Community-based tourism and networking: Viscri, Romania

Abstract

This paper raises questions concerning the complexity of the term “community” when dealing with community-based tourism initiatives. It highlights the difficulty of translating into practice the paradigm of “community-based tourism”. Through a case study of tourism in the multi-ethnic village of Viscri, Romania, the paper discusses the operational role that a network of both internal and external actors may play in piloting tourism initiatives that produce benefits for communities that are unaccustomed to participatory development processes due to various barriers. The study highlights the key role played by a local leader and an external foundation in building a network that, thanks to the bonding and bridging relations activated, led the community towards a form of sustainable tourism development and a broader amelioration of the social conditions. The network described can be replicated in other geographical contexts, provided there is strong local leadership and also international interests and donors. In the long term, however, the network needs to be strengthened by involving other actors, above all local authorities. They are needed to assure the basis for long-term empowerment, participation in decision-making and progressive diversification of economic activities

Community-based tourism in practice: evidence from three coastal communities in Bohuslän, Sweden

“…Furthermore, stakeholder interests are not fixed and clear, but instead multiple and fluid (Jamal, Getz, 2000), e.g. local stakeholders are not always local (Iorio, Corsale, 2014). Moreover, local stakeholders tend to compete with each other, be involved in various conflicts of interest, and have very different degrees of power to influence community development (Blackstock, 2005;Kumar, 2005;Harwood, 2010;Iorio, Corsale, 2014).…”

“…The notion of a local community needs to be unpacked in order to develop effective techniques to involve local stakeholders in tourism development (e.g. Iorio, Corsale, 2014). Hence, unlike the shallow understanding and lack of interest in the community when applying a tourist-centric approach, the main concern needs to be the wellbeing of the community and, the understanding of place as a community developing tourism, rather than a tourist destination serving the tourists (e.g.…”

“…Community participation composes an integral part of sustainable tourism development, specifically in accordance with the community-based tradition (Murphy, Murphy, 1985;Tosun, 2000;Blackstock, 2005;Beeton, 2006;Saarinen, 2006;Iorio, Corsale, 2014). As opposed to research traditions highlighting economic growth and environmental protection in tourism planning and development, the community approach calls for a main focus on the "host" per se.…”

Innovating Rural Tourism Targeting Poverty Alleviation through a Multi-Industries Integration Network: the Case of Zhuanshui Village, Anhui Province, China

“…Community participation in rural tourism is helpful for desirable interrelations among tourism stakeholders [5,35]. The government also has a crucial role to be facilitator of the entrepreneurial environment [34,36], the mediator in establishing trust relationships with the rural service providers [26,37], and policy maker of rural tourism [38,39].…”

“…Networking has potential as a structure to enhance competitiveness and innovation of a rural tourism destination [25,26]. It may be a means of overcoming lack of resources faced by small firms when it comes to innovation [27], contributing towards the creation of a cohesive destination [25].…”