explicit attention to conflict resolution (Cashore et al., 2010; Schmink , 2004) . T he importance of governance and effective institutional arrangements How stakeholders are involved in planning and implementation can lead to increased capacity for local governance. Governance in this sense refers essentially to the processes o f decision making and distribution of resources and power within the institutional structure. The capability to organize for processes that enable and constr ain their livelihood strategies. Improving local governance capacity
16 involves participation in all stages of planning and implementation, as well as monitoring and evaluating progress towards goals. Investments in human and social capital contribute to bui lding governance capabilities and establishing processes which strengthen trust and accountability. Participatory processes which seek to build local capacity for cooperation are reciprocally related to strengthening local institutional structures for col lective governance. The focus on local governance has grown hand in hand with the global tendency towards decentralization. Realizations that top down, one and (Dietz, Ostrom, & Stern, 2003) . This trend can also be seen as an abdication of responsibility on the part of the public sector that has created a governance vacuum. Either way, partnerships, alliances, and multi stake holder networks have been promoted as strategies to fill the void and provide the technical support and investments in livelihood capitals, whose absence are so often cited as constraints to community based conservation and development initiatives (Cronkle ton, Bray, & Medina, 2011; Trejos, Chiang, & Huang, 2008) . Project design increasingly seeks to draw in the participation and support of a wide range of stakeholders from the public, private, and civil spheres, reflecting the increasing role played by civi l society and market forces in governance (Agrawal & Chhatre, 2006) . These multi stakeholder platforms attempt to create linkages across broader governance scales. This can have positive effects on project sustainability, but also complicates the logisti cs of providing opportunities for participation in decision making that fairly represents differing interests and concerns of stakeholders (Scheyvens, 1999) . Attempts to strengthen collaborative governance also require explicit acknowledgement of conflicti ng interests and institutional mechanisms for resolution. Success has been found in dynamic approaches to collaboration characterized by continuous dialogue between stakeholders within the ongoing processes of negotiation and decision making (Dietz et al., 2003) . A final component of governance deals with accountability and institutional structures needed for collective governance of resources that promote compliance through utilization of traditional norms regulating resource use. These concepts provide a theoretical foundation highlighting essential components of a sustainable approach to integrated development planning. The next section evaluates community based ecotourism, or TRC ( Turismo Rural Comunitario sustainable development, examining the concept of ecotourism itself and whether it can achieve conservation and development goals while providing opportunities for expanding livelihoods. Community Based Ecotourism: A viable strategy for sustainable devel opment? Ecotourism has the potential to be used as a tool for sustainable development. The emphasis on the natural environment, coupled with raising awareness of environmental threats and the value of conservation, promote ecological sustainability. The so cial component seeks to involve local stakeholders in the process of planning and implementation, creating positive spillover in building local institutional capacity, while simultaneously promoting cultural preservation (Koens et al., 2009) . Tourism howev er, does require substantial investments in infrastructure in order to promote accessibility and provide facilities that fulfill tangible needs of tourists. In order for tourism to be
17 sustainable, these investments must be made responsibly and inclusively, assuring that local people also benefit from investments and are not denied access. Investments in physical capital, such as roads and water and sanitation infrastructure, should be made in tandem with balanced investments across the community capitals as set base. An integrated approach can be used to harness investments in ecotourism for holistic development and promote the overall well being of local people. ion and development (Mulder & Coppolillo, 2004) , and as being (Stronza & Gordillo, 2008) . In theory, community based ecotourism has a unique ability to add ress the three conservationist paradigms (see Figure 2.4) in that it acknowledges that people are a threat to the natural environment; it provides opportunities for participation, empowerment and sustainable use; and it can add economic value to biodiversi ty and thus correct for the institutional, market, and policy failures described in the neoliberal paradigm. From the development perspective ecotourism is regarded n of tourism planning seeks to sustain to urism as an agent for socio (Tosun, 2006) , however the concomitant process of transition from traditional livelihoods to tourism activities has often caused social and environmental degradation. Such experiences have led (McCool & Lime, 2001) . Additionally, the relative importance of emphasizing conservation or approach emphasizing conservation leads to increased success and better integration (Zeppel, 2006) ; others argue that approaching community based ecotourism th project sustainability overall (Scheyvens, 1999) . Conservation Paradigms Classic : Local people are a threat to biodiversity Populist : Local participation and empowerment for sustainable use Neoliberal : Economic value must be added to biodiversity to address instit utional, market, and policy failures Figure 2.4 (Bl aikie & Jeanrenaud, 1997; Brown, 2008)
18 Within the myriad critiques of ecotourism and its feasibility as a natural r esource management strategy it is possible to discern common constraints and opportunities. Cumulative lessons learned about the possible positive and negative outcomes of tourism, can inform strategies to mitigate negative impacts and promote beneficial o typical opportunities and constraints associated with tourism in addition to possible positive and negative outcomes and highlights the information needed for planning across the thr ee pillars of they have less potential for damage. Stronza (20 08) maintains that successful ecotourism development requires a clear exchange of information in which possible positive and negative outcomes are discussed and evaluated against community values and priorities. The process of planning should also address the desired level of community involvement in planning and management and seek to elicit local participation at all stages. Tosun (2006) posits that utilizing participatory development principles results in more tourism developm ent and opportunities for active participation are not provided at the right time and stage of development it is difficult for local people to achieve with participatory development princi ples, providing these opportunities is the very beginning. As in other conservation and development initiatives, strategies to address insufficient endowments of local capitals include Figure 2.5 Tourism Balance Sheet *adapted from (Koens, Dieperink, & Miranda, 2009) **adapted from (Backman, Petrick, & Wright, 2001)
19 innovative schemes to mobilize existing natura l and social capital at the local level while building partnerships with external stakeholders to leverage investments in human, financial, and physical capitals and embed projects into networks of support (Trejos et al., 2008) . Capacity building to improv e local management of resources and ability to design and implement flexible plans for adaptive (Mulder & Coppolillo, 2004) p249. There are many concerns associated w ith the economic equations of connecting communities to markets, including the negative impacts of unequal distribution of benefits, and commoditization of traditional norms of cooperation and reciprocity. A two fold strategy to deal with these concerns in cludes careful and negotiated placement of community enterprises within existing tourism production systems and supply chains, and the creation of mechanisms to avoid external or elite capture so that money stays within the local area and is distributed wi dely through direct opportunities for economic gain and collective investments in public goods (Mulder & Coppolillo, 2004) . By placing ecotourism components within the Sustainable Livelihoods Framework one can evaluate the relevant forms of local capital that can be mobilized, what existing governance structures and processes constrain or enable project planning and implementation, and how access and influence over resources and decision making processes impacts the broadening of liveliho od strategies. It also allows for the evaluation of vulnerabilities within existing livelihood strategies alongside possible program vulnerabilities or threats. Following the Appreciative Inquiry and Community Capitals approach requires beginning with an evaluation of what assets the community already has, as opposed to the deficiencies or problems, in order to foster positive participation. After the asset evaluation, including attention to the levels of participation of various stakeholder groups an d intra community differentials in access and control, the priorities and goals of the SLF a dapted ( from DFID ) to incorporate the components of tourism plann ing Figure 2.6
20 community, or desired livelihood outcomes, must be identified and possible strategies developed for achieving goals. The next step is to examine local level livelihood s trategies, governance context, and institutional make up. Determining the structures and interactions of public, private, and civil institutions can uncover factors that may enable or constrain project development, in addition to potential areas for confli ct or collaboration. This can highlight opportunities for partnerships to mobilize additional external resources for investment in broadening the capital base, such as training programs for human capital, assistance with physical capital construction such as facilities, grants and loans of financial capital, or environmental expertise to assist with conservation of natural capital. These steps, in accordance with the key elements of the sustainable livelihoods framework and the Community Capitals approach, form the basis for the adapted model for ecological planning at the community level outlined in the following section. II.B Ecological Planning for Community Based Tourism ovide options for (Steiner. 2008). The design of a planning process for a community based ecotourism initiative should seek to incorporate the lessons learne d from the conservation and development discourse in order to create the enabling conditions for sustainable success. If TRC is to be promoted as a tool for sustainable community development then it ought to strive to mobilize existing resources and build local level capacity with attention to the human dimensions of planning. As the conceptualization of sustainability entails both participatory processes and a holistic view that emphasizes the social, economic, and livelihood contexts and outcomes then the se components must play a central role in the design of the planning process. Steiner provides a model for landscape planning focused on the interrelations between human and natural processes (2008). While his model offers much insight into the planning p rocess within a capacity common to developing countries and marginalized areas. By applying theories and methods of community based and participatory develop ment, the planning framework can be made more relevant to planning in the developing world. Three main critiques for application in developing communities: 1) ack of endowments in the capital assets base (community & livelihood capitals) and the need for balanced an d sustainable investments across sectors 2) It neglects t he importance of local capacity and existing institutional structures for collective natural resource governance 3) ow the proce ss of planning and data collection can emphasize collaboration of local and external stakeholders to overcome resource deficits and strengthen governance
21 Adapting the Framework Resources and livelihoods The ecological and human sustainability of planning is discussed by Steiner at length; however the third pil lar of economic sustainability is hardly touched upon. Given the above mentioned lack of resources and the importance of dynamic sources of funding to sustain projects over time (Mulder & Coppolillo, 2004) this oversight must be accounted for within the de veloping context. Primary goals of community based development are to improve well being, expand livelihood opportunities, and promote collective action to mobilize and manage existing resources, and a holistic development plan requires an economic compone nt so that income can be invested in the continuation of the project and in community goods and services. Institutions and governance planning and impl ementation that are common in modern democracies. However, community development involves the attempt to build capacity for governance and strengthen local institutions for planning and management. Issues of governance and institutional arrangements are a key constraint to successful development outcomes, especially within the context of collective natural resource management (Ostrom, 1990) . To address these issues a greater focus on process is needed, one that explicitly acknowledges inequities and confli cting interests between stakeholders and encourages equitable participation in decision making and information gathering. The lack of formal governmental agencies responsible for planning and implementation can be mitigated by drawing in stakeholders from public, private, and civil society spheres which operate at multiple scales of governance. These Figure 2.7
22 partnerships can help to mobilize resources for data collection and implementation while simultaneously garnering external participation can contribute to the long term sustainability of the project by connecting actors across scales and embedding communities into networks of support. Process A redesign of the framework for development planning must start in the middle. Steiner wisely places throughout the process, yet making this component the eighth step represents a lack of commitment to ensuring that planning is truly a participatory process. My framework (see Fi gure 2.8) transforms the central element to reflect the importance of livelihood resources and the social and economic pages will explain how explicit incor poration of participation at each step lays the foundations for a multi stakeholder process that recognizes the importance of sustainability, resources and livelihoods, and institutional structures. The adapted process prioritizes equitable and collaborati ve participation in the generation of planning information with explicit attention to utilizing information in subsequent steps. Figure 2 .8 New f ramework A dapted to refle ct importance of all three sustainability pillars and livelihood resources
23 to the essential dif ference in social, economic, and institutional contexts of developing communities. Utilizing the list of fifteen key lessons learned from reviewing the literature on conservation, development, and ecotourism experiences, I highlighted which of the plann ing steps corresponded to each associated activities 2.9 below). Starting with the essential idea of sustainability as composed of both procedural and substantive aspects, I further organized the lessons into substantive issues dealing with the human dimensions of a holistic approach: those dealing with livelihood resources and socioeconomic considerations (shown in the top half of the table) . The process factors (the bottom half of t he table) are building capacity for local governance. model which needed adaptation to incorporate the factor. T he far right column of the table summarizes how each lesson is incorporated into the adapted planning model.
24 S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y Holistic Approach : Expanded & integrated across scales and disciplines Attention to human side: Social & economic pillars of sustainability, Resources and Livelihoods Lessons Learned Planning Stages Adaptation of Planning M odel Insufficient endowments in capitals base All Multi scale & multi disciplinary scope with expli cit inclusion of social & economic information natural capitals 1,3 Local level resource inventories & mobilization strategies human, physical, & financial capitals through partnerships 4 ,5,8 Inclusion of external stakeholders from public, private & civil spheres Equitable distribution of benefits and responsibilities All Create a platform for equitable cooperation & inclusion of marginalized groups Maintain traditional sociocultur al relationships 1, 2, 7, 9 Utilize traditional forms of communication & governance; explicit discussion of possible +/ outcomes Provide diverse & direct opportunities for economic gain & investment in public goods 2,5,6,8 Focus on balanced investment s in community asset base Avoid external and/or elite capture 2,3,4,5,6,7,9 Equitable platform for cooperation & negotiation Negotiated connections of communities to markets & equitable value chains 4,5,9,10 Local control of process within multi st akeholder platforms & capacity building for negotiation Process: Participation builds capacity for local governance Participation Community ownership of process All Local creation of priorities & strategies Appropriate timing of opportunities for participation at all stages All Initiate planning process through appreciative and participatory approach Attention to the desired level of community participation 1,2,3,9, 10 Explicit discussion of local expectations for participation Capacity for local governance Lack of strong institutions 1,3,4,8,9 Information on local and external institutional context Build partnerships & networks of support 1,4,5,9,10 Motivate buy in of external stakeholders Local control of development over time 1,2, 7,8,9,10 Provide legal and institutional support for local control Capacity building for local adaptive management 2,5,6,9, 10 Explicit investments in human capital throughout process Figure 2. 9 Lessons learned and implications for planning summary of main points
25 The following step by step discussion highlights how the les sons learned were employed in the the modification of each step in order to deal with the distinct challenges of community based planning within the developing context. Included in the explanation of each step are methods and activities commonly used by practitioners of participatory development. While all of the steps are discussed in this section it is important to note that my project in ChirripÃ³ entailed elements of only the first half of the process (those highlighted in bold in F igure 2. 8 ). My experiences in carrying out those steps and attempting to put theory into practice will be discussed in the third and final section. 1) Initial Appraisal He declines to detail the development planning the first step is arguably the most important as it establishes the relationships and processes that frame the entire project. The Appreciative Inquiry approach warns practitioners of the dangers of beginning with a problematic or diagnostic approach, and suggests that by inquiring among marginalized communities as to what they have that has value, and wh at is working well, practitioners can build on success and create agency among participants by reaffirming their achievements instead of highlighting failure (SIDA, 2006) . In reality, practitioners do arrive in an area for a reason, whether it be an issue highlighted by an organization, specific government agency, or donor priorities. However, it is important to use this first step to ensure that the issue is relevant to the local context and reflects the interests and priorities of the community. livelihood strategies, and determining relevant stakeholders and their interests. Utilizing participatory development methodologies lends legitimacy to the planning process and helps gain respect and credibility. This first step is the beginning of a dialogue and iterative process of shared learning for decision making. Communities are not homogenous entities, and thus it is important to highlight potential areas of c onflict and collaboration, evaluate existing governance structures, and access to and control over resources and decision making processes (Dietz et al., 2003) . Attention to inequities across gender, socio economic, and ethnic groups is essential in order to promote participation of marginalized groups and establish a more equitable distribution of benefits. There are myriad tools from the participatory development toolbox including informal interviews, community meetings, participant observation, and othe narratives to gain insight into their experiences (Russell & Harshbarger, 2003) . The most important product of the initial step is a Stakeholder Analysis which details who the relevant groups and individuals are, their positions and interests, resources and relative power, likely level of engagement, and pertinent contextual information. This initial attempt at stakeholder analysis should be considered preliminary and expand ed upon as understanding of the situation increases with each step. 2) Identify Priority Areas and Shared Goals stage in the planning process, and the importance of community participation in establishing them.
26 However, the techniques he provides for participation need to be adjusted to the developing world context and incorporate process goals that explicitly address desired levels of participation amo ng stakeholders. As understanding of the area will increase greatly over the following steps, Steiner allowed to evolve throughout the process (p 41). Str ategies to elicit participation in the context of marginalized communities must be creative and appropriate to the local context. Utilization of existing mechanisms for participation may serve to further exacerbate inequalities, as the most marginalized po pulations may remain excluded. Tools and techniques based on modern communication infrastructure, and assumptions of literacy will often not work in the developing context. It is important to understand and utilize local forms of communication and informat ion dissemination, including working with a diverse array of existing community groups and informal networks in order to reach people who may be excluded from the current governance processes. Tools and methods include surveys, focus groups, meetings, and building relationships with key groups and individuals in order to generate and disseminate information. This process entails a significant expenditure in time and effort, and as priorities essentially boil down to contested value judgments, the discussion of values and priorities necessitates expert facilitation. This process of negotiation can be used to establish relationships and process guidelines for following steps. Information for planning Steiner does an excellent job of elevating the human lay components of pl anning in proportion to environmental considerations, and even less to the economic aspects which make up a only a small sliver of the human layer. As discussed, the economic side of sustainability needs to be integrated through the collection of economic information related to expanding livelihood opportunities and providing sustainable sources of investment in basic services and collective goods. Within the context of limited resources it is important to look for existing data and make tradeoffs regardin analysis without neglecting the need for combined quantitative and qualitative data (Agrawal & Chhatre, 2006; Mulder & Coppolillo, 2004) . The process of data collection can also be made more participatory, and existing local k nowledge of human and ecological processes offers benefits in decreased costs, increased Figure 2.10
27 (Russell & Harshbarger, 2003) . Incorporating participation of many stakeholders can mobilize informational resources and provide access to technical and expert knowledge that may otherwise be outside the ability of the projec t team to generate. This process should provide a platform for the creation of shared knowledge, including the dialectic process of translating local and technical knowledge to create a shared and legitimate knowledge base for collective decision making. 3) Local Level Information level, collecting and analyzing information about the area level and then placing the information within the larger context to understand how external drivers impact local realities. This reversal is based upon an essential adherence to bottom up approaches that seek first to understand the realities of local community members from their perspectives, enabling an analysis of t he larger scale drivers which specifically addresses the values, priorities, and felt impacts at the local level. A useful first step is to conduct an inventory of livelihood and community capitals, operationalizing the appreciative approach by understandi ng what resources exist within the area and how they can be mobilized toward achieving priority outcomes. In addition, an analysis of current and traditional livelihood strategies, land uses, and natural resource management systems is necessary for underst anding the current context and informing potential strategies. Information about all types of capitals, current indicators and interactions with the governance and vulnerability context provide a holistic vision of the local situation. Information collect ed in this step can also provide baseline data for future monitoring and evaluation activities to ensure that certain goals are not being met at the expense of others. 4) Meso and Macro Context At this stage the spatial and temporal scope of investigati on expands to include the social, economic, (Ticktin, 2004) . The involvement of external stakeholders from public, private, and civil society sectors is particularly important in order to collect broader information from various sectors and disciplines. Utilizing a political ecological model to determine the external drivers of change across scales and th roughout time helps lends a more holistic perspective of the current situation and future possibilities. Environmental and ecological data team of scie ntists which may be outside the scope or ability of a development project. However an ecological inventory should be conducted and can be realized through partnerships with NGOs and private, public, and educational institutions. At this stage aggregated so cio demographic information can be analyzed to discern patterns and trends of population characteristics and change over time. Investigating the political and institutional context involves understanding past and existing policies which may constrain or en (Gezon, 1997) . Economic analysis of the flow of goods and services, value chains, and market characteristics of key sectors is impor tant for highlighting opportunities and constraints as well as evaluating the feasibility of investment opportunities.
28 5) Synthesis and Translation es to In order to explicitly address differences in stakeholder input and the need to bridge the divide between step would function in the participatory development context, to address the need for social learning and the creation of a shared and legitimate knowledge base for decision making. Local knowled ge and mental models should be explicitly included and used in tandem with technical expertise to inform planning activities. It is important to emphasize the use of appropriate technology for both data collection and the communication of information. For example, the use of complex GIS and mapping technology may not be feasible or even desirable as communities already possess intimate knowledge of their landscapes. Community mapping is a viable alternative which results in tangible data that can be used fo r planning and, if resources permit, triangulated through basic GPS and spatial imaging technology. As in previous steps, studies are needed in all three areas of sustainability, so the inclusion of a study evaluating the economic viability of proposed pr ojects is necessary in order to better prioritize investments of scarce resources. Steiner highlights the need for studies of ecological carrying capacity to assess human impacts and sustainable levels of consumption and waste discharge. However, this anal ysis should take into account available technology and management techniques that increase the sustainability of human impacts and the associated productive and waste cycling capacities of the natural environment. This information can then be used to deve lop scale appropriate development components as discussed in step eight. 6) Alternative Scenarios and Possible Outcomes that links decisions to actions and impacts. This step should entail a discussion of possible positive and negative outcomes associated with alternative plans and scenarios (Stronza & Go rdillo, 2008) . The evaluation of outcomes should be an explicit step in this process, providing a platform for stakeholders to discuss their multiple objectives and associated values and priorities. This negotiated process should attempt to build consensus on shared goals and priorities, and create a collective vision of the desired future condition, with attention to increasing involvement of marginalized groups for equitable and inclusive participation in dialogue. Possible methods include discursive eva luation, rankings, and scenarios planning (Evans & Research, 2006) negative impacts of chosen scenarios informed by relevant past experiences (Stronza & Gordil lo, 2008) and seeks to understand local attitudes and willingness to accept trade practitioners and planners can use existin g knowledge to inform the planning process.
