See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/325598719

A Critical Look at the State of Tourism Studies in Anthropology in

Latin America and the Caribbean

Article  in  Tourism Analysis · April 2018

DOI: 10.3727/108354218X15210313504599

CITATIONS READS
2 193

1 author:

Carla Guerron Montero

University of Delaware
54 PUBLICATIONS   189 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Construcción discursiva de las características psicológicas atribuidas al sujeto indígena en América latina View project

Women, Gender, and Development in the Afro-Ecuadorian Highlands View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Carla Guerron Montero on 11 June 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Tourism Analysis, Vol. 23, pp. 249–259 1083-5423/18 $60.00 + .00
Printed in the USA. All rights reserved. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3727/108354218X15210313504599
Copyright Ó 2018 Cognizant, LLC. E-ISSN 1943-3999
www.cognizantcommunication.com

A CRITICAL LOOK AT THE STATE OF TOURISM STUDIES IN

ANTHROPOLOGY IN LATIN AMERICA AND THE CARIBBEAN1

CARLA GUERRÓN MONTERO

Anthropology Department, University of Delaware, Newark, DE, USA

Anthropology has expanded by including within its purview the study of tourism. Although tourism
is a subject of relative recent concern among anthropologists, anthropological scholarship on tourism
has contributed greatly to tourism studies. In this conceptual article, I offer a preliminary study of the
state of tourism studies and anthropology in Latin America and the Caribbean, based on a survey of
literature published in English, Spanish, and Portuguese in Latin America, the US, and Europe. My
primary concern is to discuss the relationship between tourism studies and anthropology in study-
ing Latin America and the Caribbean. I conclude proposing that for the anthropology of tourism to
advance towards more vibrant development, there needs to be an equal and multilingual dialogue
among scholars, practitioners, and tourism stakeholders in the Global North and South, as well as a
conceptualization of tourism as one aspect of a larger spectrum of movements, representations, and
practices.

Key words: Anthropology of tourism; Tourism studies; Latin America; Caribbean

Introduction In this conceptual article, I offer a preliminary

Anthropology has expanded by including within
its purview the study of tourism. Although tourism
is a subject of relative recent concern among anthro-
pologists, anthropological scholarship on tourism
has contributed greatly to tourism studies. Likewise,
the field of tourism studies has grown significantly
over the last few decades and has achieved a promi-
nent position as a multidisciplinary field (Graburn &
Jafari, 1991; Jafari, 2001; Nash, 2007), thereby con-
tributing to anthropology and other social sciences.
study of the state of tourism studies and anthropol-
ogy in Latin America and the Caribbean,2 where
I  have conducted ethnographic research on tour-
ism, gender and racial relations, and construc-
tions of citizenship since 1996.3 To do so, I have
surveyed literature published in English, Spanish,
and Portuguese in Latin America, the US, and
Europe. I  have included the work of anthropolo-
gists living and practicing in the US, Canada, and
the Western world with a focus on Latin America
and the Caribbean, as well as the work of those who

Address correspondence to Carla Guerrón Montero, Associate Professor of Anthropology, University of Delaware, 135 Munroe Hall,
Newark, DE 19716, USA. E-mail: cguerron@udel.edu

