地理学报 ›› 2006, Vol. 61 ›› Issue (4): 401-413.doi: 10.11821/xb200604007

• 区域经济 • 上一篇    下一篇

社区参与旅游发展的中西差异

保继刚,孙九霞   

  1. 中山大学旅游发展与规划研究中心,广州 510275
  • 收稿日期:2005-09-21 修回日期:2005-11-23 出版日期:2006-04-25 发布日期:2010-09-06
  • 作者简介:保继刚 (1964-), 男, 云南个旧人, 教授、博士生导师, 中国地理学会副理事长, 主要研究方向为旅游地理、旅游规划。E-mail: eesbjg@mail.sysu.edu.cn
  • 基金资助:

    国家自然科学基金项目(40471032)

A Contrastive Study on the Difference in Community Participation in Tourism Between China and the West

BAO Jigang, SUN Jiuxia   

  1. Center for Tourism Planning & Research, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou 510275, China
  • Received:2005-09-21 Revised:2005-11-23 Online:2006-04-25 Published:2010-09-06

摘要:

在中国不同地区案例调查的基础上,结合西方学者的案例材料,探究中国和西方社区参与旅游发展的不同之处,并进一步发掘两者形成差异的深层原因。基本结论为中西方社区参与的差异明显,主要表现在:参与的社会意义不同,旅游是西方社会当地社区发展的力量之一,但却是中国当地社区发展的主导力量;所追求的利益点不同,西方在追求旅游发展的经济利益的同时看到了旅游所带来的或潜在的负面影响,中国的社区参与注重单纯的经济利益诉求;参与各方的主动性不同,西方的社区在很大程度上是主动参与到旅游发展过程中,而中国社区几乎都是被动参与旅游;参与方力量对比不同,西方社区、企业、政府等各参与方之间力量对比相对均衡,而中国各社区参与方的力量对比相对悬殊;参与的发展阶段不同,西方走得比中国更远。中西社区参与旅游差异出现的深层社会文化原因为民主化进程不同、NGO和NPO等民间组织的发育程度不同、旅游发展阶段不同。

关键词: 社区参与, 旅游发展, 中国, 西方, 差异

Abstract:

There has been a rapid tourism development in China in recent years. Researchers have been studying many aspects of tourism. However, community participation in tourism is scarcely studied; research in this aspect is far behind the scene of tourism development. Therefore, the study of community participation in China must be based on the understanding of the differences in the background and perspective between China and the West. A contrastive analysis would reveal differences in community participation in the Chinese and Western contexts, so that China can use Western theories for reference in constructing Chinese models. The current studies in China are based on fieldwork of anthropology. Fieldwork lasted four years in the communities of the Dai minority in Xishuangbanna of Yunnan Province, of the Yulong River and of Shiwaitaoyuan in Yangshuo of Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region.The studies in the West are based on the second-hand materials data from the Western researchers. There are very distinct differences in the community participation in tourism development between China and the West. In social implication points of interests, degree of involvement, participant roles, and stage of involvement are all different between the West and China. Though both China and the West are after economic gain, the West has seen the (potential) negative impacts while China is still only after profit. In terms of participation in tourism, the West plays an active role, while all participants in China participate passively. At a result, the parties involved would find themselves in the following chain of reaction: community's pursuit of interest unsatisfied→confrontation and conflicts→government passively reacting to issues concerned→measures proposed→some temporary policies made→impacts on the tourism development in communities→new problems found→new solutions sought after→readjusting the ways of community involvement and the direction of tourism development. The passive state that the residents, the government and the enterprises participate in would eventually lead to the passivity of sustainable tourism development. Community participation in the West is very substantial, from that in planning to management, operation, financial gain and protection of the culture, while community participation in China is superficial or non-existent, where participation is only at the economic level. As long as China has not caught up with the West in areas of democracy, in non-governmental organizations, in the stage of tourism development, in the land tenure, the government plays a crucial role in the decision-making, management and finding out what the community wants in tourism development. Avoid the mistake of thinking that the government can make decisions for the community, that the residents are ignorant and powerless, that they are in a disadvantaged position and have no direct role to play in influencing the direction of tourism development. In fact, the ability for community participation can be developed.

Key words: null