29 7) Landscape Plan Steiner describes the landscape plan as a strategy for development with flexible guidelines that allow for ruments for conflict resolution (Neuman, quoted in Steiner p. 264). However, if ultimate decision making regarding plan adoption occurs at too distant a scale, or without sufficient input from local stakeholders, then using the plan as a governance tool may encounter challenges due to lack of community buy in and legitimacy that are gained through participation in decision making. Possible negative outcom es of top down decision making include low compliance, lack of participation in implementation, the inability to mobilize local resources due to the absence of community ownership, and increased monitoring and enforcement costs. The landscape plan establi shes operational logistics such as priority objectives, schedules, targets, and budgets (Steiner, 2008). Tools and frameworks from recreation planning should also be utilized in developing the landscape plan. The Recreation Production System utilized in Ou tcomes Focused Management provides a tool for understanding how priority outcomes (objectives and targets) are produced through the interaction of inputs (investments) with specific setting characteristics (enabling environments) (Driver, 2008) . Another to ol from recreation management that can be employed in developing the landscape plan is the zoning classification system used in Recreation Opportunity Spectrum framework which was designed for planning within areas of multiple resource use (Boyd & Butler, 1996) . Zoning for specific tourism activities is important for sustainability and maintaining existing livelihood strategies by demarcating zones for conservation and other non tourism land and resource uses. 8) D esigning Development Components chosen landscape plan to ensure that it can work within the given landscape. Emphasis should be added to determining whether scale and design are appropriate to the biophysical, social, and economic context and that design components and specific development strategies are in line with local realities, including feasibility within given resource limitations. Steiner explains that this step involves envisioning the fu ture landscape condition, likely processes of change, and whether the human ecological system more technical building blocks of traditional development pro jects such as access to improved water, sanitation, waste management and transportation infrastructure that are crucial components of traditional development initiatives. context necessitates a focus on the idea of appropriate technology that fits within the scale and scope of available resources. For example, designing elaborate electrification infrastructure might be replaced with designing a campaign to provide scale ap propriate solutions such as solar panels and biodigesters at the household or community level, including attention to logistics of funding, implementation, and sustainability within environmental, social, and economic context. There are also many tools fr om the recreation management toolbox that may prove useful for designing landscape fundamentals. The
30 Limits of Acceptable Change (LAC) framework provides an approach for planning and adaptive management to measure impacts and develop management strategies to keep negative impacts within acceptable levels (Stankey & Forest, 1985) . Mulder and Copolillo note that educating tourists and zoning important a spects of tourism planning strategies that seek to use design elements and setting characteristics to influence use behaviors. Zoning is arguably the most important aspect of planning, and specific tools from the ROS and LAC approaches can be applied in th is step to inform zoning strategies. 9) Activities and Accountability Logistics This step involves planning activities for implementation, including the distribution of responsibilities among stakeholders and the establishment of mechanisms of accountabil ity. Steiner aptly describes this institutional a rrangements characterized by an indirect relationship between planners and implementers that is moderated through economic incentives and mechanisms of regulation and enforcement. His discussion focuses on the legal institutional framework of complex and e xplicit tenure regimes that are supported by effective enforcement. Not only does this institutional structure rarely exist in developing areas, but the lack of tenure and use rights is frequently cited as they key constraint limiting success of community based resource management (Ostrom, 1990) . Given the vast differences in who, how, and with what resources implementation occurs, activities will be completely different in the developing context and must focus on providing the appropriate processes and re sources while building local governance capacity and mechanisms of accountability for the realization of collective action. This process involves identifying necessary rules for successful tional and customary regulations (Ankersen & Barnes, 2004) (Antinori & Bray, 2005) . Possible methods and tools include implementation of the 10) Adaptive Management This step represents the shift from planning and design to regular management activities and entails the development of a management plan that provides guidelines and processes for regular management and monitoring and evaluation (M&E) activities. Given the common lack of human resources for local management, a crucial component of this transition is capacity building so that local people have the skills, knowledge, and confidence for effective management. The period of transition to loc al ownership is often characterized by technical assistance from external stakeholders and reliance on networks of support (Trejos et al., 2008) . The management plan must include monitoring activities to provide managers with information about progress to wards goals and early warning signs of potential threats or weaknesses. Indicators should be developed early in the process with community participation, incorporating all the three areas of
31 sustainability and directly reflecting progress towards stated go als and priorities of the community. A good M&E plan is comprised of a mix of qualitative and quantitative indicators that can be easily measured without putting an excessive burden on time and resources. A systematic approach is essential, including an ex plicit plan for developing indicators, charting when and how they will be monitored, and feedback mechanisms for using data in management decisions. An effective M&E plan is not only essential for good internal decision making, but can also help to attract support from external partners by demonstrating project viability and commitment to planning for success and adaptive management. Enabling potential partners and donors to show the positive economic and environmental impacts of their contributions is a ke y component to attracting support and ensuring the sustainability of the project. Some concerns regarding the implementation of an effective M&E system include, first, determining the availability of baseline data. If a goal of the program is to provide h olistic improvements for community members across sectors, it would seem pertinent to collect a wide range of data regarding all facets of the livelihood framework, from health and nutrition to access to water and sanitation. However, this amount of monito ring could overburden a small operation and is outside of the scope of a small scale ecotourism project. An evaluation of secondary data available and the possibility or legitimacy of extrapolating project level data to reflect changes within the target po pulation can provide an alternative to extensive internal monitoring. A second concern is the sustainability of the monitoring component itself, whether or not people will feel compelled to continue measuring the indicators as time goes by. To address this it is important to write M&E activities into the management plan and promote wide support for monitoring activities, as well as create a system of accountability. This section has sought to provide a new model for community based planning by adapting the ecological planning framework to address common constraints within the developing context. By conceptualizing sustainability as not just what is involved in planning, but how the process is carried out recognizes the need for not only a more holistic appr oach and greater attention to social and economic components, but also that local participation builds capacity for long term, sustainable management. The shifting paradigms in conservation and development have highlighted the need for expanded and integra ted information for planning and strategies which seek to overcome deficits in livelihood resources (capital endowments) and governance institutions. Past experiences in community based ecotourism have shown that it can be an effective tool for sustainable development when attention is paid to the possible positive and negative outcomes and information for planning is generated through participatory multi stakeholder processes which serve to strengthen local collective capacity and embed communities within networks of support. The new framework seeks to address these crucial aspects of sustainable development by explicitly addressing them throughout the planning process and providing tools for increasing participation in the generation of information for pl anning and activities related to decision making, implementation, and management.
32 Part III Theory into Practice This section will discuss my experience attempting to operationalize participation in data collection for tourism planning in ChirripÃ³, C osta Rica, including the specific methods used for turning theory into practice and preliminary results outlining the data collected and the effectiveness of the approach. I will first discuss the project objectives and the methodologies used in designing and implementing the project. The specific methods matrix I developed for the project will then be explained with respect to the planning process discussed in the previous section as a way to illustrate how planning activities overlapped to contribute towa rds the three central objectives as I progressed along the planning stages. I will then discuss the activities, methods, and results for each of the first five planning steps, with the inclusion of a separate section detailing how I devised and implemented a strategy for increasing participation among both local and external stakeholders, and how participatory processes of data collection for planning can be used to promote collaboration and lay the foundations for a multi stakeholder platform. III.A Impl ementation & Objectives As discussed in the introductory section of this paper, this project was set in motion through collaboration with the managing committee of the CBVCT (a regional biological corridor) and CoopeduchÃ, who highlighted a need for a loca l level resource evaluation and identification of possible sites for tourism development in ChirripÃ³. I began the process of planning for the practicum project with broadly conceptualized goals including, primarily, contributing to improving livelihood op portunities while strengthening local institutions and capacities. Second, to utilize a sustainable livelihoods approach and participatory methods to evaluate local forms of capital and determine how these assets could be mobilized for sustainable developm ent within the conservation context. Third, collaborate with communities and stakeholders to prioritize goals and create an action plan for working towards priority outcomes. Fourth, contribute to developing local capacities towards the successful implemen tation of the plan. Lastly, to create partnerships with organizations from the public, private and civil sectors in order to improve long term sustainability and continuity of the project. From these general goals I conducted a review of the tourism li terature to identify key components impacting the success and failure of TRC projects, and worked with CBVCT and CoopeduchÃ to determine the following project objectives: Carry out a participatory inventory and evaluation of local resources (livelihood cap itals) for tourism planning Embed the project in a network of support through building relationships with external stakeholders Conduct a market analysis and feasibility study to promote sound investments of limited resources To achieve these objectives I employed a variety of methodologies for engaging diverse stakeholder groups and eliciting participation in data collection activities for planning. The following Methods Matrix
33 outlines the primary methods used and how the processes of stakeholder engageme nt contributed to increasing participation in the project while also providing valuable information for planning. Fig. 3.1 Practicum Methods Matrix
34 Operationalizing participation in data collection for tourism planning Based in theories of sustainable c ommunity development, my approach utilizes the ecological planning process focusing on the need for a holistic approach that incorporates participation at all stages of planning. Participation in this case is conceptualized not only as by the local communi ty but also external stakeholders who can provide additional knowledge, resources, and support. For clarity, the following sections have been organized into the first five steps of the adapted ecological planning model presented in the previous section. Ho wever, the realities of participatory processes did not allow for such linear progression of activities. Many steps overlap both conceptually, providing information for multiple stages of the planning process, and temporally, given the need for increasing participation. In order to get results that would reflect a more equitable local viewpoint, many of the first steps were carried out multiple times with different stakeholder groups. This overlap was particularly relevant in the case of ChirripÃ³. Due to th e differences between CabÃ©car and Tico communities and stakeholders, in addition to the much greater difficulty of gaining the trust and participation of indigenous community, implementation ended up following two distinct, yet related and overlapping, pro cesses. Methods and approaches were carried out and tested first in the Tico community of Grano de Oro (GDO) while simultaneously working with other stakeholders and endeavoring to gain the participation of the indigenous community. Once able to begin the dialogue with the CabÃ©car community, the methods carried out in GDO were evaluated and adapted for use in the Reserve. Figure 3.2 Methods matrix with planning steps
35 1. Initial Appraisal ins the planning process but requires evaluating the reasons why the particular issue or initiative was identified as a priority. This includes determining whether the project reflects local realities and whether or not it falls in line with local prioriti among local participants and gaining a broad overview of the context and the issues involved. Upon arrival I was introduced to many affiliates of CoopeduchÃ , including a local recent graduate of the University of Costa Rica in tourism who provided valuable information and oriented me to the context hand man in all things related to tourism, he helped me to plan and carry out the initial workshop and was essential in providing contacts for many local and external stakeholders and provided continued support throughout the project. Additionally, a $20,000 project through the Programa de PequeÃ±a s Donaciones (PPD) program was wrapping up at the time of my arrival and a French graduate student, working through the MINAE, was carrying out her thesis project helping the local orchid conservation group to organize the final phase of their project. As the project included a tourism component we were able to join forces in some of the areas in which the two projects overlapped. Thanks to these fortunate circumstances, in addition to the help and support of the local Peace Corps volunteer and the Coopeduc hÃ leadership, I was able to a single, unconnected individual. tandable that there are differences in interests and priorities for development in the region. Through social research methods incl uding observation, informal convers ations, and interviews I was able to get insight into the local context. Due to the comple x array of local organizations, a main component of the initial appraisal was attendance at meetings, where I gained not only an understanding of local issues and stakeholders, but also accepted processes of organization, communication, and decision making . I found that there was significant interest in community based tourism (TRC) development in the Tico communities of GDO and Santubal, and among some indigenous individuals and the local indigenous cooperative (CoopeOroNimarÃ). The wider CabÃ©car populati on proved to be very difficult to engage in the planning process. This may have been due to a variety of reasons including suspicion of outsiders, CabÃ©car gender norms, language barriers, or that I was introduced through CoopeduchÃ and thus identified as b elonging to an established project and organization. The difficulties experienced in my initial attempts to engage with the CabÃ©car community provided a realization that this relationship building process would take much more time than my three months allo wed for carrying out the planning process within the reserve, so I began to carry out activities in the community of GDO while working to understand the local situation and foster participation by the indigenous people.
36 Initial Appraisal Results Instit utional context , participation, and equality Initial Appraisal included identifying local and external stakeholders and carrying out an initial stakeholder analysis. An important part of this process was understanding the local context and highlighting are as of possible collaboration or conflict among stakeholders. The local institutional structure proved to be highly complex and comprised of an array of local organizations involved in governance and development activities. In GDO there exists the local gov erning association (ADI GDO), a water governance association (ASADA), a producer association of individual dairy farmers ( AsociaciÃ³n de Productores de Leche), a local orchid conservation and tourism organization, an a ssociation of sport s and facilities, ed ucational associations of parents, and several faith based groups. These organizations are dominated by Ticos and have low levels of indigenous participation. The Indigenous community has separate governing organizations, including the AsociaciÃ³n de Desar rollo Integral de ChirripÃ³ (ADI C), the Gestores Comunitarios, and CoopeOroNimarÃ. No community is a homogenous unit, and ChirripÃ³ is characterized by many of the typical disparities often found across socio demographic groups. There are distinct inequa lities across ethnic and gender groups. The CabÃ©car population as a whole has lower access to basic services and economic opportunities, reflected in their heightened levels of poverty and lower performance across a wide range of development indicators. Wi thin the non indigenous community , gender relations are fairly equitable and Ticas perform many productive and reproductive roles in addition to community organizing activities. Within the Indigenous community there appeared to be only very limited partici pation of CabÃ©car women in indigenous organizations and governance. As I gained the confidence of several indigenous individuals, I was able to inquire about the lack of participation of women in the ADI attending all the meetings or having leadership positions. When I asked why this may be and if this was traditional in the CabÃ©car culture the response was invariably elusive, yet indicating that they thought women would be welcome to participate if they w anted to. Near the end of the practicum I was introduced to an indÃgena in Quetzal and told that she would be the next president of the ADI C, so perhaps the gender relations are beginning to change. Due to the difficulties I encountered engaging the CabÃ© car population, coupled with the complexities of gender relations and limited participation by women in the public sphere, I was able to meet and talk to w omen the language barrier meant that our interactions were generally mediated by men who have disproportionately higher levels of education and are far more likely to speak Spanish. Conflict & Collaboration Context and Internal Stakeholder Analysis As there are currently no formalized plans for tourism development in the district of ChirripÃ³, opportunities for collaboration or conflict center mainly around the planning process and associated procedural interests, including participation in the decisi on making processes. The task of determining the substantive interests of all stakeholders has not yet been accomplished; however, what is at stake is determining who will be involved in the planning process and thus better able to represent their substant ive interests and those of their constituents in the future.
37 The interests of the various stakeholders are not necessarily in conflict with one another (see Internal Stakeholder Analysis in Appendix 1), and in fact a multiplicity of tourism projects is p referable for a number of reasons. 1) To increase participation in the planning and implementation, which can lead to 2) Wider and more equitable distribution of benefits and responsibilities, 3) expands the variety of market segments of potential visitors , and 4) multiple activities will make the arduous task of getting to the area more worthwhile, promoting increased visitation and longer stays. Currently, the initial stages of planning have outlined the following areas of interest for tourism development : Agrotourism, Nature tourism, Adventure tourism, Cultural tourism, and Hospitality services. At present, a main priority identified by CoopeduchÃ is the development of a fourth route to Cerro ChirripÃ³, a popular national tourism destination, which would b e a long distance trek through the indigenous reserve. This has been highlighted as a priority for investment not only because it represents investments in i mproving the local transportation infrastructure to isolated communities within the reserve (bearing in mind that transportation is done by foot and horse). However, there is disagreement as to the appropriate pathway to be made into the fourth route, wit h the CoopeduchÃ leadership proposing a three day trek which crosses through parts of CabÃ©car territory that have traditionally been off limits. Indigenous stakeholders have expressed the desire to establish a route that would utilize existing networks of paths between communities in order to increase their access to markets and basic services , while also providing opportunities for intere sted communities to gain benefits through tourism service provision. The situation presents many opportunities for coop eration, however is currently characterized by poor communication within and among stakeholder groups that could present issues resulting in future conflict (see Figure 3.3). CoopeduchÃ is a recently formed cooperative with wide Tico and CabÃ©car membership . At the time of incorporation the official CabÃ©car governing body (the ADI C) promoted indigenous membership by subsidizing the initial affiliate payment ($5) for around 100 of their members. This placed the cooperative directly in the national spotlight as the largest indigenous cooperative in a country which has prioritized cooperativismo as a main component of its development strategy. In addition, as the poorest and most isolated district in Costa Rica, ChirripÃ³ has been elevated to a priority area for institutional development, giving both the cooperative and the ADI C considerable leverage in gaining investments and support from public, civil, and private organizations. However, since this unprecedented initial collaboration there have been only limit ed opportunities for affiliates to participate in co op activities.
38 Some affiliates from both Tico and CabÃ©car communities feel that they are being left out of the activities of the cooperative. Additionally, many communities within the reserve feel that the ADI C is not representing their interests and that their voices are not being taken into account by the governing body. As a result, leaders from 23 CabÃ©car communities have organized themselves into a new organization (Gestores Comunitarios de Chirrip Ã³) which seeks to have their development priorities heard and acted upon. The effort to organize the Gestores was spearheaded by local leaders from the community of NimarÃ, which has also recently obtained a personerÃa juridica for their own indigenous co operative, CoopeOroNimarÃ, focusing on the production of banana vinegar and tourism development. Given focus on guava they were amenable to allowing CoopeOroNimarÃ to take the lead on tourism in the meantime, and to take a leadership r ole in the development of a proposal for tourism planning in the district. The ADI C is an important stakeholder for tourism development in the region, however have not yet taken an active role in the planning process. Legally, all development within the reserve must be approved by the ADI C, as they are the official landholders of the reserve. Thus far the leadership has expressed only slight interest in participating in tourism development and had minimal representation in the initial stages of the plann ing process. As for the Tico communities of Grano de Oro and Santubal, they are interested in bringing tourism to the area as a means of expanding livelihood opportunities and promoting economic development. Two groups from GDO (the dairy producing ass ociation and the orchid conservation group), and the producers association of Santubal have been active participants in tourism planning meetings and workshops, prioritizing the promotion of community rural tourism (TRC) focusing on nature and agrotourism. The younger community members, represented by a group of tourism students from the local high school ( colegio ), have shared interest in promoting agrotourism, however also feel that adventure tourism will be important for attracting tourists to the area. They all recognize the benefit of having an indigenous cultural component, however the indigenous community lacks representation in these groups. Fig ure 3.3 Potential areas for collaboration and c onflict
39 The indigenous stakeholders want to bring cultural tourism to the reserve, however representatives from the A DI C, Gestores, and other community leaders recognize that there are many in their The internal stakeholder analysis reflects the different groups an d individuals in the district and their positions and interests, resources and relative power, likely level of engagement, possible areas for collaboration and conflict, and pertinent contextual information. External Stakeholder Analysis In the Initial A sectors, which are highly active and integrated into governance and development activities at various scales, from national policy to local level initiatives. The pre liminary external stakeholder analysis identified relevant stakeholders and their possible interests in involvement with the project (included in Appendix 1). To gain information on external stakeholders I again attended various meetings and workshops thro ughout the region. A key source of information was attending meetings of the CBVCT, which is comprised of diverse members f r o m the public, private, and civil spheres. I was able to meet many representatives from various ministries and organizations and eng age them in informal interviews institutional arrangements and identify possibilities for collaboration. Strategy for increasing multi stakeholder p articipation cycle. The fact that ChirripÃ³ is very remote meant that extra effort would be needed to draw in the participation of external stakeholders, and the isolation and exclusion of the indigenous population resulted in a need for an explicit strategy to increase participation in local planning activities. In addition, attendance at the initial workshop in GDO was fairly low and the 22 participants largely represented homogenous demographics and interests. The strategy included expanding participation through planning and information collection activities th emselves, in addition to other activities related to working with local stakeholders on their own projects and goals. For the purpose of this project I had to re conceptualize how I thought of participation, creating a sliding scale of participation that would enable me to garner the support and participation of non traditional external stakeholders. This continuum envisions participation as proportional to the proximity of each stakeholder group to the project, as motivation for participation is related t o the extent which project the nature and quality of participation change along the continuum determined by proximity and likely interests of each stak eholder group. Moving further away from the local level, the methods of engagement become less focused on creating ownership and sharing power and tend to employ strategies for induced or functional participation (see Figure 3.4).