249
IP: 76.111.174.212 On: Wed, 06 Jun 2018 19:37:00
Article(s) and/or figure(s) cannot be used for resale. Please use proper citation format when citing this article
including the DOI, publisher reference, volume number and page location.
Delivered by Ingenta
 250 GUERRÓN MONTERO
operate in the region itself.4 When necessary, I make
a distinction between these two groups of Latin
Americanists. My primary concern is to discuss the
relationship between tourism studies and anthro-
pology in studying Latin America and the Carib-
bean, following a critical tourism methodology
(Ateljevic, Pritchard, & Morgan, 2007). I conclude
by proposing that for the anthropology of tourism
to advance towards more vibrant development, a
more equal and multilingual dialogue among schol-
ars, practitioners, and tourism stakeholders in the
Global North and South needs to develop.
Tempering the Tropics
Tourism is of fundamental economic, political,
cultural, and social importance in Latin America.
Historically, the region has been characterized by its
global orientation, while tourism additionally repre-
sents a vehicle to develop a comprehensive nation-
building agenda. In fact, in many Latin American
countries, tourism has come to occupy a central place
in their economies, replacing traditional colonial sta-
ples like sugar, tobacco, and coffee as the engines of
economic growth; therefore, the study of tourism is
as important as any political or cultural phenomenon
studied in the region (Fields, 1984; Spoor, 2000).
How did the tourism industry initiate its long
history in Latin America? For most of the 19th cen-
tury, in Western countries (particularly the US and
UK) warm weather was believed to be unhealthy
and unsuitable for the assumed delicate nature of
its population. With the advent of the Industrial
Revolution and the globalization of markets and
cultures, the discourse changed dramatically dur-
ing the late 19th century, and by the early 20th
century, the upper and middle classes in the US
and UK engaged often in tourism in the tropics
(Merrill, 2009). Warm weather, tropical fruits, and
dark peoples were viewed as healthful and reinvig-
orating remedies for cold temperatures. Pursuing
these remedies (consuming the weather, the fruits,
the peoples, or getting a tan) through leisurely
trips to presumably pristine places became a wel-
come option for the wealthy and the middle class.
Latin America and the Caribbean transformed into
prime locations for this newly acquired fascination
with “the tropics,” which came to represent inti-
macy with a bountiful nature—perhaps even with
IP: 76.111.174.212 On: Wed, 06 Jun 2018 19:37:00
Article(s) and/or figure(s) cannot be used for resale. Please use proper citation format when citing this article
including the DOI, publisher reference, volume number and page location.
Delivered by Ingenta
the Garden of Eden (Cocks, 2007, 2013; Reis &
Shelton, 2011; Schwartz, 1999). Ultimately, tour-
ism industry mediators “recasted climatic deter-
minism in a romantic, instead of a tragic vein”
(Cocks, 2007, p. 220), by “tempering” the climate
of Latin America and the Caribbean and advertis-
ing it as manageable.
In line with this new perspective, pleasure travel
to Latin America began to be advertised heav-
ily since the 1880s in the US and Europe, and by
the mid-1920s the industry was firmly established
(Berger, 2006; Cocks, 2013; Merill, 2009). After
WWII, most Latin American countries used tour-
ism as means of economic growth. Resulting from
more economic air travel and the establishment of
large beach resorts, tourism became a mass activity
from the late 1960s onwards. Just like their prede-
cessors, “the tourists who booked their holidays at
these resorts were attracted by the promise of sun,
sand, sea, and (possibly) sex. They could enjoy these
under rather luxurious circumstances and without
much awareness of daily life outside the resorts”
(Baud & Ypeij, 2009, p. 2).
There was a sharp interruption of this steady
growth in the 1970s and 1980s, when authoritarian
regimes, violence, and human rights violations kept
foreign visitors away, especially in countries such
as Chile, Nicaragua, and El Salvador (Mings, 1980).
Mean­while, “backpack” tourism emerged in the 1970s
in the region. Tourism reemerged in the 1990s and
2000s, even in those places that were previously per-
ceived as dangerous and not welcoming to US tour-
ists, such as Peru or Nicaragua (Babb, 2011). Since
then, tourism has become an essential industry in the
region (Baud & Ypeij, 2009).5 The United Nations
World Tourism Organization (UNWTO) reported
that 51.5 million tourists and 55 million tourists vis-
ited the region in 2010 and 2011, respectively; this
represents 5.5% of the world market share (UNWTO,
2012). The projections estimate that the region will
receive 79 million tourists by the year 2020, with a
combined annual growth of 13.7% (UNWTO 2012).
In the last decade, Latin America and other
emerging regions of the world have gone from
being mere tourism destinations to also become
prime dispatchers of world tourists. In fact, Latin
America has witnessed a dramatic rise in domestic
and intraregional travel. Domestic travelers’ tour-
ism spending has grown 15% since 2006, more
 STATE OF TOURISM STUDIES IN ANTHROPOLOGY 251
than three times the world average, while 60% of
all international arrivals are intraregional visitors
(Ruggles-Brisse, 2012). However, it should be
stressed that at least a decade before, Latin Amer-
ica and the Caribbean were not only carriers of
receptive tourism. For instance, intraregional travel
has been commonplace between countries such as
Argentina, Uruguay, and Brazil at least since the
1980s (dos Santos Filho, 2008; Sammarchi, 2001).
The Study of Tourism in Anthropology
Anthropologists and tourists have many things
in common. Both travel to nearby or distant places
with the intention of having some kind of cultural,
ecological, or social experience at a given place,
and both do this on a temporary basis. Nonetheless,
in spite of the ubiquitous nature of movement in
anthropology (both by anthropologists themselves
as well as by the cultures studied), tourism and travel
became subjects worthy of discussion in anthropol-
ogy relatively recently, in Europe in the 1930s and
in the US in the 1960s. Three reasons explain this
paucity of attention. First, anthropologists argued
that their experience and motivations for being in
a distant location could not be compared to that
of tourists, and they believed that they were being
unfairly associated with the tourists they encoun-
tered in these faraway places (Crick, 1995). In order
to more securely establish themselves as legitimate
academics, anthropologists tended to dismiss tour-
ists as superficial pleasure seekers, individuals
whose actions are unconstrained by ethical obliga-
tions and who are neither interested in nor taken seri-