40 Full Participation Not participation Citizen control (Arnstein, 1971) Delegated Power Partnership Placation Consultation Informing Therapy Manipulation Spontaneous (Tosun, 1999) Induced Coercive Self Mobilization (Pretty, 1995) Interactive Functional For Material Inc entives Consultation Passive Manipulative complex view of different stakeholder groups, how they fit into the tourism production system, their resources , interests, possible level of engagement, and methods for engaging them in the generation of information for planning. The table below (Figure 3.5) highlights different stakeholder groups as described in the Outcomes Focused Management approach to recrea tion planning and demonstrates how their proximity to the project relates to the type of participation and method of engagement in information generation. Facilitating the definition of desired outcomes in multi stakeholder platforms is not an easy task . OFM presents two main stakeholder groups: customers and associated providers (Driver, 2008) . Within the TRC context the associated providers present a wide range of stakeholders, as one of the objectives is to increase participation in providing the good s and services associated with tourism, in order to create a more equitable distribution of responsibilities and benefits. Promoting the participation of local community members, both collectively and individually, to become involved in the process of plan ning and implementing diverse tourism products should lead to a situation where the local associated providers are significantly comprised of what would normally be the local offsite users , meaning that instead of being passive observers of tourism develop ment this group would become involved in the provision of tourism products and services . Figu re 3.4 Continuum of participation from three perspectives
41 Figure 3.5 Stakeholder Groups, Types of Participation, and Methods for Generating Information for Planning Customer Stakeholders Any person or group who rea lizes positive or negative outcomes associated with the resource Associated Providers Anyone involved directly or indirectly in the tourism production system On site users Off site users Local Regional National Visitors Local off site users Remote off s ite users Customers who use the resource for recreation purposes Residents and nearby communities who do not use the resource for recreation External non users who receive tangible or intangible benefits from the resource including public, pr ivate, and civil orgs &individuals Residents in and around ChirripÃ³ who will be involved in service provision, including Hospitality providers, tour agencies, transportation companies, information providers, and other associated service providers based in Turrialba Hospitality providers, tour agencies, transportation companies, information providers, and other associated service providers operating nationally Prospective tourists from various market segments Internal stakeholders, residents of ChirripÃ³, G DO, and Santubal CBVCT, MAG, MINAE, CATIE, Local businesses and entrepreneurs, community groups and associations Regional tourism agencies and hospitalities providers in Turrialba, ICT National tour agencies and hospitality providers, ICT, ACTUAR, COOPRE NA Anticipated level/type of participation , 2004 ) Participation through consultation Interactive and self mobilized participation through Citizen control/ delegated power Functional interact ive participation through partnership consultation Interactive and self mobilized participation through Citizen control/ delegated power Participation for material incentives through consultation and informing Interactive participation through partnership or participation for material incentives through consultation Methods for data collection and information generation Tourism survey Workshops, direct participation in process Interviews, information sharing , relationship building Workshops, direct par ticipation in process Interviews and surveys Interviews, information sharing, relationship building Customers are comprised of on site users, or the actual visitors, and local and remote offsite users (Driver, 2008) . Local offsite users are the people wh o live nearby and are often directly impacted by tourism development and the positive and negative economic, social, and environmental outcomes. This
42 group is especially important within the context of community development and has distinct perspectives th individual and collective experiences (Wyman & Stein, 2010) . Remote offsite customers are those who do not use the area for recreation purposes but derive benefits from learning or knowing about the recreation area (Driver, 2008) . Additional benefits to this group may include the conservation of cultural and natural patrimony, or the natural resources and ecosystem services provided by the managed area. The remote n ature of this group means that the quality of their participation in the planning process will differ from that of local off site users and their collaboration in the planning process is more dependent on their desire and willingness to get involved. The groups outlined by Driver should be complemented with attention to private, public, and civil society organizations that can impact project planning and implementation. Collaborating with such groups can not only provide for needed investments in natural, human, social, physical, and financial capital, but also contribute to the long term sustainability of the project and strengthen the mechanisms of local resource governance through creating partnerships and linkages to larger governance scales. In a case study of TRC in Costa Rica it was found that embedding projects within networks of support organizations helped to overcome constraints of lacking human and financial resources associated with rural and marginalized communities (Trejos et al., 2008) . In creasing local level participation (meetings, interviews, surveys, and capacity building) In the initial appraisal and workshop we carried out the local level resource inventory of livelihood capitals (see results Local Level Information), including inform ation about social capital and the identification of local groups and organizations, which was used to build the preliminary stakeholder analysis and develop a strategy for increasing participation. I began by attending meetings of all the different local organizations where I identified leaders and requested interviews about the organizational structure, function, goals and priorities, communication strategies, and membership and participation. I was able to use this information not only to inform general planning logistics and communication strategies, but also to increase my understanding of the local context and priorities. In addition, as most of the organizations are related to economic and community development initiatives I was able to collect inform ation about current livelihood strategies. Working with these groups in addition to social, education, and faith based organizations I gained an understanding of cultural norms and social networks, including a complex web of family ties in which nearly all residents are related through common ancestry in three main settler families. Survey of Community Members From the interviews with leaders I used membership information to conduct a snowball survey of community members inquiring about primary and seconda ry livelihood activities, membership in local organizations and level of participation, and interest in tourism planning. Despite that I was able to enlist the help of several other people working on our tourism team, our sample size was low (n=20) and bia sed towards the most active community members and those who had an interest in tourism development, due to the nature of the snowball sampling design. The survey respondents had a
43 generally high level of interest in tourism development, with an average of 4.38 on a scale of 1 5. The most interest in tourism development was for projects related to nature tourism (n=13, or 65%). Lodging provision ( hospedaje ) garnered the second highest level of interest (n=11, or 55%). Adventure tourism was of the least inter est to respondents, with only 5 people expressing interest in participating in adventure tourism planning. Respondents were asked about their membership and level of participation in local organizations. All but four respondents were currently registered members in at least one organization, and forty percent (n=8) held one or more leadership positions. Respondents had an average of membership in 1.9 organizations, with a range from 1 to 4 organizations. Respondents were given a participation score based upon their affiliation and level of participation in each organization ( 1= membership but low participation, 2= low attendance at meetings, 3= average level of participation, 4=attendance at all meetings and activities , 5= leadership position ). The average participation score was 6.6, with a range of 1 15. Five participants had extremely high levels of participation, with scores above 10. Survey information was used to identify likely participants in planning activities and possible committee members to le ad the project in the future. Survey data was also used to perform a social network analysis in an effort to get a better picture of which organizations and individuals were most central to the civic life of the community. While the low sample size and sa mpling bias was a severe limitation to the analysis, given more time I believe this methodology and dual analysis would help to provide a clearer picture of the interactions among stakeholder groups and individual participants and provide insight into patt erns of social and civic organization that would enable a more in depth strategy for planning processes. Relationship and Capacity Building Activities The third component of building local participation in the project included working with groups on t heir own projects in order to create relationships of reciprocity and generate interest in tourism, and went hand in hand with the need to increase the amount of data and variety of viewpoints it represented. As I became more known and accepted in the comm unity people began to ask for help with many different activities which consisted primarily of capacity building, helping local groups with organizational strengthening and administrative skills. I worked with associations on such things as logistics for g aining legal status and opportunities to apply for external support, administrative record keeping, financial management and accounting skills, and logistical support for current activities. With cultural and educational groups activities were more relate d to simple participation and assistance with projects like fundraisers and meetings, acting as a Figure 3.6 Menu developed with Soda el Dorado
44 judge in the talent show and science fair, and helping with English classes. I also worked with local hospitality providers on menu development and pricing st rategies, and general concepts to help prepare for the new market segments associated with national and intern ational tourism (see Figure 3.6 ). These relationships allowed me to carry out workshops individually with diverse groups to collect more represent ative data about perceptions of tourism and possible attractions. With the Association of Milk Producers I was able to carry out the full planning process for designing the agrotourism lecherÃa tour, from the resource inventory all the way through planning and mapping the tour, deciding on pricing and responsibility logistics, and creating p romotional material (Figure 3.7 ). Increasing External Stakeholder Participation Having established contacts within many organizations during the initial appraisa l, I was able to build relationships with many key public and civil organizations. In the public sphere I was able to work with the ICT, INA, MAG, MINAE, and Ministerio de Salud to collect information about policies and programs which could potentially pro vide resources and support for the project, as well as general statistics and information at the local, national and regional level. In return, I was able to provide information from the local level and perspective on various programs. Through these relati onships I was able to not only generate a wide range of information but also garner a surprising level of support from many organizations, two of which actually came all the way out to ChirripÃ³ for site visits, which in Costa Rica is considered a valuable demonstration of support. In the civil sphere I worked to strengthen relationships with both CATIE and the CBVCT, and through them other organizations working in conservation and social and community development. Reaching the national civil society organi zations working specifically in TRC (COOPRENA and ACTUAR) took considerably more effort, calling upon contacts from my personal and professional network to get introductions and travelling to San Jose to conduct interviews. The importance of the economic and market components of TRC planning led me to develop a strategy for working with potential stakeholders from the private sphere. Due to local concerns about the tendency of tour agencies to co opt local initiatives and capture the benefits, I did not ca rry out explicit interviews with tourism agencies but simply feigned interest in their products to collect information about regional tourism markets and supply and demand of tourism products. Upon realizing that regional tourism value chains depend heavil y on hotels to bridge the gap between independent tourists and agencies, I began to carry out formal interviews with hotels to get a better idea of the logistics of d level of Figure 3.7 Promotional flier for
45 demand for TRC as a concept and the specific products highlighted in the initial inventory, in addition to willingness to support future efforts for placement and promotion of the project. 2. Priorities and Shared Goals In this step we look for shared goals to begin the dialogue about desired future conditions. This is usually a negotiated process of consensus building among heterogeneous stakeholders (Steiner, 2008) . In ChirripÃ³ we worked to build consensus first within, then between stakehold er groups, first working with community members in GDO and Santubal to create a shared vision of the future, a process which has been modified and included into the planning activities proposed for ChirripÃ³ Reserve. The most difficult aspect of identifying priorities and shared goals was the attempt to understand the interests and priorities of indigenous stakeholders and how they differed from those of CoopeduchÃ and other Tico stakeholder groups. Lluvia de Ideas At the community level we designed worksho ps with specific activities to evaluate perceptions of ed their responses to gain a better understanding of the similarities and different aspects of tourism they had in mind and organize the project around these ideas. Figure 3. 8 lists all the responses from the lluvias in both GDO and NimarÃ; the responses a re in Spanish here but are organized and translated below. Que piensen cuando piensen en turismo? Grano De Oro NimarÃ Recursos o Generar mÃ¡s recursos CapacitaciÃ³n Tours o De cafÃ© o GanaderÃa Cabalgatas Senderismo InteracciÃ³n o Diferentes culturas o Con los indÃg enas Cambio de costumbres Caminatas a miradores OrquÃdeas Mariposas Guayabas Hospedaje y AlimentaciÃ³n Necesidad de transporte OrganizaciÃ³n para traer turismo Un seguro UniÃ³n de los pueblos o Compartir beneficios Valor de la vida cotidiana Experiencias nuev as y compartidas Empezar con lo que tenemos (1ra Dora dijo que no, el grupo le corrigiÃ³) Mejorar los recursos que tenemos Ofrecer/compartir lo que tiene cada quien DistribuciÃ³n de tareas y organizaciÃ³n Capacitaciones o Que es turismo (10) o GuÃas locales o Ingl es (2) Agrupar la gente o Todos los compaÃ±eros Con los gestores Darnos a conocer a otras personas Beneficios o Para toda la comunidad Figure 3. 8 Results from the lluvia de Ideas in Grano de Oro and NimarÃ
46 Using these ideas as a starting point we organized the responses into categories based on whether they were conceptual in nature or dealt with a concrete tourism product or service. The latter were used to structure a preliminary project framework which outlined five key segments of tourism products (see Figure 3. 9 ). Additional activities helped to discern some of the different priorities for development, ice breaker activity in which we asked tourist arrived here tomorrow what would you recorded and organized their answers and incorporated them into the project framework. The more conceptual and value based ideas were organized into the three pillars of sustainability and presented in the follow up workshop to initiate a dialogue about the possible outcomes of tourism in the context of c ommunity values (see Figure 3.10 ) . Values Possible Outcomes Environmental Natural resources Mountains and forests Rivers and waterfalls Flora and fauna Agriculture Increase environm ental consciousness Improve waste management Social Organization of the people Distribution of responsibilities Interaction with different cultures & with the indigenous Trainings/Capacities Bringing together the people Sharing the benefits Increased valu e of daily lives/activities *Change of traditional customs Economic Start with what we have Connections to organizations Sharing/contributing what each person has Generate more resources Improve the resources we have Figure 3.10 Tourism Values Results atmosphere that focused on opportunities instead of problems, emphasizing existing resources instead of deficits, and valuing the livelihoods and resources o f community members. This worked quite well. Without directly explaining my intentions or explicitly describing the approach participants began to get into the spirit, emphasizing the wealth of resources they already had and highlighting opportunities for Turismo Rural Comunitario Chirripo Productos Turisticos Agro turismo Naturaleza y Aventura Cultura Indigena Servicios/ Hospitalidad Hospedaje Comida y Bebida Figure 3.9 Five part tourism framework
47 collaboration. Several participants even told me in the following days that it was the best meeting they had ever been to, which is no small feat given the sheer quantity of time that granodeorodienses spend in meetings. However, in the interest of puttin g a more realistic face on the impacts of tourism development, and the possible positive and negative outcomes, we presented the results in the following w orkshop and used them to structure a discussion about sustainability. Starting from the one negative comment of tourism causing a change of customs ( cambio de costumbre ), we asked what were some other possible harmful impacts of tourism. The dialogue highl ighted the increase of garbage and waste likely to result from tourists, however participants saw this as generally positive in that they thought it would provide the impetus for improving waste management and building more environmental consciousness amon g community members. Another main outcome we discussed at length was the development of competition among community members and the unwillingness of people to work cooperatively which, as could be expected, was a conversation that became quite heated. P ebble Distribution Ranking The rest of the ideas from the lluvia we used for a pebble distribution prioritization activity, as a majority of the lluvia ideas dealt with possible tourism products and services. We presented their ideas organized into the di fferent components of the framework and asked for any changes they wanted to make, which they did, increasing the size of the lists of possible tourism attractions and placing some activities in multiple categories, which created some complications in the analysis. We then gave each participant exercise. In the interest of expanding our sample size and getting more perspectives on tourism priorities I ca rried out another series of workshops with the local high school (colegio) and repeated the ranking activity. As shown in figure 3.1 1 , the highest priority for the younger generation was adventure tourism, as they thought this would bring in more tourists and reflected their own interests in tourism activities. The five part framework was altered to separate adventure and nature tourism and combine all hospitality related goods and services. The full results of the pebble distribution rankings in the commun ity workshops in GDO can be found in Appendix 1. GDO Rank Colegio Priority Segment Nature 1 Adventure Agrotourism 2 Agrotourism Lodging 3 Lodging Culture 4 Culture Adventure 5 Nature Priority Attraction Homestays 1 Camping Orchids 2 Guava Tour Butterflie s 3 Lecherias Tour Lecherias Tour 4 Waterfalls Guava Tour 5 Cabanas Figure 3.11 Difference is priorities between GDO community and GDO colegio
48 Visioning and Pathways exercise, where we asked the whole group to envision tourism in ChirripÃ³ in ten yea rs, then put them their topic focusing on the top three ranked tourism attractions in their category. The next step was to have the groups think abo ut the pathway for achieving the vision, thinking about who, how, and what would need to be done in the short, middle, and long term. The long term visions included aspects of creating a physical environment that would be adequate for any type of visitor and ensuring that the flora and fauna were protected and conserved. Initial steps included identifying priorities within the area, such as which sender os needed to be built or what products would be featured in an agricultural feria . Trainings were highlig hted as necessary steps by most groups and were focused on language, client services, and guide training. Construction of dormitories, and observator ies and gardens to showcase flora and fauna. Groups were asked to think about who would be responsible for each activity, which led to discussions of whether things would be constructed individually or collectively. Most groups also included promotional ac tivities such as sponsoring a national guava & orchids festival and competitions that would attract cyclists, hikers, and equestrians. Many groups and participants also commented on the need for studies of local ecological and social conditions and impact assessments, which are frequently carried out in preparation for development projects across the country. The visioning and pathways exercise was useful for getting participants to consider what the future of tourism might look like and the logistics of ac tually making it happen. As usual, time was a constraint and in order to make the activity more productive a follow up workshop would be ideal for formulating concrete steps and distributing responsibilities among participants. Indigenous Priorities As on ly two indigenous people came to the workshops we had to work much harder to seek out indigenous views on tourism and development priorities. I set to work on learning some CabÃ©car phrases and greeted everyone in the traditional way. Enlisting the help of a local ATAP we arranged weekly meetings where I would go to his office in the health center and we would exchange language lessons. This had the added benefit of gaining me access to the ATAP survey data (ASIS) on health, housing, and sanitation that the ATAPs collect every year as they do their house visits. Meeting with CabÃ©car Leaders Having finally gained the trust of some key individuals, we were able to call a meeting with some CabÃ©car leaders, including representatives from CoopeOroNimarÃ, the ADI C, Gestores Comunitarios, members of CoopeduchÃ, and other individuals from nearby communities. This meeting provided an opportunity to discuss current issues in the district related to tourism and development plans, learning that Gestores Comunitarios had organized out of discontent with the ADI C and the feeling that the views of the CabÃ©car communities were not being represented by the ADI C. In a fortunate turn of
49 events , I learned that the Gestores had recently carried out a participatory diagnostic in 23 communities, finding that the number one priority was improving the access pathways ( vÃas de acceso ) throughout the reserve. At this meeting we also discussed views and ideas of tourism, and though the representation was clearly biased towards men in le adership positions, they provided some excellent feedback on the diverse views held in different communities, noting that there was in general a lack of understanding about what tourism is and that there are many communities which are hesitant, or even hos tile, to outsiders coming in. From this meeting I was able to arrange follow up activities in indigenous communities, including a meeting and mapping in Quetzal, a workshop with the community of NimarÃ, and a mapping visit to Paso Marcos and Bajo Pasos. We also planned a follow up meeting to discuss how to create a participatory process for planning that would address the varied interests and concerns of communities and incorporate the improvement of access within the reserve (for more information see Appen dix 3 Meeting and Mapping in Quetzal An ADI C member and CoopeduchÃ affiliate from Quetzal expressed interest in having us come to his community and meet with the headmaster of the school and de facto community leader. The meeting centered around their idea that they needed one respected person, Reynaldo, to begin with tourism so that people could see and understand how it would work. They talked about the wealth of cultural artifacts in the community and thought quetzale Ã±o s would be very interested in constructing a traditional lodge to display these like a museum. We also discussed the community and individual survey methods that they thought would be most appropriate for inclusion into the planning proposal. Th e follow up visit entailed a day long hike to map the community and surrounding areas. I was able to talk to many people in several communities and ask questions about cropping systems, community organizations, gender issues and tourism interests. As outco me of this adventure we designed a preliminary Tour to Quetzal and promotional materials to be distributed in 2 hostels in Turrialba (see Figure3. 1 2). Figure 3.14 Promotional Flyer for Tour in Quetzal Figure 3. 1 2 Promotional material for a tour to Quetzal
50 Community resource inventory and tourism workshop in NimarÃ Working with 2 Gestores and founders of CoopeOroNimarÃ we planned a workshop in the community of NimarÃ. The icebreaker activity consisted of making a map of the community of the earthen floor of the community lodge and having each person introduce themselves and explain where they lived and what they did. In contrast to the same activity carried out in the Colegio in GDO, the participants made the communal areas, such as the school, church, and soccer field, enormous and added their own houses as almost a miniature afte rthought (see photos, F igure 3. 1 3) . This representation reflected the communal and collective emphasis that came out of the resource inventory and tourism dialogue that followed (results discussed above). The number one priority of participants was to have trainings on what tour ism is and how it might work in their community. Implications process. Through the participatory process we developed they would be able to get more i nput from communities throughout the reserve and in doing so gain an understanding of the diversity of priorities within the CabÃ©car population. Tourism in the region simply will not work without the support and participation of the indigenous community. The findings of the Gestores participatory diagnostic provided the perfect opportunity to combine local priorities of transportation infrastructure with tourism development. Given that the information collected for the market analysis indicated that long distance trekking would be a viable tourism product, we developed the proposal to leverage investments for meeting both goals. Figure 3.13 Workshop photos of mapping in the Colegio in GDO & NimarÃ
51 3. Local Level Information As discussed previously, this step involves collecting local level information about livelihoods, resources, vulnerability, and ways in which these components interact. Methods for collecting these data included a mix of communication with local and external stakeholders, traditional research and investigation, and participatory workshops. Community Livelihood Capitals Inventory In an attempt to utilize the appreciative approach we carried out participatory resource inventories in the communities of GDO, Santubal, and NimarÃ, and to broaden the results also carried out similar activities with individ ual groups including students from the high school, the orchids group, and the Productores de Leche. Through these different groups we were able to gain a broad perspective of the resources and relative values across socio demographic perspectives. The met hod involved an initial discussion of the different kinds of community capitals and then, either all together or in small groups, the creation of an inventory of all the resources which have value in the community, followed by a discussion about their rela tive value and importance. In community wide workshops we encouraged a broad understanding of the capitals, however individual groups were more focused on capitals that have value for their specific interests in tourism planning. Natural Human Social Physical Financial Natural resources, natural attractions, sites of scenic beauty Local knowledge and capacities (including for tourism: guides, languages, hospitality knowledge) Existing community organizations, inter institutional organizations, mecha nisms for collaboration Infrastructure and facilities (transportation, waste management, community and private facilities) Potential sources of investment (activities and funding organizations) Figure 3 .14 Livelihood Capitals & their components for tour ism planning
52 The table above (Figure 3. 14 ) provides the basic definitions we used in conceptualizing and explaining the five types of capitals or resources. In GDO , participants were grouped and asked to list all of the resources in the community for one type of capital. We then had them discuss in their groups the relative importance of each resource and rank them by relative importance in the day to day lives of the community and possible role in the development of TRC. The natural resources group r anked mountains first, broadly conceived as the wilderness areas and resources within them, followed by plants used for cooking, medicinal purposes, and the orchids project. Insects were given a high relative rank due to the group having a participant with extensive entomological knowledge and income from selling specimens to international collectors and giving tours of his mariposario. Rivers and waterfalls came in fourth and were highlighted for their beauty and for providing the products which were commonly thought of as highly valued natural resources . The human resources were quite different between GDO and NimarÃ, with the Tico population focusing on trainings they had received from INA in touri sm and other livelihood strategies. Participants in NimarÃ highlighted traditional knowledge of medicine, arts & handicrafts, cooking, and the reproduction of natural resources and agricultural skills. Natural Resources Gra no de Oro Rivers Animals (wild and domestic) Plants o Orchids o Medicinal plants o Species for eating Insects o Butterflies o Beatles Waterfalls (Paths, semi paved roads, trochas) NimarÃ River s Mountains Swimming hole Vegetation in the paths Waterfall Agricultur e Flora y fauna Domestic animals Fig 3.15 a Natural Resources nventory Human Resources Grano de Oro Trainings from INA o Client service o Tourist guide Artistic Abilities o Singing, theater, mÃºsic, artesanÃa, painting Horse tour guide Knowledge of insects Capabilities/ INA trainings: o Orchids o Raising Tepesquintles o Food handiling & o Jellies and jams o Cheese o Insemination o Tilapias o OrgÃ¡nic Fertilizers o Accounting o OrgÃ¡nic Bananas o Cultivation of coffee o Blackberries o Garden vegetables NimarÃ Tradition al art/handcrafts Teachings in construction Cooking o Fruits, vegetables, tubÃ©rs Agriculture Reproduction of natural resources o Trees, fruits Natural medicine Figure 3.15 b Human Resources Inventory
53 In Grano de Oro it was difficult to explain the nuances of social capital and cooperation so the facilitator of their group had them focus on organizations within the community. ranked the health organization as the most important and especially the Indigenous ATAPS. Their group had a milk producer in it and they ranked the Assoc iation of Milk Producers second. They highlighted the schools and associated groups as third saying that education is important and the schools provide an area to organize the people. Religious groups came in fourth with discussion centered around the Cath olic church. Number five was the Development Association of Grano de Oro (ADI GDO) social resources and social capital and the participant s highlighted how the community worked together for the protection of the environment and natural resources. They also highlighted collective efforts to construct a new path through the efforts of CoopeOroNimarÃ. They also ended up listing all of the organ izations in the community, highlighting the Gestores and the Church as important for organizing people and also connecting with people and organizations from outside the community. Physical capitals always began with the plaza de fÃºtbol , or soccer field , w hich plays an essential role in bringing together people from different communities and is the central location where most people spend their Sundays. The first resources listed generally centered on spaces where people got together, such as the community (s alon c omunal ), or traditional meeting houses, in addition to transportation infrastructure such as roads, bridges, and pathways. Privately held resources such as housing and farms were generally added last if at all. Financial Capital was difficul create the impression that we would be asking people to contribute their own money to tourism development, and neither did we want to start a discussion about poverty. In NimarÃ, I left out the financial resources altogether due to time constraints, and in GDO we asked people to think of activities and strategies for raising money for tourism projects. They thought the best option for getting tourism Social Resources Grano de Oro Productores de Le che (Milk Producers) AsociaciÃ³n de Desarrollo (Local development association) CoopeduchÃ CEN (school related group) Productores de banana High schools Religious groups EBAIS/ATAPS (health center/ workers) NimarÃ CoopeOroNimarÃ Junta de Education Asociaci Ã³n de Desarrollo Iglesia Deporte Gestores comunitarios ( community advisors ) Figure 3.15 c Social resources inventory Physical Resources Grano de Oro Football field Schools and highschools Health Clinic CEN (educational group) Bean collection area & bean machine Churches School Cafeterias Stores Houses for lodging NimarÃ School Church Pla za de futbol Farms Ranchos culturales Paths (finished and under construction) Figure 3.15 d Physical resources inventory
54 money was through asking external organizations for help. They also came up with culture and sporting festivals, Bingos, and selling tamales, as viable options for raising funds. The table below (Figure 3.16 ) shows what type of information was collected through the participatory inventory and how the different types of resources fit into the planning process. The middle columns list what other data still needed to be collected and methods for collecting it. This was used to plan the next steps and follow up activities for progressing toward planning objectives. Many of the resources highlighted as natural capital went directly into the inventory of possible tourism sites prepared for the ICT. The results from the social capital inventory were used to inform the stakeholder analysis and strategy for increasing participation. Much of t he other information was used to inform logistical aspects of planning and tourism development. As described in the other sections, we were able to carry out all of the follow up activities in at least a preliminary fashion. Figure 3.16 Capital Inventory data & examples of how it was used to inform following activities for planning Financi al Resources Grano de Oro Sporting fesitval Dances Bingos Institucional help Sales of tamales Bake sales Cultural Fairs o ArtesanÃa o Traditional dance o Typical food Figure 3.15 e Financial resources inventory
55 Livelihood and Local Go vernance Information (interviews, observation, ATAP reports, survey s ) To supplement the information provided by the participatory resource inventory I looked to other methods and sources for more information on livelihoods and governance. Existing data fro m local organizations included the 2010 ASIS survey carried out by the ATAPs which provided valuable information on socioeconomic and health data. Selected in dicators are found in Figure 3.17 and are organized by association with forms of livelihood wealth . The data shown above indicates a low level of general development in the region, which contrasts sharply with the rest of Costa Rica. The differences in population distribution, as depicted in the population pyramids (Figure 3.18 ), show how Costa R ica as a whole has moved toward a distribution associated with Figure 3.17 Selected socioeconomic indicators for the district of ChirripÃ³ . Data from ASIS 2010 by relationship to types of livelihood wealth Figure 3.18 Population pyramid of ChirripÃ³ (source ASIS, 2010) compared to the national distribution (source UN ESA, 2010)
56 more developed countries while the district of ChirripÃ³ is still characterized by high birth rates and shorter life expectancy. The majority of the disease burden comes from illnesses associate d with environmental risk factors, largely stemming from lack of access to improved water and sanitation and the predominance of the use of leÃ±a as cooking fuel. In children under ten respiratory infections make up the largest portion of the disease burden , followed by intestinal parasites and acute diarrheal infection. Implications for planning in ChirripÃ³ Th is information highlight s not only the components of livelihood strategies in the region, but the indicators reveal insights into the vulnerability context of an impoverished, isolated, and largely illiterate population. The people of ChirripÃ³ enjoy few of the benefits of modern development such as access to electricity, improved water and sanitation, and accessible health services. It will be of prim ary importance that tourism investments are balanced across all forms of capital and made to benefit not only future visitors, but the entire population. Local level data from the surveys can be used as baseline indicators to measure the broad impacts of d evelopment activities, however future planning activities will require the identification of specific indicators to understand the impacts of tourism specifically on social, economic, and environmental conditions which correlate to the goals and priorities of local people. While I was able to collect much information regarding the local context, important environmental aspects remain to be researched and inventoried. The proposal for planning in ChirripÃ³ outlines the process for collecting livelihood and resource use information at the community and household levels, then using the information for zoning of recreation areas, including recreation free zones in the communities which are not interested in tourism development. The plan for senderismo combines the indigenous priority of improved access ways with a funding strategy that incorporates public programs and future tourism income.