ously by the people they encounter in their travels
(Levi-Strauss, 1992). Although, in practically every
ethnographic field site anthropologists encountered
at least occasional tourists, they were perceived to
be an undesired nuisance and given scant or no atten-
tion. Second, anthropologists considered tourism
a subject not serious enough to discuss intellectu-
ally and ethnographically (Nuñez, 1977). This was
motivated in part by a degree of insecurity about
the limits and seriousness of the discipline. Finally,
there was a general lack of recognition of the impor­
tance of tourism as a sociocultural phenomenon.
In spite of this inauspicious beginning, the field
of tourism studies and its relationship to anthropol-
ogy has witnessed tremendous growth since the
IP: 76.111.174.212 On: Wed, 06 Jun 2018 19:37:00
Article(s) and/or figure(s) cannot be used for resale. Please use proper citation format when citing this article
including the DOI, publisher reference, volume number and page location.
Delivered by Ingenta
1970s. Since then, anthropological scholarship on
tourism has contributed greatly to tourism studies
and has grown exponentially (Guerrón Montero,
2012; Leite & Graburn, 2009; Nash, 1996). Anthro-
pologists recognize that tourism provides an ideal
context for the study of subjects related to political
economy, social change and development, natural
resource management, and cultural identity, among
others. In fact, many of the great questions asked by
anthropologists since the 19th century can be stud-
ied through the lens of tourism (Stronza, 2001).
Although some scholars argue that the anthropo-
logical study of tourism has achieved a status of
subfield (Burns, 2004), others (Leite & Graburn,
2009) invite us to consider the work of anthropolo-
gists in tourism studies as “anthropological inter-
ventions.” Leite and Graburn (2009) proposed that
“most anthropologists conducting tourism-related
research orient their work toward disciplinary audi-
ences focused on other topics” (p. 35) due to the
lack of evidence of a coherent discipline.
Some of the main recognized contributions of
anthropologists to tourism studies include ethno-
graphic understandings of tourism’s impact on host
communities; the influence of travel on an indi-
vidual; the power relationships in tourism devel-
opments; heritage and culture commodification;
types of tourism and tourists; and the relationships
between tourism and ethnicity, identity, material
culture, nationalism, and the environment.
In the US, the first recognized study of tourism in
anthropology focused on Latin America. In an article
entitled “Tourism, tradition, and acculturation: Week-
endismo in a Mexican village” Theron Nuñez (1963)
studied wealthy domestic tourists in Guadalajara,
Mexico, who spent weekends at nearby Lake Chapala.
Nuñez argued that tourism can be studied within the
context of acculturation theory, by considering the
urban tourist as a “donor” culture and the host popu-
lation (the rural inhabitants of Lake Chapala) as a
“recipient” culture. For the anthropologist, the pres-
ence of a “weekending” urban leisure class in a rural
village in Mexico represented a second conquest with
harmful consequences in terms of political authority,
social organization, economics, and values (Nuñez,
1963). Nuñez stated, “the tourist is today more ubiq-
uitous than the missionary, the technical assistance
agent, or the trader, all of whom have been consid-
ered agents of diffusion and acculturation” (p. 352).
 252 GUERRÓN MONTERO
This article launched the interest on the study of
tourism in anthropology in the US. At the Ameri-
can Anthropological Association meetings in 1974
(Mexico City), anthropologist Valene L. Smith
organized the first panel on tourism at a US profes-
sional conference. The panel was followed by the
publication of the first edited book on tourism and
anthropology, Hosts and Guests: The Anthropology
of Tourism, published by Smith in 1977 and reed-
ited in 1989 (see Smith, 1989). This volume marked
the beginning of a more serious interest in tourism
and travel in anthropology. It included a collection
of 16 essays that addressed tourism both theoreti-
cally and ethnographically. Latin America was only
represented with one article on indigenous peoples
in Panama (Swain, 1989). At about the same time,
Annals of Tourism Research, one of the first aca-
demic journals dedicated to tourism,6 published
work focused on anthropological approaches to tour-
ism in the 1970s, including articles by Greenwood
(1976), Aspelin (1977), Smith (1977, 1979), Jafari
(1979), and Nash (1979). In the 1980s, Annals of
Tourism Research dedicated two issues to anthro-
pological approaches to tourism (Graburn, 1983;
Jafari, 1980). The 1980 issue addressed anthropo-
logical perspectives on tourism and development
and the 1983 issue tackled the anthropology of
tourism specifically, which suggested the appear-
ance of a separate field of study.
From the 1960s until the mid-1980s the frame-
work of most of the scholarship within the anthro-
pology of tourism centered on social impact
analysis, noting the lack of attention given to local
populations in the development and benefits of
tourism. Almost invariably, the supposition was
that tourism brought negative economic and cul-
tural impacts (Meyer-Arendt, 1990; Nash, 1989).
There were important exceptions, such as those
offered by MacCannell7 (1976) and Graburn (1977).
These scholars understood tourism as a ritual and a
sacred journey for Western modern societies, akin
to religious pilgrimages in small-scale societies.
Regarding publications that discussed tourism
in Latin America, in addition to the article by Mar-
garet Swain (1989) on gender roles in indigenous
tourism among the Kuna indigenous peoples in
Panama, Paul Aspelin (1977) studied tourism from
an anthropological perspective among the Mam­
ainde indigenous peoples in Brazil. Argentinean
IP: 76.111.174.212 On: Wed, 06 Jun 2018 19:37:00
Article(s) and/or figure(s) cannot be used for resale. Please use proper citation format when citing this article
including the DOI, publisher reference, volume number and page location.
Delivered by Ingenta
Juan José Selebri studied resort tourism in his
book Mar del Plata, el Ocio Represivo (Mar del
Plata, the Repressive Leisure), first published in
1970. Through a sociological lens, Selebri used
Marcuse’s concept of repressive desublimation to
analyze Latin America’s oldest tourism resort.
Selebri considered tourism as a new form of alien-
ation, as Argentineans who engaged in these pur-
suits needed to sustain two or three jobs to finance
a short leisure experience in Mar del Plata.
In an article that traces studies of tourism in
Latin America from a geographical perspective
in the 1980s, Meyer-Arendt (1990) argued that
most research in that period was along the lines of
host–guest interactions and their implications,