57 4. Meso and Macro Level Information Instead of focusing on livelihoods and resources this step takes more of a political ecological approach, evaluating relevant information at broader scales and interactions between them. In keeping with a holistic approach encompassing all five livelihood sectors, the previous step highlighted specific local level information ac ross sectors; this section seeks to place that information conceptually within the larger social, economic, and environmental systems (see Figure 3.19 ). The following discussion highlights some of the most important external sociopolitical and economic dri vers identified by local and external stakeholders. The figure below depicts how local level livelihood, resource, and governance factors interact across sectors and scales, highlighting some key regional, national, and international drivers of local lev el change. Economic considerations impact the ability to invest in physical infrastructure which can provide improved technology for natural resource use and management and access to improved water and sanitation; transportation for access to markets and delivery of health, education, and other basic human services; facilities for producing value added goods and services; and common areas for carrying out social and governance activities. Economic resources also allow for investments in improving human capital, however policies promoting economic growth can result in an imposition of worldviews and a Figure 3.1 9 Local level information within meso & macro level context, interactions across scales and sectors
58 social disruption at the local level. Environmen tal components include the natural resources which are the basis of livelihood and economic activities in the district, and the way in which the resource base is impacted by extraction and construction of physical capital and infrastructure. Natural resour ce use is determined by local knowledge and traditional methods of agricultural production and harvesting of forest and water interconnected parts of a larger cosmovisiÃ³n , which manifests itself in the traditions, customs, and spiritual activities and provides the foundation of social organization. These social foundations of how people interact and organize themselves in turn provide the structures through whic h governance activities occur: deciding who has access to which resources, how they will be used and managed, and how the benefits and costs are distributed within the community, both directly and through collective investments in public goods. Socio pol itical Context Sociopolitical information was collected through traditional research, government documents, and communications with local and external stakeholders and focused on policies which have impacted social and development outcomes in the reserve. The reserve has historically been excluded from government programs stemming from isolation and lack of political will on the part of the government; this history today is manifest in the lack of access to basic services (Meneses, 2010). In the last two de cades the district saw the establishment of its first schools, and more than a decade later the establishment of a health outpost in Grano de Oro with a network of primary healthcare workers who travel throughout the reserve (ATAPS). These developments are slowly beginning to impact the development indicators of the region. A complementary conditional cash transfer program ( AVANCEMOS ) was recently established and is providing money in return for school attendance and vaccination compliance. In addition, al l of the indigenous living within the reserve qualify for federal seguros , as they are without employment opportunities or income, and the state also provides housing vouchers which contribute the materials needed for the construction of a typical modern bono been able to capitalize on this policy, there are concerns about the cultural ramifications as communities closer to GDO transition to b ono houses and traditional architectural customs and skills are declining. National policies have had great impacts which are seen alternately as significant steps toward reducing poverty within the reserve, and as increasing indigenous dependence on the state. These government economically productive. These social policie s, in conjunction with the Ley IndÃgena passed in 1977 giving indigenous communities legal communal title to their lands and updated in 1992 to reflect accordance with the ILO Convention #169, have led to many changes within the indigenous institutional co ntext (Ley IndÃgena de Costa Rica, Ley N 6172). Indigenous tenure reform has been both celebrated as a victory for indigenous property rights and harshly critiqued as paternalistic in that it provides a
59 bundle of rights which does not include alienability or individual titles. The law mandates that indigenous groups form an AsociaciÃ³n de Desarrollo Integral (ADI), which acts as the legal governing body and the sole nexus of interaction with the state and public agencies (BariÃ©, 2003BariÃ©, 2003) . The imposi tion of this modern governance institution has led to a shift in power within the indigenous institutional make up, with traditional decision making structures favoring the wisdom of community elders, including women, being replaced with a transition in le adership that favors younger literate males who are able to navigate the bureaucratic and administrative channels which connect the ADI to the state (Luis Meneses, personal communication). The state has also been criticized for their failure to make envir onmental policies functional within the indigenous context, as evidenced by the lack of capacity building for natural resource management planning and the very low representation of indigenous land receiving payments for environmental services, despite the crucial role of reserves in maintaining ecological services such as biodiversity conservation, carbon sequestration, erosion mitigation, and fresh water provision, among others (Personal Communication MINAE representative). Economic Meso and Macro lev el economic information includes the way in which local livelihoods are and could be impacted by regional, national, and international markets. ChirripÃ³ is essentially characterized by subsistence agricultural activities; however the region is also known for its high quality organic beans which are collected by the ADI C, sorted, polished, and sold to a single European company for export. The Tico population of ChirripÃ³ produces other agricultural goods including bananas and coffee for export, along with m ilk for regional and national markets. While there is very little processing of agricultural products, CoopeduchÃ has recently opened up a guava pulp processing plant, marking only the second investment in the region towards value added agricultural produc ts. For the purpose of this analysis I focused on tourism markets in order to better understand the regional, national, and international tourism production system. In order to carry out the feasibility and market analysis I investigated supply and deman d characteristics, carrying out a competitive census, and analysis of national tourism data, a market segmentation analysis and basic value chain assessment. l guides, and agency and operator websites, in addition to interviews with regional and national tourism and hospitality providers and professionals. My intention was to gain a more nuanced understanding of the tourism production system and perceived deman d for the various prospective tourism products highlighted in the resource inventory. With the dual goal of identifying priority areas for investment and increasing awareness and support for the project, I utilized the external stakeholder analysis in conj unction with the OFM typology of tourism stakeholders to identify key groups and individuals for involvement in generating information for planning. The inclusion of potential customers as stakeholders led to the addition of a tourist survey as an importan t element of understanding demand characteristics, with the help of a masters student in San Jose to carry out the survey for her thesis project (results pending). Preliminary results are discussed in the following section, and the analysis is included in Spanish as Appendix 4.
60 Implications for Planning Sociopolitical and economic information is essential for developing an approach for tourism planning, including a strategy for development of targeted investments in tourism projects. My research was fo cused more on the social and economic components, and to fully address the environmental aspect it will be necessary to leverage the support of external stakeholders to provide an evaluation of the biotic, hydrologic, soil, physiographic, geologic, and cli matic components. This information can collected in the same collaborative fashion and the social and economic data, and should be used in conjunction with local level knowledge and ecological models. In order to be worthwhile, this information must be org anized, analyzed, and presented in a way that makes it usable in the planning process. The following section will discuss this process of synthesizing information from diverse sources and translating it for use by multiple stakeholders. 5. Synthesis and Tr anslation The fifth step is not simply a onetime event but a facilitated exchange of information throughout the planning process. The principle of shared learning is a key component of effective multi stakeholder processes. My efforts toward this goal incl uded collecting information from various stakeholders and sources, sharing it among them throughout our continued interactions, and organizing and compiling the data into three principle outputs. Workshops and meetings at the community level incorporated activities designed to share information gathered about tourism through traditional and experiential learning approaches. In turn, the information gathered at the community level was synthesized into reports and proposals to pass along to stakeholders oper ating at the regional and national levels. This process of collecting information from different stakeholders at various scales comprised the central element of the project, and the results are found in the following appendices. These outputs are w ay of synthesizing the data collected throughout the program, however currently the results can only be returned to stakeholders with access to modern communication technology, limited to mainly external and local elites. This means that I will have to re ly upon local elites to return results at the community level, however new developments and the arrival of a new Peace Corps volunteer may make this more feasible. Inventario Participativo The inventory of tourism resources contains the information gathe red in the many workshops and meetings. It identifies existing resources and their associated possible tourism attractions within the five part project framework, discusses next steps in planning for their development and the related existing resources and needed investments. The inventory includes detailed information about the methodologies used and the need to carry out a more detailed inventory within the reserve. It has been turned into the ICT for use in regional tourism planning and has also been se nt to CoopeduchÃ, CoopeOroNimarÃ, and representatives from the CBVCT and MAG. Propuesta de Senderismo The proposal for senderismo ( senderos are paths, senderismo refers to the action of utilizing paths for recreation, such as in trekking) outlines the pla nning process developed with representatives from the
61 Gestores Comunitarios, CoopeOroNimarÃ, and the ADI C with input from individuals and leaders from nearby CabÃ©car communities. The proposal provides a means of establishing indigenous participation as a prerequisite for tourism development in the reserve, establishing a participatory process for collecting planning information from communities within the Reserve including workshops, surveys, and mapping activities. The process is based upon the approach u tilized in Grano de Oro, with several changes made to include feedback from indigenous participants for adapting it to the CabÃ©car context. Disagreement about whether the surveys should be conducted at the community or household level led to the inclusion of a dual survey technique in which community meetings are followed up by household, or finca, surveys aimed at collecting information about livelihood and land use strategies, existing livelihood resources including human and natural resources for tourism , and interest in participating in tourism planning. A goal of the method is to understand the heterogeneity across and within communities in order to develop a planning process that accounts for diverse needs and interests. The inclusion of participatory mapping activities is particularly important given the for increased attention to the role of CabÃ©car cosmovision in determining appropriate land use and zoning. Participatory mapping using scale maps and images provides a way to incorporate social, cultur al, and livelihood information into spatial knowledge. The lack of quality cartographic information will enable community maps to evolve from an essentially blank canvas and help to avoid the imposition of externally defined conceptualizations of the CabÃ©c ar territory. Additional considerations The planning process outlined in the proposal requires high initial investments in time and resources in in clusion of various strategies for garnering additional investments in the construction and implementation phases should help to mitigate concerns about the additional time and resources required in the planning phase. There will be a need for a capable fac ilitator to assist in the process and mediate between stakeholders with a focus on strengthening opportunities for collaboration and mitigating conflict through establishing mechanisms for improved communication. The initial step of training the Gestores i n tourism planning will be particularly important given the expressed concern of indigenous leaders and participants in the NimarÃ workshop highlighting the need for more information about what tourism is and how it works. It will be of utmost importance t o initiate an honest dialogue about the possible negative and positive outcomes of tourism development early on in the process. Finally, given the gender relations and disparities in the participation of CabÃ©car women in the public sphere, it will likely b e necessary to conduct separate meetings or workshops in order to better put appeared to be valued by the other participants, however it remains to be seen whether this will be the case throughout the reserve. Market Study and Feasibility Analysis The Market Study and Feasibility Analysis synthesizes the information collected from various sources and outlines some principle recommendations for the next stages of the planning process, taking into account the lessons learned from the tourism and community development literature. The document
62 describes the findings from activiti es carried out with external stakeholders and tourism providers. Findings highlight an unmet demand for a tourism experience combining indigenous culture with long distance trekking. The famous trek to Cerro ChirripÃ³, a hallmark Costa Rican adventure and T ChirripÃ³, a 3 4 day trek involving visits to CabÃ©car communities and exploration of the CabÃ©car territory, culture, and cosmovision. This fi specialist would expand in each stage as investments allow for more upscale facilities that appe al to a broader market. This process also applies to the development of community rural tourism in GDO, coupled with a broad based strategy offering a multiplicity of tourism products designed to entice visitors to make the arduous journey and provide acti vities for multiple night stays. This strategy also promotes the participation of many groups and households within the community to provide services, allowing for a more equitable distribution of tourism benefits and avoidance of elite capture. The docume nt includes a brief analysis of supply and demand and a market segmentation strategy informed by ICT data and ecotourism planning frameworks. A component of this is the competitive census which details existing TRC operations in Costa Rica highlighting the activities and lodging offered in similar initiatives. Conclusion The evolution of our conceptualization of sustainable development has increasingly highlighted the need for more integrated and holistic approaches that use participatory methodologies to achieve lasting social, economic, and environmental outcomes. Within the fields of conservation and development these participatory ideals have gained traction among practitioners, however opportunities for participation are provided too late and externall y designed projects often lack the flexibility to respond to local level realities and incorporate the priorities of participants. C urrent approaches for planning and recreation management are making similar strides in developing more integrated models tha t incorporate the human side of sustainability. However these models are inadequate for use in the developing context as they fail to consider the importance of balanced investments needed across all types of capitals and methods that serve to build capaci ty for local level governance. Through designing and implementing this project I sought to develop a more participatory planning process that incorporated both the substantial and procedural aspects of sustainability. In developing these methods for genera ting planning information I strove to create a process wherein each activity provided data that was used to inform next steps, while simult aneously promoting participation of diverse stakeholders to lay t he foundations for collaboration . Throughout this p rocess I had to re conceptualize participation as it applies to different stakeholders, utilizing more traditional and extractive methods for engaging external stakeholders and their technical expertise. Participation is not easily won or casually engender ed. It requires seeking to understand the interests of divers e stakeholders, working with them to achieve their own goals and incorporating their views into the very framework upon which the project is based. This necessitated a constant process of synthes izing and translating information, and continuous adaptation of the process, methods, and
63 project itself. Integrating the diverse priorities of stakeholders also required me to look for areas of shared interests in order to create a viable platform for col laboration. Initial planning research establishes the lens through which the project will be developed . I wanted to avoid a narrow and externally defined project trajectory. In this case ChirripÃ³ opportunity to holistically define r esources and priorities, enabling me to increase participation of many stakeholders to develop a variety of tourism products deemed necessary to entice potential tourists to make the journey. The fortunate confluence of local development priorities of tran sportation improvements and interest of both internal and external stakeholders in the development of a tourism trekking opportunity provided an ideal solution. It allowed us to develop a project that would enable investments to meet local needs while prov iding an economically viable and marketable product. Partic ipating in this project afforded some proof that an appreciative approach can work. Local people do have a wealth of resources that are often undervalued by traditional development approaches, and by simply employing a methodology that acknowledges the value of people, their resources, and their capabilities and knowledge of how to manage them, the planning process itself can positively impact their well being. While creativity is essential for cra fting strategies to mobilize existing resources and generate investments in development initiatives, it can be done, and local people can be the ones to do it. for community based tourism has made it glaringly apparent why the vast majority of such projects end in failure. It is not an easy thing to do. Not only does participatory planning require significant investments in time and resources, but the end result has to be an economically viable product that can attract a sustainable portion of the market share. Participation proves messy, and the linear trajectories of to have any chance to keep up with the constant inflow of new information. However, I still believe it can work , given proper time and attention to developing sustainable processes and solutions to the myriad development issues facing marginalized communit ies. Despite the many hurdles that CoopeduchÃ and the communities of ChirripÃ³ mus t overcome, tourism planning activities bodes well not only for the success of this project, but also the many other futu re projects that will require collaboration.
64 References AcuÃ±a, M., & Villalobos, D. (1999). Competitividad del cluster turÃstico de Costa Rica en el marco de la relaciÃ³n Turismo Ambiente. CINPE/UNA. Heredia, Costa Rica . AcuÃ±a, M., & Villalob os, D. (2001). Ecoturismo en Costa Rica: competitividad y sostenibilidad. Revista Ambientico (98), 36 52. Agrawal, A., & Chhatre, A. (2006). Explaining success on the commons: Community forest governance in the Indian Himalaya. World Development, 34 (1), 14 9 166. Ankersen, T., & Barnes, G. (2004). Inside the polygon: emerging community tenure systems and forest resource extraction. Working forests in the neotropics: conservation through sustainable management? , 156 177. Antinori, C., & Bray, D. B. (2005). Community forest enterprises as entrepreneurial firms: economic and institutional perspectives from Mexico. World Development, 33 (9), 1529 1543. Backman, S., Petrick, J., & Wright, B. (2001). Management tools and techniques: an integrated approach to plan ning. The encyclopedia of ecotourism , 451 477. BariÃ©, C. G. (2003). Pueblos indÃgenas y derechos constitucionales en AmÃ©rica Latina: un panorama : Editorial Abya Yala. Bien, A. (2010). Forest based ecotourism in Costa Rica as a driver for positive social a nd environmental development. Unasylva, 61 . Blamey, R. (2001). Principles of ecotourism. The encyclopedia of ecotourism, 2001 , 5 22. Boyd, S. W., & Butler, R. W. (1996). Managing ecotourism: an opportunity spectrum approach. Tourism management, 17 (8), 55 7 566. Brown, K. (2002). Innovations for conservation and development. The Geographical Journal, 168 (1), 6 17. Cashore, B., Galloway, G., Cubbage, F., Humphreys, D., Katila, P., Levin, K., Maryudi, A. , McGinley, K. (2010). Ability of institutions to address new challenges. OpenSpace Research C enter . Chambers, R., & Conway, G. (1992). Sustainable rural livelihoods: practical concepts for the 21st century. CIA. (2012). The World Factbook: Costa Rica Retrieved January 16 2012, 2012, from https:// www.cia.gov/library/publications/the world factbook/geos/cs.html Coria, J., & Calfucura, E. (2011). Ecotourism and the development of indigenous communities: The good, the bad, and the ugly. Ecological Economics 7 3, 47 55 . Cronkleton, P., Bray, D. B., & Medina, G. (2011). Community forest management and the emergence of multi scale governance institutions: Lessons for REDD+ development from Mexico, Brazil and Bolivia. Forests, 2 (2), 451 473. Datta, A. (2007). Threatened forests, forgotten people. In: G. Shahabuddin & M. Rangarajan (Eds.) . Making conservation work: securing biodiversity in this new century ( 165 209 ) . New Delhi: Permanent Black. Datta, A., Anand, M., & Naniwadekar, R. (2008). Empty forests: Large carnivore and prey abundance in Namdapha National Park, north east India. Biological Cons ervation, 141 (5), 1429 1435. Dietz, T., Ostrom, E., & Stern, P. C. (2003). The struggle to govern the commons. Science, 302 (5652), 1907 1912. Driver, B. L. (2008). Managing to optimize the beneficial outcomes of recreation : Venture Publishing. Emery, M., & Flora, C. (2006). Spiraling up: Mapping community transformation with community capitals framework. Community Development, 37 (1), 19 35. Ce nt er f or I n t erna ti on al F or es tr y Re se ar ch . (2 00 6) . Guide to participatory tools for forest communities . J akarta : Evans, K., et al.
65 Garnett, S. T., Sayer, J., & Du Toit, J. (2007). Improving the effectiveness of interventions to balance conservation and development: a conceptual framework. Ecology and Society, 12 (1), 2. [online] . http : // www. ecologyand society.org /vol12/iss 1 /art2 / Gezon, L. (1997). Institutional structur e and the effectiveness of integrated conservation and development projects: Case study from Madagascar. Human Organization, 56 (4), 462 470. Honey, M. (2008). Ecotourism and sustainable development: Who owns paradise? : Island Pr. Koens, J. F., Dieperink, C., & Miranda, M. (2009). Ecotourism as a development strategy: experiences from Costa Rica. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 11 (6), 1225 1237. McCool, S. F., & Lime, D. W. (2001). Tourism carrying capacity: tempting fantasy or useful reality ? Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 9 (5), 372 388. Mehta, L. (2001). Commentary: the World Bank and its emerging knowledge empire. Human Organization, 60 (2), 189 196. Mulder, M. B., & Coppolillo, P. (2004). Conservation: linking ecology, economics, and cul ture . P rinceton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Ostrom, E. (1990). Governing the commons: The evolution of institutions for collective action : Cambridge Univ Pr. Pagiola, S. (2008). Payments for environmental services in Costa Rica. Ecological Economics, 65 (4), 712 724. Russell, D., & Harshbarger, C. (2003). Groundwork for community based conservation: strategies for social research . O xford ,UK : AltaMira Press. Sayer, J., & Campbell, B. (2003). The science of sustainable development: local livelihoods and the global environment : Cambridge, MA : Ca mbridge University Press. Scheyvens, R. (1999). Ecotourism and the empowerment of local communities. Tourism management, 20 , 245 250. Schmink, M. (2004). Communities, forests, markets, and conservation. Working Forests in the Tropics Conservation through Sustainable Management , 119 129. SIDA. (2006). Logical Framework Approach: with an appreciative approach: SEKA/SIDA Civil Society Center. Smith, P. H. (2005). Democracy in Latin America: Political change in comparative perspective : Oxford University Press Nueva York. Stankey, G. H., & Forest, I. (1985). The limits of acceptable change (LAC) system for wilderness planning : USDA. Steiner, F. (2008). The living landscape: an ecological approach to landscape planning : Island Press. Stronza, A., & Gordillo, J. (2008). Community views of ecotourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 35 (2), 448 468. Journal of Applied Ecology, 41 (1), 11 21. Tosun, C. (2000). Limits to community p articipation in the tourism development process in developing countries. Tourism management, 21 (6), 613 633. Tosun, C. (2006). Expected nature of community participation in tourism development. Tourism management, 27 (3), 493 504. Trejos, B., Chiang, L. H . N., & Huang, W. C. (2008). Support networks for community based tourism in rural Costa Rica. The Open Area Studies Journal, 1 , 16 25. Vanden, H. E., & Prevost, G. (2002). Politics of Latin America: the power game . New York, NY: Oxford University Press. West, P. C., & Brechin, S. R. (1991). Resident peoples and national parks: social dilemmas and strategies in international co nservation . T uscan, AZ : University of Arizona Press.
66 WorldBank. (20 12). World Bank Data Retrieved February 14 2012, from data.worldbank.org Wyman, M., & Stein, T. (2010). Examining the linkages between community benefits, place based meanings, and conservation program involvement: A study within the Community Baboon Sanc tuary, Belize. Society and Natural Resources, 23 (6), 542 556. Zeppel, H. (2006). Indigenous ecotourism: Sustainable development and management (Vol. 3) . C ambridge, MA: Cabi. Additional Documents 1. Internal Stakeholder Analysis 2. External Stakeholder Analysis 3. Social Network Analysis 4. Pebble Distribution Ranking: Full results tables 5. Livelihood and Governance Mapping
67 STAKE HOLDERS POSITION S INTERESTS INTERNAL ISSUES POWER RESOUR CES HISTORY /OTHER? Coopeduc hÃ Leadership To promote development in ChirripÃ³ district They advocate fo r the promotion of high investment tourism including rafting and long distance trekking to ChirripÃ³ on a three day route that passes through traditional CabÃ©car no go areas * Success of initiatives promoted by the co op * Increased income for the co op and its members * National recognition * Improved well being of inhabitants of the district * Efficiency in the planning process *Personal & professional recognition Leadership comprised mostly of elites with internal power struggles. Lack of communicati on and participation in decision making ha s alienated many members, both non indigenous TIcos and Indigenous elites. I nsensitiv ity to loca l concerns and some differing view s of CabÃ©car people Have power in that they control all administrative and decision making processes of the co op, have access to resources, technical skills, and external connections to resource providing organizations Likelihood of Engagement: high Access to financial capital and technical expertise, connect ions to external organization s and personal and professional contacts Established three priority areas for development including guava processing, coffee, and tourism. Currently focusing on guava with recent establishmen t of processing plant in Moravia Coopeduc hÃ Affiliates To benefit from tourism through individual participation & service provision They have no single position on the outcome of tourism * Increased livelihood opportunities * Employment * Economic development * Participation in Co op decision making Feel that the cooperative lacks transparency and occasionally exhibits favoritism Not a high level of power as they are not collectively organized/ united, as situation progresses could become more unified Likelihood of All have individual resources (social, physical, financial, and human)
68 development * Transparency administration engagement: moderate Grupo de Orquideas To promote nature tourism in GDO * P rofit from their orchids project * I ncrease livelihood opportunities *P rovide hospitality services *Increase attention to local flora & fauna Group that formed to implement PPD orchids project, schism in the group due to past struggles and competition over PPD resources Some members have influence in the Co op leadership and are community leaders in their own right. Currently provide only tourism accommodati on in GDO Viveros , PPD funds for tourism promotion and signage, local knowledge, educational materials, computer and printer AsociaciÃ³n de conservaci Ã³n y turismo local To develop nature tourism in GDO * Increased livelihood opportunities of memb ers * Increase business in Soda el Dorado & attached rooms * Visitation of the mariposario & viveros of the members *Find markets for insect & butterfly specimen This is the organization w/ Personeria juridica which was put in place for the PPD for conservation of Orchids & tourism development , not all members are in the orchids groups Some members have influence in the community (same as above) Likelihood of engagement: high Facilities for food and beverage, knowledge of local flora and fauna, knowledge of medicinal plants & surrounding areas , connections to external organization s AsociaciÃ³n de Productore s de leche To incorpo r ate agrotourism into tourism development * Provide a tour of lecherias *Gain personeria juridica Disagreement about nature of the association , quality of participation, Influential members of the community whom provide employment Land, lec herias, s ocial capital and human capital,
69 *Provide hospitality services as individuals and collective investments for value added, not all members interested in tourism and income, own much of land that could be used for tourism Likelihood of engagement: moderate individually held financial and physical capital AsociaciÃ³n de P roductore s de Santubal To promote community tourism in Santubal * Increase livelihood opportunities *Provide hospitality services *Obtain resources for investing in community projects *Build community pride and recognition of their efforts None (most cohesive and effective organization involved) Influential community members and members of the CoopeduchÃ leadership Likelihood of engagement: high Social capital, physical capital for hospitality service provision, natural attractions, horses, human capital & capacity for tourism, connections to external support orgs . Grupo de turismo del Colegio To promote adventure and agrotourism *T o create employment opportunities for the future *Obtain capacity building for personal /profes sional development *To not have to leave their communities to find work None As youths have little actual power, though as future leaders many believe they should be given a primary role in tourism planning Likelihood of engagement: Human capital and capacity in tourism services ( official capacitacio n incomplete)
70 *To put the area on the map & meet other people moderate CoopeOro NimarÃ To bring cultural TRC to the community of NimarÃ and develop tourism related enterprise in GDO *I ncrease livelihood opportunities *Garner external resources for investment in community projects *Capacity building *Share and preserve their culture & traditions *Strengthen the power of the Gestores Comunitarios None Have influence & legitimacy as the cooperative, influence in the Gestores Comunitarios, little actual power from the legal standpoint Likelihood of engagement: high Local knowledge, socia l and cultural capital, natural attractions , access to external support Gestores Comunitari os Increase the representatio n of CabÃ©car communities in official decision making Advance development priorities * Improve the vÃas de acceso throughout the reserve * O btain funding for education projects * Improve access to markets & services *Ensure inclusion in ADI C None known at present Have influence& legitimacy as representative and support from outside organizations, little actual power from the legal standpoint Likelihood of engagement: high Social capital, local knowledge, access to support from external organization s Allied with CoopeOroNi marÃ , not with the ADI C, recent participatory diagnostic prioritizing investm ents in access infrastructur e (paths).
71 administration AsociaciÃ³n de Desarrollo de ChirripÃ³ To maintain control over any development within the reserve * To not allow deve l opment of projects within the reserve which are outside their control *Obtain assistance with ADI C administrative activities *National recognition & support Many communities feel their interests are not represented by the current association leadership. L ow female participation in decision making. Lots of power based on the Ley IndÃgena which establishe s them as the legal property owners of the reserve and official governing body of the CabÃ©car people Likelihood of engagement: moderate Cont rol over natural resources within the reserve, access to financial resources from the government Hacienda Moravia Increase tourism business * Protect their business interests *Increase tourist activities in the area *Improve standing within the community *Provide hospitality services None (single entity) High level of power and influence as the largest landholder and business operator in the district. Likelihood of engagement: low to moderate Hacienda & tourism facilities, horses, experienced guide, event space, financial and human capital, tourism expertise Seen by many in the Tico and CabÃ©car communities as acting in self interest and not sharing benefits of tourism. Currently tours to CabÃ©car communities do not share benefits 2. External Stakeholder A nalysis
72 Stakeholders Positions & Interests Context (relationships, involvement, background) Possible Resources (what they have to offer) ACTUAR Costa Rican Association of TRC Promotion of TRC as a national market segment, support sustainable development and local participation in tourism Personal professional connection to current managing director, provided information and documents in interview & correspondence Information & espertise re. tourism markets & logistics, capacity building for TRC, marketing and promotion, access to TRC market segments COOPRENA Cost a R ican Cultural Tourism Cooperative Promote and expand affiliate projects, appeal to new markets (indigenous tourism) Held formal interview with midlevel rep. Not high degree of commitment or support Possible future affiliation, information on TRC & access to edu market segment. CBVCT Talamanca Central Volcanic Biological Corridor Promote regional conservation and biological connectivity, increase participation of Shara Pacuare sub committee Work closely with CATIE and connected me to CoopeduchÃ, have worked previously with members & SHs from Santubal Connections with many people and funding orgs, trainings, logistical support, regional ecological info CATIE Tropical Agricultural Research and Hig her Education Center Promote conservation and development projects, provide learning opportunities for students Initial connection to project through MDP program, have worked on many initiatives in the region Human resources and environmental data, suture students to carry on project UCR National University of Costa Rica Improve status of indigenous population, document CR cultural heritage, researching and learning opportunities for faculty & students Currently working with local schools in the reserve to map and improve pathways, cultural heritage Spatial data and technical expertise, anthropological expertise for organizing and documenting CabÃ©car cultural resources MINAE Ministry of Natural resources, the E nvironment, and E nergy Promote sustainable NRM and environmentally friendly local development & conservation initiatives Current orchids project with the GDO AETL, past project in Sanutbal, CBVCT membership & collaboration other funding orgs (PPD), support for projects & NRM initiatives ICT Costa Rican Tourism Institute Promote CR tourism & expand offerings, promote regional visitation High level of interest and support, made field visit, included Inventory in regional plan Tourism data, sustainability certification, connections to financing orgs, legitimacy, promotion MTSS Ministry of Employment and Social Security Provide employment & income opportunities, promote social security in ChirripÃ³ Working with Gestores & CoopeOroNimarÃ on pat hway construction projects Materials & funding for pathway construction through community organizations Turrialba Hospitality Providers More tourism opportunities, promotion of business, increase understanding & involvement in TRC, increase occupancy, tou r sales, and profits Interviewed and surveyed many hotel operators, provided valuable regional market data, several expressed interest in future collaboration Promotion of ChirripÃ³ tourism products, transportation services, knowledge and expertise of touri sm industry
73 3. Social Network Analysis Membership data from the community survey in GDO was also used to carry out a Social Network Analysis in order to understand the patterns of interactions between individuals and organizations. First, a two mode analysis was carried out which measured the centrality of organizations by individual affiliation, which corresponds to the organizations position and ability to connect diverse members of the community. Figure 3.9 shows the results of the two mode analysis, with the size of the reflects its large number of affiliates des activities. Figure 3.9 Social Network Analysis by organizational affiliation
74 I then carried out two s of membership represented in the thickness of the li represented by the relative size of their node. The analysis highlighted that individuals with membership in a diversity of organizations, those less likely to have members that were active in other gro ups, are best positioned to increase awareness and participation in the project. This analysis is clearly fraught with limitations stemming from the small sample size and sampling bias towards active community members located in GDO surrounding areas. While the distribution of men and women was equal within the sample population, there were only 2 indigenous respondents. While this greatly handicaps the usefulness of the information for broad based participation in planning, I think that with more time to conduct additional surveys the information would be extremely useful for creating a strategy to increase participation. Given more time, the snowball sampling method would have allowed for the inclusion of more respondents from across organizational affiliations and the data would be able to more accurately represent the level of intere st in various segments of tourism development and give a clearer picture of the patterns of interactions among stakeholder groups and individual participants. F igure 3.10 Social Network Analysis by individual connections
75 4. Full Tables of Results from Pebble Distribution Activities: GDO and Colegio
76 4. Livelihood & Local Governance Mapping: Economic activities and interactions with stakeholders
77 Como continuaciÃ³n del Plan Inicial de Senderismo entregado por Ing. Leocadio MartÃnez RodrÃguez , Coordinador de PYMES del INA, este documento elabora el proceso de planificaciÃ³n para una red de senderos del Distrito de ChirripÃ³ y desarrollo turÃstico. Elaborado por Sydney Nilan (MaestrÃa en P ractica de Desarrollo Sostenible de la Universidad de Florida) con Henry Rojas (Coopeduch Ã, Graduado del UCR en Turismo) ; con el apoyo de CoopeOroNimarÃ y los Gestores Comunitar ios de Alto ChirripÃ³ , especialmente de Minor JimÃ©nez y Miguel JimÃ©nez MartÃnez . Reynaldo Segu a GarcÃa de la comunidad de Quetzal Representantes de la AsociaciÃ³n de Desarrollo Inte gral de ChirripÃ³ Con el apoyo institucional del Centro AgronÃ³mico Tropical de InvestigaciÃ³n y EnseÃ±anza ( CATIE ) , y el Corredor BiolÃ³gico VolcÃ¡nico Central Talamanca ( CBVCT ). Con financiamiento de M a cArthur Foundation, Tropical Conservation and Development P rogram de la Universidad de Florid a y la MaestrÃa en Practica de Desarrollo de la Universidad de Florida
78 IntroducciÃ³ n de la Zona y EvaluaciÃ³n del Sitio El distrito de ChirripÃ³ cuenta con una poblaciÃ³n de unos 8,000 habitant es, de los cuales 93% son indÃgena s de etnia CabÃ©car 1 . La densidad poblacional es 7.1 habitantes por kilÃ³metro cuadrado, o 1.17 familias. SegÃºn el Ãndice de Desarrollo Social del Ministerio de PlanificaciÃ³n y PolÃtica EconÃ³mica (MIDEPLAN) de l 2009 el dist rito de ChirripÃ³ ocupa el Ãºltimo lugar, por lo cual se impulsÃ³ su declaraciÃ³n como Ã¡rea de prioridad para apoyo institucional. La tasa de mortalidad infanti l en la zona es cuatro veces mayor a la que la tasa nacional, con la mayorÃa de partos extrahospita larios. Esta falta de acceso a servicios bÃ¡sicos tambiÃ©n se refleja en otros indicadores de desarrollo inte gral. El analfabetismo es mayor al 60% y la pobreza oficial es casi universal. Los medios de vida de los pobladores son mayormente basados en agric ultura de subsistencia. La zona sufre de una deficiencia de infraestructura. El a cceso a la zona es posible Ãºnicamente a travÃ©s del cantÃ³n de Turrialba y la ruta desde la municipalidad es difÃcil y despuÃ©s de Tayutic el camino es de lastre. Dentro de la reserva el transporte es mayormente a pie o en caballo, con pocos caminos aptos para vehÃculos. Tampoco existe infraestructura de electricidad ni agua potable. El clima es variable y lluvioso, lo cual produce situacion es de aislamiento en comunidades cuando la lluvia se hace l os senderos intransitables. Dada esta falta de infraestructura la poblaciÃ³n no tiene acceso suficiente a los servicios bÃ¡sicos ni a mercados para vender sus productos. Actualmente existe un a ofici na de EBAIS (Equipos BÃ¡sicos de AtenciÃ³n Integral de Salud) en la comunidad de Grano de Oro que tiene un grupo de ATAP (Asistentes TÃ©cnicos de AtenciÃ³n Primaria) indÃgenas que brindan servicios de salud a las comunidades de la reserva. El Proyecto Estamos llevando a cabo un inventario de atractivos turÃstic os de la zona para identificar el potencial turÃstico y elaborar un plan estratÃ©gico de desarrollo del mismo . Como gran parte de este proyecto, propone mos la creaciÃ³n de una red de senderos para t odo el distrito de ChirripÃ³. Sin acceso, las comunidades de ChirripÃ³ son relegadas a mantener su estado de sub desarrollo. Una red de senderos es instrumental para mejorar la vida del pueblo indÃgena y proveer los servicios bÃ¡sicos que son los derechos de cada ser humano. El diagnÃ³stico participativo llevado acabo por los Gestores de 23 comunidades de la zona destacÃ³ vÃas de acceso co mo prioridad nÃºmero uno, seguido por educaciÃ³n y salud . El t urismo presenta una oportunidad idÃ³nea para invertir en el desa rrollo integral de la zona, dado que las inversiones necesarias en infraestructura, capacitaciones locales, organizaciÃ³n comunal, y los servicios bÃ¡sicos requeridos para traer turismo tambiÃ©n pueden beneficiar a la poblaciÃ³n local. Como un distrito princip almente agropecuario, los senderos facilitarÃan el acceso a mercados para que los 1 SegÃºn los datos de los ATAP, en 2009 la poblaciÃ³n actual era 6,877 con un aumento promedio de 5% cada aÃ±o
79 SOCIAL Que la organizaciÃ³n del pueblo y la distribuciÃ³n de tareas y beneficios sea justa, compartida, y que el proceso sirva para fortalecer la organizaciÃ³n social y mejorar el bienestar social de todos y todas pobladores. ECONOMICO Que los ingresos se mantengan el proyecto en el futuro y contribuyen al mejoramiento de la vida de todos los pobladores . AMBIENTAL Que las actividades turÃsticas y construcciÃ³n de infraestructura sirvan para la conservaciÃ³n del medio ambiente y no su destrucciÃ³n. pobladores tengan la oportuni dad de vender sus productos y por otro lado mejorarÃan el acceso de instituciones para el reparto de servicios bÃ¡sicos como la salud y educaciÃ³n. A largo plazo, el acceso para el desarrollo de turismo permitirÃ¡ la inclusiÃ³n de la zona en uno de los sectores econÃ³micos de m ayor importancia en el paÃs, con US$2.2 mil millones en ingres os en el aÃ±o 2011, representando el 8.1% del PIB del paÃs (Banco Mundial , 2012 ). La importancia de ecoturismo en el paÃs refleja la demanda existente de oportunidades para conocer la naturaleza, incluso las montaÃ±as, rÃos, bosques, y su flora y fauna . La zona de ChirripÃ³ tiene un alt o potencial de conver tirse en un destin o Ãºnico que combine lo natural y cultural . E l creciente interÃ©s en Turismo Rural Comunitario (TRC), el cual creciÃ³ 46.8% entre 2008 2009 ( ICT , 2010 ) , indica un alto potencial de turismo comunitario en el paÃs. La falta actual de opciones de TRC que c ombinan la naturaleza y aventura con la riqueza de la cultura indÃgena muestra una oportunidad para el desarrollo de turismo en la zona de ChirripÃ³. El turis mo tambiÃ©n representa una forma de mejorar la calidad de vida de la poblaciÃ³n a travÃ©s de actividad es complementarias, las cuales sirven para valorar la vida cotidiana y mantener las costumbres y medios de vi da de las comunidades indÃgenas . El turismo Ã©tnico impulsa el rescate y la conservaciÃ³n de la cultura porque los ingresos turÃsticos agregan valor a las actividades cotidianas, el patrimonio cultural, y los recursos naturales. Sobre todo, el senderismo turÃstico es una estrategia para promover el desarrollo integral de las comunidades de la zona. Por eso, es sumamente importante utilizar la metodol ogÃa participativa del desarrollo integral para que el proceso y sus resultados reflejen las p rioridades de los pobladores, lo cual motivarÃ¡ la sostenibilidad del proyecto en el futuro para que sean los dueÃ±os de su propio destino . La sostenibilidad del pr oyecto resulta no solo de la manera en que se planifica, sino tambiÃ©n de la atenciÃ³n a los aspectos sociales, ambientales, y econÃ³micos:
80 La so stenibilidad viene en primer lugar del proceso de planificaciÃ³n. Para evitar los problemas que suceden cuando la visiÃ³n de alguien mÃ¡s se impone en la comunidad, el proceso deberÃa ser participativo y contribuir al fortalecimiento de instituciones locales y la capacidad local de autogestiÃ³n. Ambiental Social EconÃ³mica /Medio de vi da *Oportunidades potencial positivo de los resultados Incremento de la preservaciÃ³n y conservaciÃ³n de la naturaleza EducaciÃ³n y conciencia ambiental Uso sostenible de la tierra Mejoramiento de servicios e instalaciones EducaciÃ³n Fortalecimiento institucional y aumento de la capacidad para la autogestiÃ³n local Cohesion y cooperaciÃ³n social Promover la cultura local Ampl iar las estrategias de medio de vida Incrementar ingresos DiversificaciÃ³n de la economÃa local y reducir la vulner a bilidad Fortalezas atractivos potenciales Recursos naturales: Biod iversidad y belleza panorÃ¡mica Capital Social: normas existentes de cooperaciÃ³n, confianza, y responsabilidad, las organizaciones existentes y los vÃnculos con organizaciones externas La capacidad para movilizar activos no tradicion ales en vez de los activos financiero s *Amenazas consecuencias negativas potenciales PerturbaciÃ³n ecolÃ³gica debido al de sarrollo de infraestructura La deforestaciÃ³n y la erosiÃ³n Aumento de residuos y contaminaciÃ³n Divisiones comunitarias y perdida de coherencia comunitaria Aumento de la desigualdad Falta de acceso a las instalaciones e inversiones DesintegraciÃ³n cultural Dependencia de turismo La devaluaciÃ³n de medios de vida tradicionales La pÃ©rdida de la base de recursos naturales Desigualdad en la distribuciÃ³n de beneficios Debilidades escasez potencial La falta de accesibilidad Incapacidad para atraer turistas Falta de conocimiento ecolÃ³gico Divisiones intracomunitarias que inhiben la cooperaci Ã³n La falta de participaciÃ³n en el proceso La falta de apoyo de socios Incapacidad para movilizar inversiones Ingresos insuficientes para las actividades La falta de un producto comercial viable Falta de conocimientos y capacidades financier a s **InformaciÃ³n Para planificaciÃ³n y gestiÃ³n EvaluaciÃ³n de recursos naturales EvaluaciÃ³n del impacto ambiental Inventarios de la biodiversidad y Estudio de capacidad de volumen IdentificaciÃ³n de objetivos y prioridades AnÃ¡lisis del impacto social Evaluaci Ã³n de la gobernanza local EvaluaciÃ³n de impactos de medios de vida Inventario de recursos culturales AnÃ¡lisis del impacto econÃ³mico Estudio del mercado y segmentaciÃ³n Plan de gestiÃ³n financiera ValoraciÃ³n de los costos de lanzamiento y operaciones AnÃ¡lisis FODA enfocado en l o s tres pilares de sostenibilidad, * adaptado de Koens, Dieperink, & Miranda, 2009 , **adaptado de Backman, Petrick, & Wright, 2001
81 VisiÃ³n del proyecto A travÃ©s del proceso de planificaciÃ³n participativa esperamo s crear oportunidades para lograr resultados prioritarios para la poblaciÃ³n local y los visitantes. Dado que hay diferencias entre las comunidades y sus objetivos es importante averiguar cuÃ¡les estÃ¡n mejor ubicadas para proporcionar diferentes productos y a spectos de l TRC. TambiÃ©n hay comunidades y pobladores que no quieren desarrollar turismo, las cuale s deberÃan tener oportunidades similares para mejorar sus vÃas de acceso. La i nformaciÃ³n sobre las prioridades e intereses distintos de cada comunidad nos ay udarÃ¡ a identificar las actividades turÃsticas apropiada s y desarrollar criterios de zonificaciÃ³n. AsÃ todos podrÃ¡n partici par en el proceso y compartir los benef icios segÃºn sus propios intereses . Etapa 1: PlanificaciÃ³n Basado en esta perspectiva, prop onemos la implementaciÃ³n de un proceso de planificaciÃ³n participativa para la creaciÃ³n de una red de senderos para promover el turismo y el desarrollo integral de las comunidades. Con la participaciÃ³n de los Gestores Comunitarios, que ya estÃ¡n capacitados en diagnÃ³stico participativo, y el apoyo del CoopeOroNimarÃ y de la AsociaciÃ³n de Desarrollo de ChirripÃ³. El proceso incluye una enc uesta comunitaria (ApÃ©ndice I) , la cual sirve para reunir a la comunidad, abrir la discusiÃ³n de los beneficios y amenazas de turismo, y averiguar cuales son los recursos comunitarios existentes. Nuestros socios tambiÃ©n han destacado la importancia de llevar a cabo una encuesta familiar para entender las actividades econÃ³micas y averiguar cuales son los recursos y atractivos pot enciales de cada familia y su finca (ApÃ©ndice II) . Paso QuiÃ© n QuÃ© Tiempo CapacitaciÃ³n de Gestores Para: Ge stores Comunitarios y la ADI C P or : un socio externo ReuniÃ³n y taller de capacitaciÃ³n para llevar a cabo la encuesta comunitaria y discutir la identificaciÃ³n de rutas y zonas prioritarias 1 mes Encuesta comunitaria Por: Gestores Comunitarios Con: sus comunidades AutoevaluaciÃ³n de prioridades en senderismo y turismo en las comunidades de la zona con una lista de preguntas fÃ¡cil es de completar y mapas grandes de la zona para mar car los senderos y atractivos. 6 meses Encuesta Familiar Por: Gestores Comunitarios Con: sus comunidades Entrevistando cada casa para entender las actividades econÃ³micas y averiguar cuales son los recursos y atractivos potenciales de cada familia y finca. (Al mismo tiempo que la encuesta comunitaria) PlanificaciÃ³n y logÃstica Por: empleado o voluntario Con: los grupos de interÃ©s y socios Digitar y juntar la informaciÃ³n y planificaciÃ³n de logÃstica y constr ucciÃ³n, mapeo, y elaboraciÃ³n de la propuesta oficial 3 meses Talleres del concepto de turismo Por: los G estores , Henry Rojas, u otros Con: las comunidades Para la explicaciÃ³n de los beneficios y desventajas de turismo, medir el nivel de interÃ©s, y elaborar un plan bÃ¡sico 3 meses (durante planificaciÃ³n) CapacitaciÃ³n de financiamiento Para: Gestores y otros grupos y individuos CapacitaciÃ³n en escribir propuestas, empezando con Subsidios de Trabajo 1 mes
82 interesados P or : El INA u otro socio del Ministerio de Trabajo Entrega de Propuestas Empleado, grupos, comunidades Entregar las propuestas de financiamiento a organizaciones e instituciones de apoyo 1 mes C apacitaciones en las comunidades Por: El I NA, u otros socios (ACTUAR, Mini sterio de trabajo ? ) Capacitar las comunidades en bienes y servicios turÃsticos Indeterminado Horario Para llevar a cabo l a primer a fase de planificaciÃ³n estimamos aproximadamente un aÃ±o, pero su realizaciÃ³n dependerÃ¡ del nivel de interÃ©s y entusiasmo de los participantes locales y la capacidad de obtener apoyo externo. Paso s Sept Oct Nov Dic Enero Feb Mar Abril Mayo Jun Jul Ag CapacitaciÃ³n de Gestores X Encuesta comunitaria X X X X Encuesta Familiar X X X X PlanificaciÃ³n y logÃstica X X X Talleres del concepto de turismo X X X CapacitaciÃ³n de financiamiento X Entrega de Propuestas X X X CapacitaciÃ³n comunidades X X X
83 Necesidades Para realizar este proceso buscamos los siguientes recursos humanos y financieros: Recursos Humanos: Facilitador para la capacitaciÃ³ n de Gestores Contratar a una especialis ta en desarrollo comunitario y sist emas de informaciÃ³n geogrÃ¡fica para facilitar este proceso y apoyar con la parte tÃ©cnica de mapeo y logÃstica; T raductor es espaÃ±ol / cabÃ©car ( puede ser por parte de los gestores u otros miembros de la comunidad.) Recursos Financieros: Etapa 1: Salario y materiales de planificaciÃ³n Necesidades y materiales Monto Encuestas Imprimir encuestas , mapas grandes, marcadores, materiales para tal leres 150.000 Especialista A tiempo completo 7.500.000 Materiales GPS Receptor 200.000 Aspectos Adicionales: El proyecto de sender ismo es parte de un plan compr ensivo que ya esta en camino y se constituye por los siguientes componentes: I. Inventario participativo de atractivos potenciales de la zona, de lo cual los resultados del plan de senderismo serÃ a n parte. Componentes del inventario participativo Recursos existentes y situaciÃ³n actual Atractivos potenciales VisiÃ³n a largo plazo Pasos de implementaciÃ³n Inversiones necesarias I I. Estudio del mercado y viabilidad de turismo rural comunitario Componentes del estudio de mercado : AnÃ¡lisis de demanda SegmentaciÃ³n del Mercado Analisis de oferta Censo Comeptitivo Estudio de viabilidad
84 Junto con el inventario participativo de recursos comunitarios y el estudio econÃ³mic o es recomendable ll evar a cabo un estudio ecolÃ³gico . Trabajando con comunidades para documentar la flora y fauna local y averiguar sitios prioritarios de conservaciÃ³n de biodiversidad y preservaciÃ³n de servicios ecosistÃ©micos . Dado el clima variable y lluviosa serÃa recomendable tambiÃ©n investigar los tipos de tierra y aspe c tos geolÃ³gicos para demarcar Ã¡reas inestables y poder ubicar los senderos donde haya menos riesg o de erosiÃ³n .