mostly assumed to be negative (Callimanopulos,
1982; Dunkel, 1985; Evans, 1981; Husbands, 1983,
1986; Lange, 1980; Passariello, 1983, 1986; van
den Berghe, 1980). Other foci included the neolib-
eral nature of tourism (Jurdao, 1992; Santana, 1997;
Turner & Ash, 1975), and the impact of tourism on
religion, culture, or the environment (Arana, 1983;
Glazier, 1983; Goldberg, 1981; Molina, 1982).
The focus shifted from the assumed negative
impacts of tourism to the study of the functions of
tourism within the boundaries of the hosts’ own
societies. In the 1990s, anthropology experienced
what became known as a “critical” or “reflexive
turn” (Fabian, 2001). This turn in the discipline also
influenced anthropological tourism studies, which
blended with cultural studies and addressed topics
such as the deconstruction of travel and “traveling
cultures”; the application of concepts such as “bor-
derlands” and “borderzones” to tourism (Bruner,
1996; Clifford, 1997; Rojek & Urry, 1997), and the
semiotic analysis of promotional material in tourism
(Dann, 1996). In Latin America, the anthropology
of tourism followed a similar path with a different
timeline (Barretto, 2011; Barretto, Grünewald, & Ota-
mendi, 2010). The “critical turn” in tourism studies
developed later, in the 21st century, with major propo-
nents of this approach calling for interpretive, quali-
tative, and reflexive research, and the unification of
philosophical and theoretical approaches (Ateljevic,
Harris, Wilson, & Collins, 2005; Ateljevic et al., 2007;
Hollinshead & Jamal, 2007; Lew, Hall, & Williams,
2004; Phillimore & Goodson, 2004; Tribe, 2006).
More recently, the “new mobilities” framework
has gained relevance in anthropology and tourism
 STATE OF TOURISM STUDIES IN ANTHROPOLOGY 253
studies (Glick Schiller & Salazar, 2013; Salazar,
2013). For Sheller (who studies the Caribbean)
and Urry (2006), this approach recognized both
the salience of both movement and its absence
throughout history and the need to examine them as
interdependent and unbounded. It aimed to go past
the imagery of terrains or the global and the local,
to recognize both the materiality and the locality
of mobilities. Cohen and Cohen (2015) proposed
that this approach merged the study of tourism—
often understood as an extraordinary event with a
beginning and an end—with more mundane local,
national, and transnational corporeal mobilities. One
key methodology employed by mobilities research-
ers is based on the transdisciplinary approach more
commonly used by anthropologists, ethnography.
Mobilities proponents call for the application of
“mobile” or “itinerant” ethnographies to the social
sciences (Sheller & Urry, 2006, p. 217).
Anthropology and Tourism in Latin
America and the Caribbean
In spite of the long history of tourism in Latin
America and the Caribbean, the anthropological
study of tourism has gained prominence only since
the mid-1990s (Barreto, Grünewald, Graburn,
Santos, & Steil, 2009; Schluter, 1988). Anthropo-
logical interventions of tourism in the region have
contributed to tourism studies in terms of theory,
method, and topics. In theoretical and methodolog-
ical terms, an emphasis on understanding the global
political economy of the topics studied and the par-
ticular Latin American context runs through the lit-
erature. Most studies address the power structures
that are attached to the touristic experience, while
also offering nuanced ways to understand the rela-
tionships among so-called hosts, guests, and tourism
mediators. As has happened with the anthropol-
ogy of tourism overall, more commonly the hosts
have been the focal point of analysis (Chambers,
2009), while the study of guests and tourism medi-
ators has been addressed with less frequency (see
Duccini, 2009; Nunes & Pacheco, 2009; Toniol, 2011).
Methodologically, the ethnographic approach and
applied methods—including action and participatory
action research—are the common denominators.
Attention to globalization permeates the anthro-
pological study of tourism of Latin America and the
IP: 76.111.174.212 On: Wed, 06 Jun 2018 19:37:00
Article(s) and/or figure(s) cannot be used for resale. Please use proper citation format when citing this article
including the DOI, publisher reference, volume number and page location.
Delivered by Ingenta
Caribbean, especially during the 1990s and 2000s
(Friedman, 1983; Gregory, 2006). In general terms,
the research that has developed in Latin America is
more connected to applied and public anthropology
and public policy (Rufino & Rufino, 2009). Barreto
(2011) provided an explanation for this prevalence
by questioning rhetorically the role of the “anthro-
pologist turismologist” in an emerging region like
Latin America, “a continent marked by favelas,
fishermen, indigenous peoples, caboclos,8 Afro-
descendants, peasants: [is it to] observe and register
or to attempt to assist in self-management, unifying
local knowledge with scientific knowledge[?]” (p. 6).
An analysis of the published work on the anthro-
pology of tourism in Latin America reveals that
anthropological interventions have centered heav-
ily on the following themes: identity, authenticity,
ethnicity, heritage, nation building, gender and sex,
and poverty. In what follows, I provide more spe-
cific details about these topics:
1. Historically, anthropology has been concerned
with exploring identity politics through culture.
Scholars of the anthropology of tourism in Latin
America have followed suit; not surprisingly,
cultural identity, ethnicity, and identity politics
are predominant. Common studies include the
influence of tourism on local systems of eth-
nic relations and hierarchies (César Dachary &
Arnais Burne, 2009; Van de Berghe, 1980), and
the application of concepts such as “commodifi-
cation of culture” and “staged authenticity.” The
anthropology of tourism has provided invalu-
able contributions to the understanding of the
role of indigenous peoples, black populations,
and other minorities in the creation of ethnic and
indigenous tourism. These studies have demon-
strated that the complexity and ambiguity of
the categories indigenous, black, or mestizo in
Latin America are generally erased in cultural
tourism. As Barretto (2011) noted:
Local inhabitants are not isolated from the
world; they are in the world; cosmopolitan-
ism is present among indigenous groups
and Afro-Latin Americans, who react to the
presence of tourists in a reflexive and dia-
logic way, showing them their cultural roots
as a way to maintain a unique attraction and
with this, strengthening those groups at the
political level. (p. 2)
 254 GUERRÓN MONTERO
2. Anthropologists have pointed out that the tour-
ism industry has a propensity to present indig-
enous cultures as a unique vestige of the past
preserved over the years to be admired by the
tourist gaze. Thus, the reinvention of lo indígena
plays a fundamental role in Andean and Central
American cultural tourism. Indigenous cultures
have been the issue around which most of the
political and intellectual debates have revolved,
and this continues to be visible in tourism’s ico-
nography (Anderson, 2012; Babb, 2011; Baud
& Ypeij, 2009; Castañeda, 1996; Castellanos,
2010; Chernela, 2011; Pereiro Pérez & De León
Inawinapi, 2007; Pereiro Pérez, 2015). More recent
studies on ethnic communities tackle alterna-
tive tourism studies in various forms, including
religious tourism (Fitó, 2009); ecotourism and
sustainable tourism (Stronza & Durham, 2008;
Vivanco, 2001); community-based and rural
tourism (Coronado, 2014; Da Silva Leal, 2009;
Ferreira de Faria, 2009; Fierro Reyes, 2015;
Juárez Sánchez & Ramírez Valverde, 2011;
Pastor Alfonso & Gómez Lopéz, 2010); and
voluntourism (Nunes & Pacheco, 2009). Schol-
ars of these forms of tourism recognize that they
are the result both of the negative outcomes of
mass tourism and of the production of marketing
niches based on business responsibility, ethnic
market, and sustainable development discourses
(Coronado, 2014).
3. Related to these concepts, cultural heritage,
heritagization, intangible heritage, and museum
studies are themes analyzed commonly. In these
studies, the association between heritagization
of culture and public policy are investigated and
brought to the forefront (Guerrón Montero, 2009;
Little, 2004; Scarpaci, 2004; Scher, 2011).
4. The role of tourism in nation building has
received important attention from anthropo-
logical research conducted in Latin America.
Overall, scholars studying nation building see
it as a wide-ranging plan that includes not only
economic goals, but also political, social, and
ideological ones, where national identities and
national interests are intertwined (Amit, 2001;
Babb, 2011; Berger & Wood, 2010; Bowman,
2013; Cocks, 2007; Guerrón Montero, 2006,
2009; Hellier-Tinoco, 2011; Merrill, 2009;
Sánchez & Adams, 2008).
IP: 76.111.174.212 On: Wed, 06 Jun 2018 19:37:00
Article(s) and/or figure(s) cannot be used for resale. Please use proper citation format when citing this article
including the DOI, publisher reference, volume number and page location.
Delivered by Ingenta
5. Gender, sex, and romance tourism have also
been explored. Most works address the complex-
ity and multiplicity of interplays between the
tourist and the client (Brennan, 2004; Cabezas,
2009; Padilla, 2007; Roland, 2011; Williams,
2013), in some cases discriminating between
sex and romance tourism, while in others pro-
posing multifaceted approaches to the category
“sex worker.” As Cabezas (2004) suggested,
this reinterpretation accounts for “the provi-
sional practices and identities that constitute
sexual markets and that envelop understandings
of labor and sex as more a matter of continua
than a hard and fast definition” (p. 992).
6. Public officials, policy administrators, and even
scholars have conceived the tourism industry
as the elixir to end poverty in Latin America
(Croes, 2014; Hawkins & Mann, 2007). In
an interesting yet somewhat predictable turn
of events, worldwide poverty itself is now
offered as a tourism attraction. Studies aimed
to understand poverty tourism have emerged,
centered more often on Brazil,9 Jamaica, and
Mexico. According to Dürr and Jaffe (2012),
this emerging field has the potential to connect
Latin American and Caribbean Studies on tour-
ism and urban inequality. Most studies on pov-
erty tourism have tended to focus on tourism
“as a form of consumption, rather than asking
how a broader range of actors connect in the
‘slum tourist encounter’ to convert the slum
into a tourism product” (Dürr & Jaffe, 2012,
p. 113).10 Some of the most relevant exam-
ples of poverty tourism studies include those
of favela tourism in Rio de Janeiro (Freire-
Medeiros, 2013), slum tourism in Mexico
City’s Tepito neighborhood (Dürr & Jaffe,
2012), and Kingston’s Trenchtown reggae
scene (Webster, 2008).
Conclusions
A few final general remarks can be made about
the state of the anthropology of tourism of and in
Latin America. It has developed a productive rather
than a merely reactive critique and it continues to be
informed by a framework rooted in global political
economy and concerned with globalization, with a
particular focus on hosts. However, it has moved
 STATE OF TOURISM STUDIES IN ANTHROPOLOGY 255
from viewing tourism as inherently negative to
viewing tourism as a coproduction (Bruner, 2005),
while considering the ways in which local popu-
lations create, cocreate, and respond to tourism.11
Another transformation refers to the emergence of
comparative works. Although generally speaking
comparative studies in the anthropology of tour-
ism in Latin America are sparse (cf. Dürr & Jaffe,
2012), a growing body of comparative works has
surfaced in the last 10 years (Babb, 2011; Bowman,
2013; Cabezas, 2004; Guerrón Montero, 2011;
Merrill, 2009).
The future looks promising for the anthropology
of tourism of Latin America. The theoretical and
methodological approaches, the topics explored,
and the emphasis on dialogue among students of
tourism of and in Latin America will continue to
produce excellent academic, applied, and public
scholarship. However, based on the process of
reviewing the literature for this article, I propose
the need for a more uniform dialogue between the
Global North and South. Although there are prom-
ising alternative approaches to the study of tour-
ism stemming from anthropology within Latin
America, the location of cultural knowledge (in
both physical and metaphorical terms) has not
been addressed sufficiently in the study of tour-
ism. One exception worth referencing is the “Cul-
tura, Turismo y Sociedad” (CulTus), founded in
2002 as forum for the reflection and debate about
tourism from empirical and theoretical perspec-
tives. The objective of the group is to develop new
paradigms for the study of tourism and anthropol-
ogy. The group includes academics from Uruguay,
Argentina, Paraguay, Chile, and Brazil (Barretto,
2011).
However, in general, what transpires in the
anthropology of tourism in Latin America is what
Lins Ribeiro (2006) called a metropolitan provin-
cialism and a provincial cosmopolitanism:
Metropolitan provincialism means the ignorance
that hegemonic centers usually have of the produc-
tion of nonhegemonic centers. Provincial cosmopol-
itanism means the knowledge that non-hegemonic
centers usually have of the production of hegemonic
centers. (p. 378)
The literature I have surveyed points to the fact
that whereas anthropologists in the North are rarely
IP: 76.111.174.212 On: Wed, 06 Jun 2018 19:37:00
Article(s) and/or figure(s) cannot be used for resale. Please use proper citation format when citing this article
including the DOI, publisher reference, volume number and page location.
Delivered by Ingenta
aware of the theoretical and methodological con-
tributions of anthropologists in the South, anthro-