85 ApÃ©ndice I Encuesta Comunitaria AUTOEVAL UACION PARA LA PLANIFICACION DE LA RED DE SENDERISMO DE CHIRRIPO I. Ruta preferida De donde viene: Por donde pasa: Hacia donde va: Distancia (appx) II. Inventario de recursos para turismo Recursos Naturales: Sitios de belleza y atractivos naturales Recursos Humanos: Conocimiento local del patrimonio cultural CabÃ©car (artesanÃa,medicina tradicional mitologÃa, construcciÃ³n etc.) Capacidades locales en turismo (guÃas, idiomas, servicio al cl iente, manipulaciÃ³n de alimentos etc.) Recursos Sociales: Organizaciones existentes en la comunidad Organizaciones interinstitucionales/de mÃºltiples comunidades Recursos FÃsicos: Infraestructura e instalaciones que puede usar para turismo III. VisiÃ³n de Turismo Prioridades y metas para desarrollar IV. Neces i dades Recursos y materiales para construcciÃ³n del sendero RotulaciÃ³n Capacitaciones Otras
86 Apendice II Encuesta Familiar Nombre : _____________________________________________ Fecha:_______ Edad: ____ ______ G Ã© n ero: M / F Estado civil : ____________________ DirecciÃ³n: __________________________________________________________ TelÃ©fono:______________________________________________ Empleo / Medio de Vida (actividad primaria) :______________________________ Otras actividades productivas o fuentes de ganancia : _______________________ ___________________________________________________________________ Numero de personas en la familia : _______________________________________ Nivel de interÃ©s en participar en la planificaciÃ³n de turismo ( 0=nada, 5= muy interesado):_______________ Ãreas de interÃ©s de Turismo Rural Comunitario: Agroturismo Turismo Cultural Naturaleza Aventura Hospedaje Otra(s): ____________________________________________________________ Recursos familiares/ Atractivos en la propiedad o finca II. Inventario de recursos para turismo Recursos Naturales: Sitios de belleza y atractivos naturales Recurso Si No DescripciÃ³n UbicaciÃ³n Bosque Rio Catarata Naciente de Agua
87 Termales Plantas medicinales Miradores Flora y fauna Otros Conocimiento de familiares en el patrimonio cultural CabÃ©car (artesanÃa, medicina tradicional, mitologÃa, arquitectura etc.) Conocimiento Quien Que InformaciÃ³n de contacto ArtesanÃa Arquitectura tradicional Medicina tradicional CosmovisiÃ³n CabÃ©car Historia CabÃ©car Otros
88 El documento presenta los resultados del inven tario participativo llevado a cabo por Sydney Nilan y Henry Rojas durante Mayo Agosto 2012. El inventario refleja los resultados de talleres y reuniones en las comunidades de Grano de Oro , Santubal, y NimarÃ, la AsociaciÃ³n AgroecolÃ³gica y de Turismo Local de Grano de Oro, la AsociaciÃ³n de Productores de Leche, y con la participaciÃ³n de individuos de otras comunidades cercanas. El siguiente paso consiste en aumentar la participaciÃ³n del pueblo indÃgena a travÃ©s de un plan de senderismo de la zona elaborada con el apoyo de CoopeduchÃ, CoopeO roNimarÃ y otras organizaciones indÃgenas. El plan de senderismo incluye encuestas familiares y comunales como primer paso para ampliar los resultados del inventario y democratizar el proceso de planificaciÃ³n de turismo en la Reserva de ChirripÃ³. El t urismo presenta la oportunidad idÃ³nea para invertir en el desarrollo integral de la zona, dado que las inversiones necesarias en infraestructura, capacitaciones locales, organizaciÃ³n comunal, y los servicios bÃ¡sicos requeridos para traer turismo tambiÃ©n pu eden beneficiar a la poblaciÃ³n local. A lo largo plazo, el desarrollo de turismo permitirÃ¡ la inclusiÃ³n de la zona en uno de los sectores econÃ³micos de mas importancia en el paÃs, con US$2.2 mil millones de ingresos en el aÃ±o 2011, repre s entando 8.1% del PNG del paÃs. El I nventario e s parte de un plan integral que ya esta en camino y se constituye por los siguientes componentes: I. Inventario participativo de atractivos potenciales de la zona de lo cual los resultados del plan de senderismo serÃ a n parte. Componentes del inventario participativo Recursos existentes y situaciÃ³n actual Atractivos potenciales VisiÃ³n a corto y largo plazo Pasos de implementaciÃ³n Inversiones necesarias II. Estudio del mercado y censo competitivo de turismo Ã©tnico, turismo rural comunitario, y turismo de aventura Componentes del estudio de mercado : DescripciÃ³n de producto s /servicio s Productos/servicios complementarios CompeticiÃ³n direct a y indirecta AnÃ¡ lisis de demanda SegmentaciÃ³n del mercado Estudio de viabilidad
89 Resultados Preliminares La investigaciÃ³n del estudio del mercado y las actividades del proyecto muestran la importancia de desarrollar el Plan de Senderismo, no solo para mejorar el acceso de la s comunidades de la reserva sino que tambiÃ©n representarÃ¡ un producto con mejores condiciones para traer turismo a la zona. TambiÃ©n, el comitÃ© de Gestores Comunitarios de ChirripÃ³ llevaron a cabo un diagnostico participativo que en lo cual las comunid ades indÃgenas se destacaron vÃas de acceso como prioridad numero uno del desarrollo integral de la Reserva. Aunque el senderismo presenta la mejor inversiÃ³n en este momento, los productos de los otros subtemas deberÃan ser desarrollados a la vez para no solo amplificar la participaciÃ³n de los pobladores de la zona, pero tambiÃ©n para diversificar la oferta y poder proveer una experiencia turÃstica mas completa. Dado que la infraestructura de la zona y los medios de transportaciÃ³n son de baja calidad es imp ortante presentar un paquete completo de atractivos para que valga la pena viajar a un lugar tan remoto y para motivar la gente para quedarse mÃ¡s tiempo en el sitio. Otra estrategia para superar las condiciones del transporte es converti r el viaje en un at ractivo en si mismo, para lo cual hemos investigado y mapeado los atractivos en el camino de Turrialba hacia Grano de Oro. MetodologÃa La informaciÃ³n del inventario viene de un proceso participativo basado en la metodologÃa de Desarrollo Comunitario Participativo informado por las met odologÃas de desarrollo comunitario participativo y capitales comunitarias , las cuales proponen un enfoque en las recursos existentes de la comunidad en vez de un diagnostico de problemas. Para comenzar hicimos un diÃ¡logo de Turismo Rural Comunitario (TRC) en la comunidad de Grano de Oro para identificar las recursos de la comunidad desde la perspectiva de los pobladores. SegÃºn la metodologÃa de Medios de Vida Sostenibles identificamos las siguientes clasificaciones de rec ursos: Recursos Naturales Recursos Humanos Recursos Sociales Recursos FÃsicos Recursos Financiero Sitios de belleza y atractivos naturales Conocimiento local y capacidades en turismo (guÃas, idiomas, servicio al cliente, manipulaciÃ³n de alimentos etc.) Organizaciones existentes en la comunidad y organizaciones interinstitucionales, de mÃºltiples comunidades Infraestructura e instalaciones que puede usar para turismo Fuentes potenciales de fondos para inversiÃ³n y organizaciones de apoyo Con los resulta dos nos acercamos a los grupos existentes de la comunidad para desarrollar ideas y productos potenciales de la zona. TambiÃ©n trabajamos con los al umnos del colegio para amplia r la perspectiva y con la comunidad de Santubal que ya cuenta con una organizaciÃ³ n de turismo. DespuÃ©s de identificar los recursos y atractivos potenciales investigamos la logÃstica de cada atractivo y trabajamos con los grupos comunitarios para averiguar el nivel de interÃ©s y la visiÃ³n del futuro. En el segundo taller hicimos activida des para crear una visiÃ³n compartida de turismo en la comunidad y los caminos, o pasos, para llegar a la meta.
90 Inventario El inventario de atractivos turÃsticos estÃ¡ dividido en cinco sub temas: Aventura, Naturaleza, Turismo Cultural, Agroturismo, y Ser vicios de Hospitalidad. PRODUCTOS TURISTICOS POTENCIALES PRIMEROS PASOS RECURSOS E INVERSIONES MontaÃ±as y Bosques de la Reserva Actualmente: Grano de Oro y sus alrededores sirven como la puerta hacia le Reserva IndÃgena ChirripÃ³, la cual cuenta con bosques primario s y secundarios lleno s de flora y fauna. Actualmente el acceso a las montanas y comunidades dentro de la reserva es muy difÃcil. VisiÃ³n del f uturo: ConstrucciÃ³n de una red de senderos para el senderismo turÃstico y uso local. Incluso la pr ioridad de desarrollar la cuarta ruta hacia el Cerro ChirripÃ³. A corto plazo: Ya tenemos un plan de senderismo elaborado por el Ingenier o Leocadio MartÃnez de INAPYME y German Loaiza, un guÃa de la zona con mÃ¡s que 40 aÃ±os de experiencia. Estamos traba jando con la AsociaciÃ³n de Desarrollo de ChirripÃ³, CoopeOroNimarÃ, 23 comunidades CabÃ©cares para crear el proceso de planificaciÃ³n de la red de senderos. PlanificaciÃ³n : Estamos elaborando un plan para el proceso de planificaciÃ³n participativo con el ADI C, CoopeOroNimarÃ, y otros grupos interesados. El plan incluye una encuesta para las comunidades para averiguar la ruta preferida (mÃ¡s utilizada y a la vez apta para turismo) , distancia del sendero, atractivos turÃsticos, y recurs os existentes. FÃsico: Equipaje y maquinaria de construcciÃ³n, rotulaciÃ³n. Humano: Alguien para organizar y llevar a cabo el proceso de planificaciÃ³n participativo. Financiero: Depende de los resultados del plan y la distancia. Basado en los cÃ¡lculos del Anteproyecto los costos para construcciÃ³n y rotulaciÃ³n son Y segÃºn una entrevi sta con ICE los materia prima cuestan 1.500 colones/metro , y la inversiÃ³n inicial seria aproximadame nte 1,500,792,000 colones por kilometro Roca Quemada Actualmente: Roca Quemada cuenta con unas paredes de roca aptas para el desarrollo de escalada. VisiÃ³n de futuro: Ofrecer tours a Roca Quemada para escalada como atractivo turismo de aventura y A corto plazo: Reunir con un experto en escalada para averiguar las necesidades en capacitaciÃ³n, seguros, y equipaje. PlanificaciÃ³n: Trabajar con la com unidad de Roca Quemada, mapeo, ubicaciÃ³n y senderos. FÃsico: Equipaje de escalada y equipo de transporte para poder llegar desde Grano de Oro al lugar de escalada Humano: Capacitar unos guÃas locales Financiero: TBD
91 Cataratas Actualmente: Hay muchas cataratas en la zona, incluso una en Santubal y otros en las fincas adentro y afuera de la reserva VisiÃ³n del futuro: ConstrucciÃ³n de senderos y rotulaciÃ³n a las cataratas mÃ¡s grandes y atractivas. A corto plazo : Fijar las locacio nes a travÃ©s de mapeo participativo e incluir las en las actividades de TRC de Grano de Oro y Santubal. PlanificaciÃ³n: Trabajar con la AsociaciÃ³n de Productores de Santubal, dueÃ±os de fincas , y comunidades indÃgenas para la ubicaciÃ³n y mapeo. Incluir las cataratas en la red de senderos. FÃsico: Materiales para construcciÃ³n de senderos lastreados y con barandas, rotulaciÃ³n, mapas Humano: GuÃas capacitados , mano de obra para construcciÃ³n Financiero: Dent ro del plan de senderismo y otra s fuentes.
92 NATURA LEZA Grupo de OrquÃdeas Actualmente: Existen 7 viveros de orquÃdeas en GDO por un proyecto de la AsociaciÃ³n de AgroecologÃa y Turismo Local . TambiÃ©n el seÃ±or Luis Artavia Anchia tiene un mariposario. Junto a Sr. Artavia y otros miembros de la comunidad ya existen un alto nivel de conocimiento local de la flora y fauna. Hay una voluntaria de Francia que esta trabajando con el grupo para crear un plan sostenible para el proyecto y la promociÃ³n de turismo local, incluso una feria de orquÃdeas. VisiÃ³n del Futuro: El grupo ya esta trabajando en desarrollar un tour a los viveros de la comunidad de Grano de Oro, y en el futuro quieren buscar inversiones para una sala de exposiciÃ³n y laboratorio. A corto plazo : El grupo ya esta trabajando en un plan de promociÃ³n y el desarrollo de los productos/tours que pueden ofrecer. PlanificaciÃ³n: Por el grupo mismo y la asociaciÃ³n Otras consideraciones: Con el conocimiento que ya existe en la comunidad y la AsociaciÃ³n podemos juntar la s fuerza s de los recursos humanos para capacitar otras personas y para hacer caminatas enfocadas en la flora y fauna de la zona. FÃsico: Ya existen los viveros y han pedido un rotulo para la entrada a la comunidad. Humano: A largo plazo podrÃa ser beneficial contratar a un biÃ³logo profesional para documentar el conocimiento local y ayudar con la rotulaciÃ³n de la flora de los senderos. Financiero: Recibieron una donaciÃ³n de $20,000 del PPD, de lo cual queda los fondos para promociÃ³n. Cabalgatas Actualmente: La comunidad ha destacado la promociÃ³n de cabalgatas como un Ã¡rea de prioridad dentro del proyecto de turismo. Los miembros de la comunidad ya cuentan con rutas existentes y caballos, pero la cantidad y calidad para tours es desconocido en est e momento. TambiÃ©n la Hacienda Moravia tiene 18 caballos para hacer tours y un guÃa experto. VisiÃ³n del futuro: Ofrecer cabalgatas a los sitios de interÃ©s de la zona. A corto plazo : Abrir el dialogo con el dueÃ±o de Haciendo Moravia (Johnny Soto) para es tablecer una alianza con ellos para hacer cabalgatas y para el aprendizaje de un joven de la comunidad. PlanificaciÃ³n : Mapeo de rutas e inventario de caballos adecuados para hacer tours. FÃsico: Caballos y construcciÃ³n de senderos Humano: CapacitaciÃ³n de otro guÃa Financiero: Un trato con la Hacienda Moravia para compartir beneficios de las cabalgatas de turistas que vienen por medio de nosotros.
93 Avistamiento de las Estrellas Actualmente: Aunque la distancia, aislamiento, y falta de inf raestructura de la zona son problemas para la logÃstica del turismo, resultan tambiÃ©n en una buena vista de las estrellas por la falta de luz. Este presenta una oportunidad de instalar un observatorio, lo cual seria el segundo en todo el paÃs. VisiÃ³n del F uturo: ConstrucciÃ³n del observatorio y promociÃ³n de turismo cientÃfico, tambiÃ©n la posibilidad de juntar la experiencia con la cosmovisiÃ³n CabÃ©car. Junto con la idea del museo, puede formar parte de la experiencia Ã©tnica de la zona. A corto plazo: InvestigaciÃ³n de logÃstica y un sitio adecuado. PlanificaciÃ³n: InvestigaciÃ³n de las inversiones necesarias y la logÃstica, incluso trabaja r con la comunidad de GDO y otra s para medir el nivel de interÃ©s en el proyecto. FÃsico: Materiales para construc ciÃ³n del observatorio Humano: CapacitaciÃ³n/aprendizaje de meteorologÃa; aprendizaje y documentaciÃ³n de la cosmovisiÃ³n CabÃ©car Financiero: Buscar organizaciones para proveer fondos para el proyecto. TURISMO CULTURAL Museo CabÃ©car Actualmente: Los indÃgenas de la zona cuentan con una gran cantidad de patrimonio cultural, incluso un dialecto verdaderamente vivo, arquitectura tradicional, artefactos, y artesanÃa. VisiÃ³n del futuro: ConstrucciÃ³n de un museo CabÃ©car ( Ver la Propuesta elaborada por Henry Rojas) A corto plazo: Como parte de la encuesta comunitaria del plan de senderismo, crear un inventario de los r ecursos culturales, sociales (pe. costumbres, grupos organizados), y humanos (conocimiento de la historia, cosmovisiÃ³n, art esanÃa y construcciÃ³n) existentes. PlanificaciÃ³n : Trabajando con l a ADI C, CoopeOroNimarÃ, gestores de las comunidades, y otros grupos organizados para organizar el inventario y elegir la ubicaciÃ³n del museo. Trabaja r con el antropÃ³logo Salvatierra para consultas y apoyo FÃsico: M ateriales para construcciÃ³n Humano: Mano de obra para construcciÃ³n y artesanÃa, conocimiento del patrimonio cultural CabÃ©car Financiero: Buscar fondos de organizaciones de apoyo para la construcciÃ³n e inversiÃ³n inicial. La propuesta elaborada por Henry Rojas estima una inversiÃ³n inicial de US $8,490
94 Tours a comunidades indÃgenas y caminatas Ã©tnicas Actualmente: Hay tours Ã©tnicos ofrecidos por la Hacienda Moravia que incluyen visitas a comunidades indÃgenas pero la s cu ales no ofrecen beneficios, ni interacciÃ³n, con los pobladores. DiseÃ±amos un tour a Quetzal con Reynaldo Segura GarcÃa como primer paso. VisiÃ³n del futuro : Ofrecer tours pequeÃ±os saliendo de Grano de Oro a comunidades cercanas y senderismo a larga distancia (a Barbilla, Cerro ChirripÃ³, etc.) con la participaciÃ³n de las comunidades CabÃ©cares. Los tours Ã©tnicos se enfoca n en la cultura CabÃ©car e incluyen charlas, ranchos de descanso, muestras de artesanÃa y artefactos. A corto plazo: Trabajar con las comunidades cercanas como parte del plan de senderismo de ChirripÃ³. Pasos e inversiones: PlanificaciÃ³n: Como parte del proyecto de senderismo, identificar comunidades interesadas en participar en el desarrollo de tours. Es sumamente importante que el p roceso de planificaciÃ³n sea participativo y democrÃ¡tico para generar el interÃ©s y proteger las costumbres de la gente. FÃsico: Equipaje y maquinaria de construcciÃ³n de senderos y rotulaciÃ³n. Ranchos indÃgenas para descansar, Ã¡reas de acampar y posadas rust icas Humano: Capacitaciones en servicios turÃsticos para las comunidades indÃgenas (guÃa local, manejo de alimentos, servicio al cliente). Alguien con conocimiento de CBD e informÃ¡tica geogrÃ¡fica para facilitar el proceso. Financiero: Amplio ver Plan de senderismo. AGROTURISMO Guayaba Actualmente: Hay muchos productores de Guayaba en la zona . CoopeduchÃ estÃ¡ lista para comenzar procesamiento en una planta temporal ubicada en Moravia, y estÃ¡ buscando un lote permanente para el futuro. TambiÃ©n estÃ¡n trabajando en encontrar mercados para la venta de pulpa de Guayaba, y elaborando una lista de rec etas y productos para la pulpa. VisiÃ³n del Futuro : Una feria de la guayaba como el producto estrella de la cooperativa, ofrecer un tour de las guayabas, incluso la oportunidad de probar otras frutas exÃ³ticas y productos que llevan la pulpa. A corto pl azo: Trabajar con los Guayaberos de GDO y la reserva para la organizaciÃ³n del tour y la ruta mÃ¡s atractiva. PlanificaciÃ³n : La ruta del tour, una persona de la cooperativa para organizarla, elaborar una lista de otras frutas exÃ³ticas que existen en la regiÃ³ n y donde conseguirlas. FÃsico : Instalaciones para hacer las pruebas de los productos y frutas, vitrinas para mostrar los productos. Humano : Una persona capacitada en eventos, para la planificaciÃ³n y promociÃ³n de la feria Financiero: La inversiÃ³n en instal aciones puede ser por parte de CoopeduchÃ y su estrategia de mercadeo.