pologists in the South are highly conscious of the
contributions of anthropologists in the North. Part
of this inequality is the lack of translation of work
published in Spanish or Portuguese to English,
and sometimes the lack of interest among Western
scholars to read works published in languages other
than English.
These realities derive as much from the Euro-
centric nature of academia itself as from the par-
ticularities of a mostly fragmented field such as
tourism studies. Cohen and Cohen (2015) stated
that the field of tourism studies was a latecomer
in the long-held debate about Eurocentrism in
academia. This tardiness applied both to assump-
tions made about the role of emerging regions in
the tourism phenomenon and to the power relations
within the tourism academy itself “alongside other
skewed variables such as gender, social class and
race” with gatekeepers whose work was based on
Western research traditions (Cohen & Cohen, 2015,
p. 158).
For the anthropology of tourism in Latin
America to advance towards a more vibrant devel-
opment, there needs to be an equal and multilingual
dialogue among scholars, practitioners, and tour-
ism stakeholders. Monological anthropology and
tourism studies need to be replaced by heteroglos-
sic anthropology and tourism studies (Lins Ribeiro,
2006). It is likely that this dialogue will facilitate a
more comprehensive interdisciplinarity. Likewise,
the conceptualization of tourism as one aspect
of a larger spectrum of movements, representa-
tions, and practices (as proposed within the new
mobilities framework) may become an alternative
to the inherently Eurocentric bias of modernist
tourism studies.
A recognition of the critical turns taken by
anthropology and tourism studies, coupled with
an approach that “does not distinguish between
a centre and periphery of tourist activity; . . .
does not assume a single point of dissemination
of tourism; and . . . does not prioritize a particu-
lar kind of motivation” (Cohen & Cohen, 2015,
p. 163) may generate a balanced framework ide-
ally suitable for interpreting emerging regions
of the world, including Latin America and the
Caribbean.
 256 GUERRÓN MONTERO
Notes
1
An earlier version of this article was presented at the
V International Conference on Critical Tourism Studies in
Sarajevo, Bosnia & Herzegovina (June 2013) at the session
Critical Action in Academia, moderated by Kellee Caton. I
would like to thank the panelists and audience present for
their valuable comments. I also would like to express my
gratitude to Dr. Florence Babb for her insightful remarks and
suggestions and to Dr. Lynn Minnaert for her outstanding
performance as co-editor of this special issue.
2
I recognize the contentious nature of the terms “Latin
America” and “the Caribbean,” and understand them as West-
ern constructions with changing meanings and a traceable
genealogy and history (Mignolo, 2005; Quijano, 2000).
3
The state of the anthropology of tourism in higher educa-
tion in Latin America is beyond the purview of this article.
4
In this article, I do not make a distinction between Latin
American scholars trained in the West versus those trained in
Latin America.
5
In 1950, approximately 1.3 million tourists visited Latin
America and the Caribbean. In 1980, Latin America wel-
comed 18 million tourists, and in 2006, 45 million. Tour-
ism revenues rose from US$392 in 1950 to US$13 billion
in 1980 and more than US$41 billion in 2006 (UNWTO,
2008).
6
Jafar Jafari, the founding editor of the journal, received a
Ph.D. in anthropology from Cornell University in 1985. His
1973 M.A. thesis discussed issues related to the anthropology
of tourism (Jafari, 1973).
7
MacCannell initiated his scholarly life as an anthro-
pologist, moving then to rural sociology and later semiotics
(Aramberri, 2015).
8
This term refers to a person of mixed Indigenous Brazil-
ian and European ancestry. It can also denote a culturally
assimilated person of full Amerindian descent.
9
The anthropology of tourism in Brazil is worth mention-
ing. It started at the end of the 1990s, when tourism was
discussed at the III Anthropology Meeting of Mercosul in
Posadas, Argentina (Barretto et al., 2009). The first sympo-
sium on the anthropology of tourism in Brazil took place
in 2004 at the 24th meeting of the Brazilian Association of
Anthropology in Olinda, Pernambuco. The most commonly
addressed issues in congresses and publications included
sexual tourism, local identity, religious tourism, cultural
impact, and heritage. Generally, the focus was on accultura-
tion processes and loss of authenticity and identity among
hosts engaging in tourism.
10
However, Dürr and Jaffe believe that there are signs of
movement from the single case study approach to theorizations
on the intersection between what they call slum tourism, dark
tourism, and urban inequality.
11
Bruner (2005) offered the very useful understanding of
the relationship between tourists and hosts as coproductions
to avoid falling into the assumption that tourists are “invad-
ers” in a given location. Coproduction and encounter are help-
ful concepts to interpret the interactions between tourists and
hosts because they both allow for the recognition of the asym-
metric relations of power that exist between these regions.
IP: 76.111.174.212 On: Wed, 06 Jun 2018 19:37:00
Article(s) and/or figure(s) cannot be used for resale. Please use proper citation format when citing this article
including the DOI, publisher reference, volume number and page location.
Delivered by Ingenta
References
Amit, V. (2001). A clash of vulnerabilities: Citizenship, labor,
and expatriacy in the Cayman Islands. American Ethnolo-
gist, 28(3), 574–594.
Anderson, M. (2012). Notes on tourism, ethnicity, and the
politics of cultural value in Honduras. In J. L. Burrell &
E. Moodie (Eds.), Central America in the new millen-
nium (1st ed., pp. 276–292). Oxford, UK: Berghann.
Aramberri, J. (2015). Roaring tiger, sweet pussy cat: The
education of Dean MacCannell. Tourism Recreation
Research, 40(2), 234–247.
Arana, M. (Ed.). (1983). Medio ambiente y turismo. Buenos
Aires, Argentina: CLACSO.
Aspelin, P. (1977). The anthropological analysis of tourism:
Indirect tourism and political economy in the case of the
Mamainde of Mato Grosso, Brazil. Annals of Tourism
Research, 4(3), 135–160.
Ateljevic, I., Harris, C., Wilson, E., & Collins, F. L. (2005).
Getting “entangled”: Reflexivity and the “critical turn”
in tourism studies. Tourism Recreation Research, 30(2),
9–21.
Ateljevic, I., Pritchard, A., & Morgan, N. (2007). Introduc-
tion: Promoting an academy of hope in tourism enquiry.
In I. Ateljevic, A. Pritchard, & N. Morgan (Eds.), The
critical turn in tourism studies (pp. 1–11). Oxford, UK:
Elsevier.
Babb, F. (2011). The tourism encounter: Fashioning Latin
American nations and histories. Stanford, CA: Stanford
University Press.