95 Frijol Actualmente: La zona produce unos de los mejores frijoles del paÃs, un producto orgÃ¡nico y de calidad que venden para exportaciÃ³n. Hay un centro de acopio en GDO de la AsociaciÃ³n de Desarrollo de ChirripÃ³ donde tienen una maquina para limpiar, separar, y pulir los frijoles. VisiÃ³n del f uturo: Ofrecer un tour del centro de acopio y caminatas a comunidades indÃgenas para ver la producciÃ³n del frijol y aprender de la cultura CabÃ©car A corto plazo: Abrir un diÃ¡logo con la ADI C y el Centro de Acopio y para desarrollar un tour y llevar a cabo el mapeo participativo con sus miembros y productores de frijol. PlanificaciÃ³n: Rutas de la caminata, comunidades cercanas, y precio del tour FÃsico: Senderos Humano: GuÃas capacitados para hacer el tour Financiero : La inversiÃ³n inicial seria poca, y la venta de frijoles a turistas podrÃa ofrecer un ingreso mas alto que reciben actualmente. CafÃ© Actualmente: Grano de Oro tie ne muchos productores de cafÃ© que es de buena calidad. La AsociaciÃ³n de Productores OrgÃ¡nicos de Tu rrialba (APOT) tiene la maquinaria para montar un beneficio en venta . VisiÃ³n del Futuro: Instalar el beneficio y organizar un tour de las fincas y el beneficio, incluso la capacidad de ROAST el cafÃ© para consumo y ventas. A corto plazo: Trabajar con APOT para negociar el asunto del beneficio PlanificaciÃ³n: Trabajar con los productores de cafÃ© y la cooperativa CoopeduchÃ para definir la logÃstica e interÃ©s en el proyecto. Trabajar con los productores de cafÃ© para definir el tour. FÃsico: Equipaje y maquinaria del beneficio, transporte. Humano: GuÃa para hace r el tour, empleados del beneficio. Financiero: Financiamiento para el beneficio. LecherÃas de Grano de Oro Actualmente: Existe en la comunidad una AsociaciÃ³n de Productores de Leche que cuenta con 8 lecherÃas. Ya tenemos un tour planeado y mapeado, co n actividades distintas en cada lecherÃa y el uso de un carretÃ³n para el tour. VisiÃ³n del Futuro : Usar los ingresos del Tour de LecherÃas para i nvertir en las instalaciones y capacidades para procesamiento de productos lÃ¡cteos. A corto plazo : Trabajar c on la AsociaciÃ³n para fortalecer la organizaciÃ³n, apoyÃ¡ndoles en el proceso de cooperativismo , incluso actividades como ordeÃ±ar, cortar pasto, y hacer productos lÃ¡cteos como queso o helados PlanificaciÃ³n: Ya el tour esta planeado, solo falta una reuniÃ³n mÃ¡s para poner el precio, la logÃstica de guÃas, organizaciÃ³n de tareas, y publicidad. FÃsico: Las lecherÃas ya existen pero falta el mejoramiento de unos senderos. Humano: GuÃa, organizaciÃ³n y fortalecimiento de la asociaciÃ³n. Financiero: No es necesario en este momento, inversiones en el futuro serian por parte de la AsociaciÃ³n de Productores de Leche .
96 Servicios de Hospitalidad Los servicios de hospitalidad constituyen un aspecto fundamental de la oferta y experiencia turÃstica. Actualme nte los servicios existentes son bÃ¡sicos, pero suficientes para acomodar cierto tipo de turista. La comunidad de Grano de Oro cuenta con dos bares y dos sodas reciÃ©n establecidas, con otra bajo construcciÃ³n. TambiÃ©n existen unas ocho pulperÃas, un cafÃ© int ernet, y espacios para eventos. Hospedaje SegÃºn los resultados de los talleres participativos existe gran interÃ©s en alojamiento en casas privadas. SegÃºn la encuesta q ue llevamos a cabo en las comunidades de Grano de Oro y Santubal hay actualmente capacid ad para alrededor de 70 huÃ©spedes en casas familiares, mÃ¡s 30 adicionales en la finca de la familia Jones. La Hacienda Moravia, aproximadamente 2km al NE del centro de GDO, cuenta con 12 habitaciones de alta calidad con capacidad para 50 huÃ©spedes. HOSPEDAJE Contacto Capacidad Nombre #/email Casa s Habitaciones HuÃ©spedes En Casa Grano de Oro Henry Rojas cel: 89726081 h.chirri_ra@hotmail 12 26 58 Santubal Ana Elizondo 2206 5332 4 5 13 Finca Los Jones Keiry Sanchez cel: 8 721 9665; keirys2009@hotmail N/A 7 30 Hacienda Moravia Johnny Soto email@example.com N/A 12 50 TOTAL 16 50 151 Entre estas opciones se podrÃan acomodar turistas de varios segmentos. Las familias locales se pueden enfocar en aquellos que bu squen una experiencia cultural (voluntarios, estudiantes, y mochileros). Otros t ipos de turistas con expectativa s y gustos mÃ¡s refinados pueden acomodarse en la Hacienda Moravia. En este momento no tenemos los datos acerca de la capacidad o interÃ©s de las comunidades indÃgenas para proveer hospedaje. La situaciÃ³n actual serÃa suficiente para la primera fase del desarrollo de turismo en la zona. Tenemos la informaciÃ³n de las familias interesadas en hospedaje, y los prÃ³ximos pasos incluyen re unir las para negociar los precios y la logÃstica, incluyendo un estÃ¡ndar de servicio. Unos han sido capacit ados en servicio al cliente y m anejo de alimentos, y otros tienen experiencia en alojar voluntarios extranjeros, pero serÃa necesario averiguar cuÃ¡le s son las capacitaciones que hacen falta y trabajar con la INA para organizarlas.
97 Comida y Bebida Actualmente existen dos restaurantes , Soda el Dorado y Soda Guayabo, en la comunidad de Grano de Oro que sirven una variedad de comida tÃpica y rÃ¡pida (ver menÃºs app.1) Otra soda de comida caribeÃ± a estaba boja construcciÃ³n en el momento de hacer este estudio. AdemÃ¡s hay dos bares, el Llamaron y el Caracol, y lo Ãºltimo tambiÃ©n ofrece un menÃº bÃ¡sico de comida y uso d e la rocola. Eventos Para satisfacer grupos interesados en tener eventos, reuniones, o talleres existen unos espacios pÃºblicos y privados. La comunidad de Grano de Oro cuenta con un salÃ³n comunal, dos comedores escolares, y un centro de acopio de la Asoci aciÃ³n de Desarrollo de ChirripÃ³. AdemÃ¡s , el Caracol tiene capacidad de unos 50 75 personas, y la Hacienda Moravia cuanta con un salÃ³n de baile para cien personas y en su comedor caben unas cinc u enta mÃ¡s . Sumado a esto, la comunidad de Santubal tiene un cen tro de acopio y un comedor escolar, y la Finca la Fortuna cuenta con un espacio para eventos con cocina y habitaciones.
98 Elaborado por Sydney Nilan Master of Sustainable Development Practice University of Florida I. Resumen ejecutivo II. ExplicaciÃ³n del Proyecto III. AnÃ¡lisis de Demanda IV. AnÃ¡lisis de Oferta V. R ecomendaciones Resumen Ejecutivo El Turismo Rural Comunitario (TRC) es un sector del mercado muy especializado y pequeÃ±o pero creciente. Actualmente, la oferta nacional de TRC supera a la demanda, aunque la demanda estÃ¡ creciendo rÃ¡pidamente. Dad a la situaciÃ³n del mercado en este momento las recome ndaciones claves son: Empezar con unos productos distintos Invertir con cuidado y de forma incremental, mientras aumenta la capacidad fÃsica y humana Buscar inversiones del sector pÃºblico y civil, al igual que prÃ©stamos privados podrÃan ser difÃciles de repagar Buscar financiamiento de fuentes sin fines de lucro, enfocando en los beneficios ambientales de desarrollo local integral Invertir en una forma estratÃ©gica, buscando inversiones en instalaciones amigables del medio ambiente y que pueden servir par a el desarrollo de comunidades locales El d esarrollo turÃstico se puede realizar en fases, con una estrategia doble que enfoque en el producto estrella de senderismo en la Reserva ChirripÃ³, con productos complementarios en las comunidades de Grano de Oro y Santubal, que servirÃan como la puerta hacia el mundo CabÃ©car y destinos en sus mismas. Identificar varios productos para empezar, dado que el viaje es largo y los turistas van a necesitar suficientes actividades para una estadÃa mÃnima de 2 dÃas Promocio nar el viaje como una ac tividad y aventura en sÃ mismo Desarrollar los prod uctos que tengan mÃ¡s interÃ©s para la poblaciÃ³n local y que tambiÃ©n sean viables en el mercado regional Productos viable para l a primer a fase de desarrollo incluyen: Senderismo, to urs de artesanÃa y cultura CabÃ©car, tours de agroturismo (lecherÃas, guayaba), y tours de naturaleza (orquÃdeas, mariposas, vista de aves, caminatas)
99 Estos productos tienen la ventaja de que requieren muy poca inversiÃ³n inicial, incluso hay algunos que ya estÃ¡n desarrollados, y que servirÃan como una base ampli a de l turismo comunitario PlanificaciÃ³n del desarrollo de turismo deberÃa llevarse a cabo con la participaciÃ³n de comunidades locales La p romociÃ³n es un aspecto clave para aumentar la demanda y conciencia de TRC y ChirripÃ³ , los cuales son poco conocidos . En la primera fase es recomendable un enfoque en turistas nacionales es recomendable TambiÃ©n, se puede empezar con turistas libres e indepe ndientes internacionales que ya estÃ¡n en Turrialba PromociÃ³n con los hoteles en Turrialba es la mejor opciÃ³n para empezar Primero h ay que poner el distrito en el mapa geogrÃ¡fico, para que este aparezca en el mapa turÃstico ExplicaciÃ³n del Proyecto Este Estudio del mercado fue llevado a cabo como parte del estudio exploratorio de turismo en la zona de ChirripÃ³. AdemÃ¡s de un inventario participativo de atractivos potenciales juntamos una lista de atractivos de la zona. A travÃ©s de entrevistas e investigaci Ã³n de las prioridades locales, junto con recomendaciones de expertos externos, la investigaciÃ³n se destacÃ³ senderismo a larga distancia dentro de la Reserva IndÃgena de ChirripÃ³ con unas actividades complementarias en las comunidades no indÃgenas de Grano de Oro y Santubal. Las actividades de la investigaciÃ³n fueron lle vad as a cabo por Sydney Nilan, estudiante de la MaestrÃa en Practica s de Desarrollo S ostenible de la Universidad de Florida, con el apoyo de Henry Rojas y la cooperativa local CoopeduchÃ. E l distrito de ChirripÃ³ es el mÃ¡s pobre y menos desarrollado en todo el paÃs que cuenta con una poblaciÃ³n mayormente indÃgena del grupo CabÃ©car . Dentro de la reserva de ChirripÃ³ hay muy poco acceso a servicios bÃ¡sicos, y se caracteriza por una falta de infr aestructura e instalaciones. SegÃºn un diagnostico participativo llevado a cabo por los Gestores Comunitarios de ChirripÃ³ , la prioridad nÃºmero uno es el mejoramiento de l a s vÃas de acceso dentro de la reserva. En las comunidades no indÃgenas las prioridades se enfocan en el desarrollo de turismo comunitario tÃpico, con Ã©nfasis en agroturismo, y ecoturismo basado en la naturaleza. Las prioridades son distintas pero estÃ¡n en conflicto y pueden ser complementarias. El problema de geografÃa y aislamiento signifi can que, mientras el TRC puede funcionar para impulsar el desarrollo integral de la zona, tambiÃ©n hay que invertir con precauciÃ³n dad as las dificultades en tr aer turismo a una zona tan remota . La metodologÃa de la investigaciÃ³n incluyÃ³ una combinaciÃ³n de v arias tÃ©cnicas, unas tradicionales y otras participativas. Hicimos entrevistas con expertos en TRC del sector civil, incluso representantes de ACTUAR y COOPRENA y varias conversaciones con representantes del ICT . Ll e vamos a cabo una encuesta con los hotel eros de Turrialba, dado que ellos sirven como parte clave de los canales de
100 distribuciÃ³n de turismo en la regiÃ³n, representando el eje principal de conexiÃ³n entre turistas y actividades turÃsticas. No hicimos entrevistas con las agencias de turismo ni raf ting porque los actores locales expresaron preocupaciones de trabajar con ellos. El estudio tambiÃ©n incluyo un anÃ¡lisis de literatura, documentos, y datos del mercado turÃstico nacional e internacional junto con documentos de empresas de TRC, agencias de viaje, y sitios de web, incluso libros de turismo y guÃas tradicionales y electrÃ³n ica s. AnÃ¡lisis de la Demanda Ecoturismo y turismo comunitario en el mercado mundial Turismo Rural Comunitario proviene de la oportunidad de combinar ecoturismo, o turismo natural, con turismo cultural, los dos segmentos que estÃ¡n creciendo mÃ¡ s en el mercado mundial. Cada vez mÃ¡s viajeros estÃ¡n buscando oportunidades recreativos basados en naturaleza y cultura, y estÃ¡n dispuestos a pagar mÃ¡s . Un estudio reciÃ©n cumplido en los estados unidos encontrÃ³ que 83% de viajeros estÃ¡n dispuestos a partic mÃ¡s para amigables . 2 Este ha contribuido a la can tidad de negocios que se tÃtulo es en no mbre y no practican ecoturismo de verdad . 3 Como segmento del mercado, los ecoturistas tienen alt o s niveles de educaciÃ³n e ingresos, y la mayorÃa son profesionales . 4 En cuanto a gÃ©nero , mujeres componen el mercado mÃ¡s grande, y de edad los turistas entre 25 54 aÃ±os son los mÃ¡s probables de participar en ecoturismo. Con la jubilaciÃ³n de los aÃ±os y mÃ¡s constituyen en segmento creciente, pero con gustos diferentes q ue requieren mayor inversiones en in stalaciones y productos de lujo, t ambiÃ©n se puede dividir el mercado por esti lo de viajar o interÃ©s. Los libres e independientes constituyen un segmento grande q ue estÃ¡ creciendo junto con la tecnologÃa de informaciÃ³n y comunicaciÃ³n. Vacaciones compradas por paquete con todo incluido tambiÃ©n estÃ¡n creciendo debido a las ofertas y descuentas d isponibles por in ternet . El Turismo en Costa Rica El Turismo es un sector prominente en la economÃa de Costa Rica, representa 8.1% del Producto Interno Bruto (PIB) con U . S .$ 2.2 mil millones por aÃ±o en ingresos y la llegada de dos millones de turistas al paÃs . 5 Los t urista s internacionales vienen de todas partes del mundo y su estadÃa pro media es once dÃa s. El gasto promedio por persona es U.S. $1,302 , lo que resulta en un promedio de casi U.S. $120 por persona po r dÃa. La temporada alta va de enero a marzo, durante la cual hay una ocupaciÃ³n hotelera de mÃ¡s del 70%. Los meses de temporada baja suceden durante s eptiembre y octubre, con ocupaciÃ³n menor a 50%, 2 Hawkins, D. and K. Lamoureux, Globa l growth and magnitude of ecotourism. The encyclopedia of ecotourism, 2001: p. 63 72. 3 Honey, M., Ecotourism and sustainable development: Who owns paradise? 2008: Island Pr. 4 Backman, S., J. Petrick, and B. Wright, Management tools and techniques: an i ntegrated approach to planning. The encyclopedia of ecotourism, 2001: p. 451 477. 5 CIA. The World Factbook: Costa Rica . 2012 [cited 2012 January 16 2012]; Available from: https:// www.cia.gov/library/publications/the world factbook/geos/cs.html .
101 pero durante todo el aÃ±o la variaciÃ³n en ocupaciÃ³n hotelera no es tan significativa 6 (ICT) . En la regiÃ³n de Turrialba la mayorÃa de los turistas vienen po r el rafting, la cual tiene una temporada alta entre junio y octubre , dando un poco mÃ¡s de estabilidad al turismo regional (LP) . TRC Nacional El sector de Turismo Rural Comunitario es una pequeÃ±a parte del mercado turÃstico del paÃs, pero es una part e creciente. Entre 2008 y 2009 creciÃ³ el nÃºmero de turistas internacionales participando en TRC un 46.8%, llegando a 72,910 personas en 2009 (ICT). En 2010 cambiaron la forma de preguntar sobre TRC y actividade s asociados y el numero creciÃ³ en un 35.7% de visitantes no nacionales. Con la nueva pregunta tambiÃ©n se mejorÃ³ el entendimiento de TRC como sector. La siguiente tabla se presenta los resultados de la encuesta llevado a cabo por el ICT en 2010, con las actividades mÃ¡s relevantes segÃºn su popularidad. Datos ICT TRC 2010 Servicio o actividad % Servicio o actividad % AlimentaciÃ³n 57.6 Sala de reunions 3.8 Hospedaje 39.2 Cabalgatas 3.6 Tour por Ã¡reas protegidas 27.5 Playa 2.5 Visita a rÃos o cataratas 22.4 Conocer gente 1.9 ObservaciÃ³n de Aves 8.3 Visita a museos 1.8 Visita a comunidades indÃgenas 7 Caminatas 1.7 Visita a mariposario 7 Visitar Iglesias 1.2 Tour a plantaciones agrÃcolas 6.9 Surf 1 Transporte 6.3 Pesca 0.8 Compras 4.7 Cultura 0.4 Conocer el lugar 3.8 Cosechas 0.3 Menos de 40% de turistas participando en TRC pasaron la noche en el sitio. Esto significa que menos de 29,000 turistas en todo el paÃs usaron hospedaje de turismo comunitario en todo el paÃs, o unos 80 por noche, lo que es mucho menos que la oferta de hospedaje del TRC. Dad a la distancia y dificultad del camino a ChirripÃ³ el proyecto tendrÃa que atraer este tipo de viajero. La mayorÃa de turistas internacionales son de los Estados Unidos y Eur opa . Muy pocos usan agencias de viaje para organ i zar su viaje. Casi la mitad de llegadas internacionales son de los Estados Unidos y la mayorÃa han visitado Costa Rica antes, con un promedio de 6 viajes previos . 7 Pero, la realidad del mercado TRC es u n poco diferente. Atrae turistas de grupos organizados, como voluntarios y educativos, y la mayorÃa tienen conexiÃ³n al mercado internacional a travÃ©s de las organizaciones de ACTUAR y 6 ICT, Anuario Estadistico de Turismo 2011. Instituto Costarricense de Turismo, 2011. 7 ICT, Informacion del Turismo Rural Comunitario. Instituto Costarricense de Turismo, 2010. 6636_TRC_AIJS_2006 _2010 .
102 COOPRENA, con otra organizaciÃ³n ATEC, de Talamanca, que logra capturar t uristas libres e independientes a travÃ©s de su oficina en la ciudad turÃstica de P uerto V iejo. Sobre todo, ahora el TRC es un producto complementario de una vacaciÃ³n tÃpica que forma una parte pequeÃ±a y experiencia distinta dentro de un viaje largo. Tambi Ã©n puede ser un viaje especÃfico y muy especializado organizado por una agencia de viajes sin fines de lucro. Mercad o Nacional Mientras la demanda de turistas internacionales estÃ¡ creciendo, se puede enfocar en el mercado nacional. A los Ticos les gusta v iajar. En una encuesta reciente del ICT se encontrÃ³ que el 31.8% de costarricenses hace paseos una vez por mes, y otro 21% hace paseos cada tres meses. La estadÃa media de los paseos es tres noches, y 98.9% de viajeros se quedan en el mismo lugar todas las noches. 8 Solo 1.5% usan agencias de viaje para organizar su paseo, y 94% planea sus vacaciones por sÃ mismos. No hay datos de cuantos costarricenses hacen TRC, y es probable que un esfuerzo de promociÃ³n serÃa necesario para atraer grupos familiares, jun to con una variedad de atractivos para cualquier edad y oferta de hospedaje FUERA DE casas de familias . AdemÃ¡s , con el atractivo de la cuarta ruta a ChirripÃ³ se puede atraer muchos Ticos, siendo una actividad popular y establecida como reto de ser Tico. SegmentaciÃ³n del mercado turÃstico MÃ¡s que segmentar el mercado de turistas potenciales por paÃs de origen , es Ãºtil agruparlos por varias caracterÃsticas para poder entender mejor sus gustos y atractivos preferidos. Se puede usar caracterÃsticas demogrÃ¡fic as, motivaciones, actividades preferidas, tipo de alojamiento, u otras. En el campo de recreo y turismo la planificaciÃ³n y manejo de sitios de recreaciÃ³n. Este tiene como base teor Ã©tic a la idea de que los turistas no componen un grupo homogÃ©neo, pero hay mucha variedad de gustos y expectativas, dependiendo de dÃ³nde caen dentro el espectr o 9 De esta base salen tres puntos importantes: 1) la s oportunidades potenciales son limitados por las caracterÃsticas del entor n o del sitio, 2) los turistas potenciales tienen preferencias y expectativas que se alinean con las op o rtunidades ofrecidas, y 3) es probable que los turistas con gustos compartidos tendrÃ¡n caracterÃsticas en comÃºn que pued a n ayudar en entender e identificar segmentos del mercado objetivo. La siguiente figura tiene el espectro como base organizativa suaves del otro, con caracterÃsticas tÃpic as y generales de turistas abajo. Este no es para decir que todos los turistas tienen estas caracterÃsticas, pero sirve para ayudar a la segmentaciÃ³n preliminar del a viajar a sitios remotos con pocas expectativas de servicios e instalaciones sofisticadas. 8 ICT, Informe de la Encuesta de Turismo Interno. Institu to Costarricense de Turismo, 2010. 39C_46_TurismoInterno_I_Sem_2010 . 9 Boyd, S.W. and R.W. Butler, Managing ecotourism: an opportunity spectrum approach. Tourism management, 1996. 17 (8): p. 557 566.