Barretto, M. (2011). Turismo, cultura y sociedad. Pasos,
9(3), 1–6.
Barretto, M., Grünewald, R. D. A., Graburn, N., Santos, R. J.
D., & Steil, C. A. (Eds.). (2009). Turismo e antropologia:
Novas abordagens. Campinas, Brazil: Papirus.
Barretto, M., Grünewald, R. D. A., & Otamendi, A. (2010).
RAM- Reunión de antropología del MERCOSUR “Diver-
sidad y poder en América Latina.” Pasos, 8(2), 403–409.
Baud, J. M., & Ypeij, J. L. (Eds.). (2009). Cultural tourism
in Latin America: The politics of space and imagery
(Vol. 96). Leiden, Netherlands: Brill Publishers.
Berger, D. (2006). The development of Mexico’s tourism
industry: Pyramids by day, martinis by night. New York,
NY: Palgrave Macmillan.
Berger, D., & Wood, A. G. (Eds.). (2010). Holiday in Mexico:
Critical reflections on tourism and tourist encounters.
Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
Bowman, K. S. (2013). Peddling paradise: The politics of
tourism in Latin America Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner
Publishers.
Brennan, D. (2004). What’s love got to do with it? Transna-
tional desires and sex tourism in the Dominican Repub-
lic. American Anthropologist, 107(2), 279–279.
Bruner, E. (1996). Tourism in the Balinese borderzone. In S.
Lavie & T. Swedenburg (Eds.), Displacement, diaspora,
and geographies of identity (pp. 157–179). Durham, NC:
Duke University Press.
Bruner, E. (2005). Culture on tour: Ethnographies of travel.
Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
 STATE OF TOURISM STUDIES IN ANTHROPOLOGY 257
Burns, G. L. (2004). Anthropology and tourism: Past contri-
butions and future theoretical challenges. Anthropologi-
cal Forum, 14(1), 5–22.
Cabezas, A. (2004). Between love and money: Sex, tourism,
and citizenship in Cuba and the Dominican Republic.
Signs, 29(4), 987–1015.
Cabezas, A. (2009). Economies of desire: Sex and tourism
in Cuba and the Dominican Republic. Philadelphia, PA:
Temple University Press.
Callimanopulos, D. (1982). The tourist trap: Who’s getting
caught? Cultural Survival Quarterly, 6(3), 1–35.
Castañeda, Q. (1996). In the museum of Maya culture:
Touring Chichen Itza. Minneapolis, MN: University of
Minnesota Press.
Castellanos, M. B. (2010). A return to servitude: Maya
migration and the tourist trade in Cancun. Minneapolis,
MN: University of Minnesota Press.
César Dachary, A., & Arnaiz Burne, S. M. (2009). Pueblos
originarios y turismo en América Latina. Estudios y Per-
spectivas, 18, 69–91.
Chambers, E. (2009). Native tours: The anthropology
of travel and tourism (2nd ed.). Long Grove, IL:
Waveland.
Chernela, J. (2011). Barriers natural and unnatural: Islamiento
as a central metaphor in Kuna ecotourism. Bulletin of
Latin American Research, 30(1), 35–49.
Clifford, J. (1997). Routes: Travel and translation in the late
twentieth century. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University
Press.
Cocks, C. (2007). The pleasures of degeneration: Climate,
race, and the origins of the global tourist south in the
Americas. Discourse, 29(2/3), 215–235.
Cocks, C. (2013). Tropical whites: The rise of the tourist
south in the Americas. Philadelphia, PA: University of
Pennsylvania Press.
Cohen, E., & Cohen, S. (2015). Beyond Eurocentrism in
tourism studies: A paradigm shift to mobilities. Tourism
Recreation Research, 40(2), 157–168.
Coronado, G. (2014). Selling culture? Between commoditi-
sation and cultural control in indigenous alternative tour-
ism. Pasos, 12(1), 11–28.
Crick, M. (1995). The anthropologist as tourist: An identity in
question. In M. Lanfant, J. Allcock, & E. Bruner (Eds.),
International tourism: Identity and change (1st ed.,
pp. 205–223). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Croes, R. (2014). Tourism and poverty reduction in Latin
America: Where does the region stand? Worldwide Hos-
pitality and Tourism Themes, 6(3), 293–300.
Da Silva Leal, R. E. (2009). O turismo desenvolvido em
territórios indígenas sob o ponto de vista antropológico.
In R. Bartholo, D. G. Sansolo, & I. Bursztyn (Eds.), Tur-
ismo de base comunitária (1st ed., pp. 240–248). Rio de
Janeiro, Brazil: Letra e Imagem.
Dann, G. M. S. (1996). The language of tourism: A sociolin-
guistic perspective. Wallingford, UK: CABI.
Dos Santos Filho, J. (2008). Política nacional de turismo:
Descaso e desrespeito para com o povo brasileiro. Revista
Espaço Acadêmico, 86.
IP: 76.111.174.212 On: Wed, 06 Jun 2018 19:37:00
Article(s) and/or figure(s) cannot be used for resale. Please use proper citation format when citing this article
including the DOI, publisher reference, volume number and page location.
Delivered by Ingenta
Duccini, L. (2009). No lugar de Exu: Os guias de turismo no
candomblé em Salvador, BA. Revista de Antropologia,
56(2), 477–508.
Dunkel, D. R. (1985). Tourism as a form of demographic
imperialism: A comparison of the Bahamas and Virgin
Islands. Unpublished Ph.D., Michigan State University,
East Lansing, MI.
Dürr, E., & Jaffe, R. (2012). Theorizing slum tourism: Per-
forming, negotiating and Transforming inequality. Euro-
pean Review of Latin American and Caribbean Studies,
93, 113–123.
Evans, N. H. (1981). The process of mediation in tourism inter-
action: A case study of Puerto Vallarta, Jalisco, Mexico.
Unpublished Ph.D., University of California, Riverside,
Riverside, CA.
Fabian, J. (2001). Anthropology with an attitude: Critical
essays. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Ferreira de Faria, I. (2009). Ecoturismo, cultura e participa-
ção: Gestão do território indígena no Alto Rio Negro. In
R. Bartholo, D. G. Sansolo, & I. Bursztyn (Eds.), Tur-
ismo de base comunitária (pp. 261–276). Rio de Janeiro,
Brazil: Letra e Imagem.
Fields, G. S. (1984). Employment, income distribution and
economic growth in seven small open economies. Eco-
nomic Journal, 94, 74–83.
Fierro Reyes, I. G. (2015). Turismo de hacienda e interven-
ción comunitaria en el contexto rural yucateco. Desacatos,
47, 54–71.
Fitó, M. (2009). Las religiones y culturas de origen afri-
cano (Brasil, Cuba, Venezuela) a prueba de políticas
turísticas y rivalidades. Études Caribéennes [Online],
13–14.
Freire-Medeiros, B. (2013). Touring poverty. London, UK &
New York, NY: Routledge.
Friedman, J. A. (1983). From plantation to resort: Tour-
ism and dependency in a West Indian island [St. Lucia].
Unpublished Ph.D., Rutgers University, New Brunswick,
NJ.
Glazier, S. D. (1983). Caribbean pilgrimages: A topology.
Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 22, 316–325.
Glick Schiller, N., & Salazar, N. B. (2013). Regimes of
mobility across the globe. Journal of Ethnic and Migra-
tion Studies, 39(2), 183–200.
Goldberg, A. (1981). Commercial folklore and voodoo in
Haiti: International tourism and the sale of culture.
Unpublished Ph.D., Indiana University, Bloomington,
IN.
Graburn, N. H. H. (1977). Tourism: The sacred journey. In
V. L. Smith (Ed.), Hosts and guests: The anthropology of
tourism (1st ed., pp. 17–31). Philadelphia, PA: Univer-