103 Mercado de l TRC ChirripÃ³ El espectro es muy importante para la planificaciÃ³n de turismo en ChirripÃ³ debido a su aislamiento y la condiciÃ³n de infraestructura, instalaciones , y transporte. En un principio hay que enfocar se en los e ir ampliando el mercado con fases de desarrollo e inversiones. Unos que podrÃan ser mÃ¡s fÃ¡ciles para traer a principios son los jÃ³venes costarricenses e internacionales, incluso mochileros que estÃ¡n quedÃ¡ndose en Turrialba y grupos de deporte y aventura. Los hoteleros de Turrialba notaron que 40 aÃ±os, y tambiÃ©n existe in terÃ©s entre familias con niÃ±os. Otro segmento tÃpico en el TRC es viajeros de grupos educativos o voluntarios. Para atraer este segmento hay que crear oportunidades apropiadas, como proyectos para voluntarios o cursos bÃ¡sicos para aprender de la naturalez a, cultura, o idioma. El turismo comunitario en GDO tambiÃ©n trabajando con la Hacienda Moravia para promocionar los tours de orquÃdeas y lecherÃas mientras los visitantes se hospedan en la Hacienda Moravia. Para traer mÃ¡s y diversos segmentos del mercado en el futuro habrÃ¡ la necesidad de inversiones en instalaciones mÃ¡s cÃ³modas. Para poder invertir de una forma estratÃ©gica hay que esperar los resultados del inventario de la reserva para ver si hay un sitio o comunidad apta para poner un ecolodge u otro tipo de hospedaje. En el inventario participativo de Grano de Oro encontramos muy poco entusiasmo para trabajar juntos en el asunto de hospedaje. Los participantes tienen mÃ¡s interÃ©s en desarrollar hospedaje
104 en casas de famili as, lo cual solo se atrae una variedad distinta de turista, especÃficamente los voluntarios y estudiantes (ComunicaciÃ³n personal ACTUAR) . Otros miembros de la comunidad estÃ¡n interesados en desarrollar otros tipos de hospedaje, como cabaÃ±as, pero solo de forma individua. Para juntar suficientes recursos para construir hospedaje adecuado para cualquier tipo de turista hay que hacerlo con la cooperaciÃ³n de varios actores ambos locales y externos. Demanda Actual La demanda en este momento es difÃcil calcular dado la falta de conocimiento actual de ChirripÃ³ y TRC. En casi todas las entrevistas se evidenci Ã³ la necesidad de promociÃ³n de crear la demanda. De los hoteleros en Turrialba solo uno tenÃa conocimiento de T RC, y eso fue por sus aÃ±os trabajando con ACTUAR en la capital. De los demÃ¡s, preguntamos su nivel de familiaridad con TRC en una escala de uno a cinco, encontrando un promedio de solo 1.6, lo cual es muy bajo considerando que la gente entrevistado pasan s us dÃas dando informaciÃ³n turÃstica a sus huÃ©spedes. Juntos, los seis hoteles tienen una capacidad de 160 personas, con una ocupaciÃ³n media de 60%. Del promedio de 96 huÃ©spedes por noche, pensaron que tal vez 10% tendrÃa interÃ©s en un tour de TRC, pero el nÃºmero se redujo aÃºn mÃ¡s cuando consideraron la situaciÃ³n del transporte. La actividad mÃ¡s solicitada actualmente es rafting, otras populares incluyen tours a Guayabo y al VolcÃ¡n Turrialba. Preguntamos si habÃa personas buscando informaciÃ³n sobre activida des de TRC y cuÃ¡les son las actividades mÃ¡s solicitadas. Nos dijeron que hay muy pocas personas buscando tours asÃ, pero eso podrÃa ser debido a la falta de oferta y promociÃ³n. Los tours de cafÃ© son los mÃ¡s buscados, seguidos por otros de agroturismo y nat uraleza . Aunque los resultados de la encuesta hotelera muestran un nivel bajo de demanda actual en turismo rural comunitario, los encuestados pensaron que con promociÃ³n y oferta de tours de calidad se puede crear una demanda mucha mayor. Todos estarÃan in teresados en promocionar tours asÃ en el futuro, y en cuanto los contactara la mayorÃa no se cobrarÃa nada hasta que el negocio en ChirripÃ³ estÃ© bien establecido y desarrollado. La siguiente tabla presenta los cinco hoteles mÃ¡s aptos para colaboraciÃ³n en e l futuro, segÃºn su nivel de interÃ©s y probabilidad de apoyar. Hotel Nombre PosiciÃ³n DirecciÃ³n Correo ElectrÃ³nico Capacidad del Hotel Turrialba Bed and Breakfast Cristian Astua Admin 25N de la Municipalidad de Turrialba turibb.com(sitio de web) 28 Hotel inter americano Luis Allen Admin Costado sur de Cindea hotelinteramericano.com 60 Casa de Lis Lisette Juffermans Duena Costado S Banco Credito firstname.lastname@example.org 14 Hotel Herza Alan Dueno Oeste Servicentro JSM hotelherza@gmail 35 Hotel Kardey Deily Sanchez Admin Parada de buses 200E 50S Hotel kardey Facebook 30 En cuanto a la cuarta ruta a ChirripÃ³ encontramos una demanda esperada mÃ¡s alta. La demanda actual para subir al Cerro ChirripÃ³ es alta y los refugios dentro de parque nacional frecuentemente se llenan a la capacidad mÃ¡xima durante los fines de semana y temporadas al tas. Tod a s las agencias y guÃas recomi endan reservaciones con antelaciÃ³n, lo cual indica que la oferta no mantiene la demanda. Casi
105 todos los entrevistados en el paÃs estimaron un alto nivel de interÃ©s en una cuarta ruta al Cerro ChirripÃ³ atravesando la re serva indÃgena. AnÃ¡lisis de Oferta La oferta de TRC en el paÃs es alta pero limitada. La mayorÃa de proyectos estÃ¡n afiliados con ACTUAR o COOPRENA y ofrecen tours muy organizados y especializados. Actualmente las empresas se enfocan en segmentos espec Ãficos de grupos educativos y de voluntarios. Hay una falta de oportunidades de TRC para viajeros libres e independientes, y hay muy pocas que mezclan cultura indÃgena con caminatas de larga distancia. Tampoco existen proyectos indÃgenas que ofrecen hosped aje fuera de casas de familias. Hay una organizaciÃ³n (ATEC) que ofrece tours de TRC sin reservaciones previas y se organizan tours a pedido desde su oficina en Puerto Viejo. Los canales de distribuciÃ³n nacional de TRC son distintos de los canales tÃpicos d e otros tipos de turismo. Casi todos son estructurados por organizaciones nacionales, lo que ayuda conectarse con mercados internacionales pero hay pocas oportunidades dentro de los canales existentes para traer otros tipos de tu ristas. Por otro lado, los canales de distribuciÃ³n turÃstica en Turrialba son poco estructurados. Con excepciÃ³n de los grupos que llegan directamente de San JosÃ© al rio para hacer rafting, la mayorÃa de turistas llegan a un hotel por recomendaciones pasada s de boca a boca o por info rmaciÃ³n encontrada por internet o guÃas de viaje. Solo un hotel recibe grupos organizados de una agencia de viajes, y los demÃ¡s tienen turistas libres e independientes ambos nacionales e internacionales. Una vez que estÃ©n en el hotel, organizan sus activid ades con el hotelero o directamente con el proveedor. Todos los hoteles ofrecen informaciÃ³n de varias actividades, y todos tienen alianzas con agencias de viaje y rafting. Solo un hotel tiene contrato con una agencia, y los demÃ¡s reciben una comisiÃ³n de ap roximadamente 10%. La siguiente tabla muestra los resultados de las agencias mÃ¡s usados por hoteleros TurrialbeÃ±os, segÃºn su relevancia en el mercado regional y potencial de colaboraciÃ³n. Agencia Orden Explorenatura 1 Adrenalina Tours 2 Ecoaventuras 2 Tico River Adventures 4 Rio Loco Tropical Tours 4 Costa Rica Rivers 6
106 Oferta TRC nacional La oferta de oportunidades de TRC incluye mÃ¡s que 50 comunidades a travÃ©s de todo el paÃs. SegÃºn la investigaciÃ³n preliminar , la mayorÃa ofrecen una variedad de actividades, con un promedio de seis actividades distintas. Hay un mÃnimo de tres actividades que estÃ¡n en oferta en los sitios cercanos a San JosÃ© u otros destinos turÃsticos establecidos, y los sitios mÃ¡s lejanos tien de n a ofrecer mÃ¡s actividades, con un mÃ¡ximo de once productos distintos. La siguiente tabla se presentan los resultados del censo competitivo, mostrando las actividades e instalaciones o servicios mÃ¡s ofrecidos por proyectos de TRC en el paÃs, segÃºn su ca lificaciÃ³n de cantidad de oferta. Actividades CalificaciÃ³n Instalaciones/Servicios CalificaciÃ³n Caminatas 1 Restaurante 1 Tours Culturales 2 JardÃn 2 Cocina/comida tÃpica 3 Senderos 2 ArtesanÃa 3 Finca 4 RÃos/cataratas/nadar 5 Mariposario 5 Tours agrÃcolas 6 Piscinas 5 Miradores 7 Caballos 7 ObservaciÃ³n de aves 7 Bicicletas 8 EducaciÃ³n ambiental 9 SalÃ³n/Comedor 9 CosmologÃa indÃgena 10 EnergÃa Solar 10 SegÃºn los hoteleros de Turrialba, las actividades ofrecidas actualmente en la regiÃ³n incluyen los tres populares de rafting, Guayabo, y VolcÃ¡n Turrialba, y otras menos populares y relacionados con actividades tÃpicas de TRC incluyen cabalgatas, caminatas a cataratas, observaciÃ³n de aves, y un mariposario. La oferta para tours a Cerro Chirr ipÃ³ es poca, debido a la ruta establecida y la posibilidad de hacer la caminata sin guÃa. Hay una agencia principal que ofrece tours dentro del Parque Nacional ChirripÃ³. Costa Rica Trekking Adventures cuenta con dos tours subiendo el Cerro, uno de tres dÃ as que cuesta entre $480 $580 para grupos de 2 a cinco, el otro es de cuatro dÃas y cuesta $500 $650. La temporada alta para senderismo en ChirripÃ³ es de diciembre a abril, y el p arque estÃ¡ cerrado durante el mes de mayo. Recomendaciones Las siguientes recomendaciones estÃ¡n basadas en los hallazgos de la investigaciÃ³n y la informaciÃ³n que saliÃ³ de las entrevistas y encuestas. Las recomendaciones estÃ¡n organizadas en las cuatro Ã¡reas principales de producto, plaza, precios, y promociÃ³n.
107 Pr oductos Debido a la ubicaciÃ³n geogrÃ¡fica de la zona de ChirripÃ³ , es recomendable desarrollar vario s productos turÃstic o s para que la gente venga y se queda. El desarrollo de turismo en la zona deberÃa llevarse a cabo en fases, empezando con los recursos qu e ya existen e invirtiendo poco a poco en las instalaciones y la capacidad humana de manejo de turismo. AsÃ podrÃan empezar con un turismo de aventura y usar la primera fase para aprender del manejo de turismo mientras van ampliando la base para traer tur istas diversos. Si la meta es llegar a ofrecer un servicio de calidad, con instalaciones cÃ³modas y modernas, es de primer a importancia que las inversiones estÃ©n bien planificadas y que incluyan tambiÃ©n inversiones en todo tipo de recursos para poder contri buir al desarrollo integral de la poblaciÃ³n local. Inversiones en el capital humano deberÃan ser prioritarios para que la gente pueda ser capaz d e manejar el asunto de turismo por sÃ mismo s . Pero a la vez, es importante entender el nivel de participaciÃ³n e involucramiento deseado por la poblaciÃ³n. Si el turismo se desarroll a de una forma que estÃ© en contra de las prioridades locales se terminarÃ¡ en un fracaso social y econÃ³mico. Una opciÃ³n viable para poner instalaciones de lujo es contratar con una empres a establecida. Lo importante en este caso serÃa que la planificaciÃ³n incluye la negociaciÃ³n de gestiÃ³n compartida con los actores locales, para que los beneficios y responsabilidades sean compartidos. Consideraciones importantes para ecoturismo incluyen la necesidad de sostenibilidad social, ambiental, y econÃ³mico. Con el crecimiento de la con sciencia ambiental l nivel mundial seria de primera importancia enfocar en la sostenibilidad de todas las invers iones, incluso materiales de construcciÃ³n, manejo de desechos, infraestructura de transporte, energÃa, y comunicaciÃ³n. Lo bueno es que hay proyectos e iniciativas existentes que proveen fondos para inversiones asÃ, que usan tecnologÃa apropiada y ecolÃ³gic a. Otro tema importante y creciente es lo del consumo sostenible, incluyendo cualquier producto que se puede obtener de la zona local, y la pro ducciÃ³n de comestibles ecolÃ³gicos y orgÃ¡nic os . La comida local es muy de moda, y la promociÃ³n de agricultura loc al cada vez mÃ¡s se crece en popularidad. Aunque no saliÃ³ como alta prioridad en el inventario de GDO, si se presenta la oportunidad de incluir una finca sostenible serÃa recomendable. No solo porque es una marca de sostenibilidad sino tambiÃ©n se usa los co nocimientos locales de una forma productiva y crea oportunidades para traer turistas voluntarios para trabajar y aprender. Respeto al hospedaje tambiÃ©n se necesita inversiones grandes. Aunque el hospedaje en casa saliÃ³ como prioridad nÃºmero uno en GDO y S antubal, la realidad del mercado es que este tipo de alojamiento solo sirve para un segmento muy especÃfico de turistas. Para poder atraer una porciÃ³n mÃ¡s ampli a del mercado seria recomendable invertir en una instalaciÃ³n de hospe daje apta para turistas de vario s tipos. Se puede construir un tipo de hospedaje como un hotel o ecolodge que tiene opciones mezcladas de habitaciones privados y compartidos, para individuales o familias, y puede acomodar cualquier grupo de turistas y su rango de precios. En los pri ncipios se puede trabajar con la hacienda Moravia, pero este no tiene la misma potencial de generar beneficios colectivos para la gente local y sus comunidades. Otra opciÃ³n que se puede desarrollar en la primera fase es el alquiler de casas privadas para f amilias, la que puede traer una diversidad de turistas nacionales para sus vacaciones familiares.
108 Plaza Dado la falta de infraestructura de transporte, la duraciÃ³n del viaje y condiciones incomodas, la plaza es un aspecto crÃtico en la planificaciÃ³n del proyecto y su promociÃ³n. Es necesario esforzarse mÃ¡s para traer turistas a la zona, utilizando cualquier canal de distribuciÃ³n disponible. L a s recomendaciones incluyen la promociÃ³n del viaje como aventura en sÃ mismo, forjando colaboraciones con proveedo res de servicios en el camino. Se puede promocionar el viaje de aventura con vistas impresionantes, un almuerzo tÃpico de la zona y una parada en el famoso puente viejo, o cualqu ier otra actividad en el camino como pesca, caminata al mirador de La Fortuna, o un picnic en el bosquecillo mÃ¡gico de eucalipto. Todos los encuestados estÃ¡n de acuerdo que el asunto de transporte serÃa un aspecto clave para turistas extranjeros sin carros, o los que tengan miedo de manejar sobre c a minos no pavimentados. Hay opiniones diferentes de la inclusiÃ³n del transporte en el precio o si es mejor cobrarlo aparte. Lo bueno de cobrarlo aparte es que deja la oportunidad de hacer el viaje e n bus o carro como reto personal del viajero aventurero, pero se necesitarÃa buena informaciÃ³n disponible en los hoteles y por internet. RecomendarÃa trabajar con ACTUAR si se puede colaborar de forma no exclusiva para dejar abierta opciones fuera de su mercado objetivo. Como COOPRENA es una cooperativa, es un poco mÃ¡s complicado manten er la autonomÃa del proyecto. Se puede tambiÃ©n crear una alianza con ATEC para juntar esfuerz o s de promociÃ³n y crear un camino de T RC en el este de Costa Rica. Sobre todo, es importante intentar utilizar una estrategia doble, buscando oportunidades para m eterse en los canales de distribuciÃ³n nacionales y establecidos, y encontrando maneras de traer turistas libres e independientes dentro del turismo regional. Precios Decisiones sobre tarifas tratan de preguntas del valor del producto, los costos para prove erlo, y la disponibilidad de pagar del mercado objetivo. Hay que lidiar con la realidad de que el ecoturismo de veras es caro, pero cuando estÃ¡ bien hecho vale la pena para las comunidades, los turistas, y el medio ambiente a largo plazo. Precios determina dos por componentes no toman en cuenta que el valor del producto es mÃ¡s que la suma de sus partes y tiend en a infravalorar el producto. Este no solo conduce a la insostenibilidad financiera, sino tambiÃ©n pueda causa r que los clientes percib a n que el produc to no es de calidad (McKercher). Decisiones de precios deberÃan ser guiados por objetivos que observan no solo los costos fijos y variables, sino tambiÃ©n el rendimiento de las inversiones necesario para la sostenibilidad del proyecto (Backman). Se puede ut ilizar las tarifas para influir la demanda, tales como el nÃºmero y tipo de visitantes, asÃ como los ajustes temporales para mejorar la consistencia de la demanda. Las tarifas para TRC en Costa Rica son variables y dependen de la actividad, la calidad de i nstalaciones, y la ubicaciÃ³n del proyecto. Precios de un tour de un dÃa salen entre $35 y $120, y de dos dÃas son entre $100 y $230. Como no hay TRC en la regiÃ³n, preguntamos a los hoteleros turrialbeÃ±os cuÃ¡l serÃa la disponibilidad de pago de sus huÃ©spede s corrientes. Para tours de un dÃa con transporte incluido nos di Ã³ respuestas entre $50 $85, con un promedio de $70. Tours de dos dÃas con hospedaje y comida incluida se valoraron entre $80 y $200, con un promedio de $135. Precios diferenciales para nacion ales son
109 recomendables. Un extranjero normalmente no conoce bien los precios locales de comestibles o consumibles y estÃ¡n dispuestos a pagar mÃ¡s , mientras un tico va a buscar un viaje asequible. En las primeras fases de desarrollo los proyectos de TRC tienen que lidiar con el problema del flujo de caja. Mientras la s visita s no son fiable s ni constante s , no se puede estar siempre preparados para turistas. La mayorÃa de TRC nacional usa reservaciones y un sistema de prepago para poder alistarse y comprar las mat erias necesarias. Este limita el mercado y excluye viajes espontÃ¡neos, pero a menudo es necesario debido a la falta de efectivo corriente. La estrategia de cobrar tambiÃ©n se hace de una forma descendiente , cobrando lo mÃ¡ximo para individuos y parejas, menos para cada persona mÃ¡s del grupo, y ofreciendo tarifas especiales para grupos grandes. AsÃ se puede aprovechar de las economÃas de escala y tambiÃ©n establecer precios justos que atraen mÃ¡s gente. Prom ociÃ³n La promociÃ³n es sumamente importante en el caso de ChirripÃ³ porque de la necesidad de aumentar la conocimiento de TRC y de la zona. Todos los entrevistados mencionaron el requisito de crear la demanda propia. La planificaciÃ³n promocional incluye la identificaciÃ³n de estrategias de comunicaciÃ³n viables y mecanismos especÃficos para llegar a los clientes potenciales, asÃ como un plan para la financiaciÃ³n y ejecuciÃ³n de las estrategias de marketing. Se puede promocionar a travÃ©s de los canales de distr ibuciÃ³n turÃstica establecidos, trabajando con agencias y organizaciones nacionales para promocionar y vender los productos. En Turrialba es recomendable trabajar con los hoteleros, dÃ¡ndoles materiales de promociÃ³n e informaciÃ³n para compartir con sus huÃ©s pedes. Otras empresas de hospitalidad y turismo incluyen restaurantes populares, empresas de rafting, y of icinas de agencias de turismo. Es importante tambiÃ©n que la informaciÃ³n salga en la s guÃas de turismo y sitios web. Se puede mandar informaciÃ³n y ped ir a los clientes satisfechos dar revistas. Los libros populares y aptos para el mercado objetivo inicial incluyen Lonely Planet y Rough Guide, dejando los otros como Fodors y Eyewitness para cuando tengan las instalaciones necesari a TambiÃ©n se puede utilizar la prensa y revistas en espaÃ±ol y inglÃ©s , promocionando el proyecto como innovador y Ãºnico, y mostrando los beneficios sociales y ambientales. El proyecto tambiÃ©n debe establecer una presencia por internet con un sitio web y a travÃ©s del medio social con una pÃ¡gina en Facebook, que resulta cada vez mÃ¡s importante para negocios nuevos y que ofrece oportunidades para conectarse con visitantes potenciales. En Facebook se puede conectar con varios grupos, incluso grupos nacion ales de deporte, y otros grupos de interÃ©s relacionado con temas como conservaciÃ³n, sostenibilidad, y desarrollo social. Lo importante de la promociÃ³n es entender el pÃºblico objetivo, los medios de comunicaciÃ³n que se usa, y poner el proyecto delante de v isitante potenciales en donde estÃ¡n normalmente. Un aspecto clave para traer turistas a ChirripÃ³ es ponerlo en el mapa. En este momento una bÃºsqueda de Grano de Oro en Google resulta en mil pÃ¡ginas de un hotel en San JosÃ© y ni una que tiene que ver con la comunidad. Igual en los mapas no sale Grano de O ro ni la Reserva ChirripÃ³, una situaciÃ³n que genera muy poca confianza en un visitante potencial.
xml version 1.0 encoding UTF-8
REPORT xmlns http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitss xmlns:xsi http:www.w3.org2001XMLSchema-instance xsi:schemaLocation http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitssdaitssReport.xsd
INGEST IEID EIWFUAI6H_H8WX7S INGEST_TIME 2016-04-19T22:59:26Z PACKAGE AA00032185_00001
AGREEMENT_INFO ACCOUNT UF PROJECT UFDC