sity of Pennsylvania Press.
Graburn, N. H. H. (1983). Special issue: “The anthropology
of tourism.” Annals of Tourism Research, 10(1), 1–192.
Graburn, N. H. H., & Jafari, J. (1991). Introduction: Tourism
social science. Annals of Tourism Research, 18(1), 1–11.
Greenwood, D. J. (1976). Tourism as an agent of change:
A  Spanish Basque case. Annals of Tourism Research,
3(3), 128–142.
 258 GUERRÓN MONTERO
Gregory, S. (2006). The devil behind the mirror: Globaliza-
tion and politics in the Dominican Republic. Berkeley,
CA: University of California Press.
Guerrón Montero, C. (2006). Tourism and Afro-Antillean
identity in Panama. Journal of Tourism and Cultural
Change, 4(2), 65–84.
Guerrón Montero, C. (2009). The “three roots” of Panama’s
cultural heritage: The construction of racial and national
identities in simulated tourism. In M. Baud & A. Ypeij
(Eds.), Cultural tourism in Latin America: The politics
of space and imagery (pp. 45–68). Boston, MA: Brill
Academic Publishers.
Guerrón Montero, C. (2011). On tourism and the con­
structions of “Paradise islands” in Central America and
the Caribbean. Bulletin of Latin American Research, 1,
21–34.
Guerrón Montero, C. (2012). Peer-reviewed entry: “Tour-
ism.” Oxford Bibliographies in “Anthropology”.
Hawkins, D. E., & Mann, S. (2007). The World Bank’s role
in tourism development. Annals of Tourism Research,
34(2), 348–363.
Hellier-Tinoco, R. (2011). Embodying Mexico: Tourism,
nationalism and performance. Oxford, UK: Oxford
UP.
Hollinshead, K., & Jamal, T. (2007). Tourism and “the third
ear”: Further prospects for qualitative inquiry. Tourism
Analysis, 12, 85–129.
Husbands, W. C. (1983). The genesis of tourism in Barba-
dos. Caribbean Geography, 1, 107–120.
Husbands, W. C. (1986). Periphery resort tourism and tourist-
resident stress. Leisure Studies, 5, 175–188.
Jafari, J. (1973). The role of tourism in the socio-economic trans-
formation of developing countries. Unpublished Master
of Arts, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY.
Jafari, J. (1979). Tourism and the social sciences: A bibli-
ography: 1970–1978. Annals of Tourism Research, 6(2),
149–194.
Jafari, J. (1980). Special issue: “Tourism and develop-
ment: Anthropological perspectives.” Annals of Tourism
Research, 7(1), 5–158.
Jafari, J. (2001). Scientification of tourism. In V. Smith &
M. Brent (Eds.), Hosts and guests revisited (1st ed.,
pp. 28–41). Elmsford, NY: Cognizant.
Juárez Sánchez, P., & Ramírez Valverde, B. (2011). Tur-
ismo rural: Experiencias y desafíos en Iberoamérica.
Texcoco, México: Colegio de Postgraduados en Ciencias
Agrícolas.
Jurdao, F. (1992). Los mitos del turismo. Madrid, Spain:
Endimión.
Lange, F. W. (1980). The impact of tourism on cultural patri-
mony: A Costa Rican example. Annals of Tourism Research,
7(1), 56–68.
Leite, N., & Graburn, N. H. H. (2009). Anthropological inter-
ventions on tourism studies. In T. Jamal & M. Robinson
(Eds.), Sage handbook of tourism studies (1st  ed.,
pp. 35–64). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Levi-Strauss, C. (1992). Tristes tropiques (Reprint ed.). New
York, NY: Penguin.
IP: 76.111.174.212 On: Wed, 06 Jun 2018 19:37:00
Article(s) and/or figure(s) cannot be used for resale. Please use proper citation format when citing this article
including the DOI, publisher reference, volume number and page location.
Delivered by Ingenta
Lew, A., Hall, C. M., & Williams, A. M. (Eds.). (2004). A com-
panion to tourism. Oxford, UK: Willey-Blackwell.
Lins Ribeiro, G. (2006). World anthropologies: Cosmopoli-
tics for a new global scenario in anthropology. Critique
of Anthropology, 26(4), 363–386.
Little, W. (2004). Mayas in the marketplace: Tourism, glo-
balization, and cultural identity. Austin, TX: University
of Texas Press.
MacCannell, D. (1976). The tourist: A new theory of the
leisure class (1st ed.). New York, NY: Schocken.
Merrill, D. (2009). Negotiating paradise: U.S. tourism and
empire in twentieth-century Latin America. Chapel Hill,
NC: University of North Carolina Press.
Meyer-Arendt, K. (1990). Geographic research on tourism in
Latin America, 1980–1990. Conference on Latin Ameri-
canist Geographers, Benchmark, 17/18, 199–207.
Mignolo, W. (2005). The Idea of Latin America. Oxford, UK:
Blackwell.
Mings, R. C. (1980). Tourism development in Latin America
and related research needs. Proceedings of the Confer-
ence of Latin Americanist Geographers, 8, 336–346.
Molina E. S. (1982). Turismo y ecología. Mexico: Trillas
Publishing.
Nash, D. (1979). The rise and fall of an aristocratic tourist
culture: Nice 1763–1936. Annals of Tourism Research,
6(1), 61–75.
Nash, D. (1989). Tourism as a form of imperialism. In V. L.
Smith (Ed.), Hosts and guests: The anthropology of tour-
ism (2nd ed., pp. 37–53). Philadelphia, PA: University of
Pennsylvania Press.
Nash, D. (1996). The anthropology of tourism (1st ed.). Bingley,
UK: Emerald.
Nash, D. (Ed.). (2007). The study of tourism: Anthropologi-
cal and sociological beginnings (1st ed.). Amsterdam,
Netherlands: Elsevier.
Nunes, F., & Pacheco, J. (2009). Solidariedade e lazer?
A  experiência dos “Turistas-voluntários” no Rio de
Janeiro. Graduate dissertation, Fundação Getúlio Vargas,
Brazil.
Nuñez, T. (1963). Tourism, tradition, and acculturation:
Weekendismo in a Mexican village. Ethnology, 2(3),
347–352.
Nuñez, T. (1977). Touristic studies in anthropological
perspective. In V. Smith (Ed.), Hosts and guests: The
anthropology of tourism (pp. 207–216). Philadelphia, PA:
University of Pennsylvania Press.
Padilla, M. (2007). Caribbean pleasure industry: Tourism,
sexuality, and AIDS in the Dominican Republic. Chicago,
IL: University of Chicago Press.
Passariello, P. (1983). Never on Sunday? Mexican tourists at
the beach. Annals of Tourism Research, 10(1), 109–122.
Passariello, P. (1986). Novelty’s pilgrims: Change and tour-
ism in a Mexican beach community. Unpublished Ph.D.,
University of California, Berkeley, CA.
Pastor Alfonso, M. J., & Gómez López, D. (2010). Impactos
socioculturales en el turismo comunitario: Una visión
desde los pueblos implicados. Salamanca, Spain: Agua
Clara.
 STATE OF TOURISM STUDIES IN ANTHROPOLOGY 259
Pereiro Pérez, X. (2015). Reflexión antropológica sobre el
turismo indígena. Desacatos, 47.
Pereiro Pérez, X., & De León Inawinapi, C. (2007). Los
impactos del turismo en Kuna Yala: Turismo y cultura
entre los Kuna de Panamá (1st ed.). Madrid, Spain:
Ramón Areces.
Phillimore, J., & Goodson, L. (Eds.). (2004). Qualitative
research on tourism: Ontologies, epistemologies and
methodologies. New York, NY: Routledge.
Quijano, A. (2000). Colonialidad del poder, eurocentrismo y
América Latina. In E.
Lander (Ed.), La colonialidad del saber: Eurocentrismo y
ciencias sociales (1st ed., pp. 201–246). Buenos Aires,
Argentina: CLACSO.
Reis, A., & Shelton, E. (2011). The nature of tourism studies.
Tourism Analysis, 16, 375–384.
Rojek, C., & Urry, J. (1997). Touring cultures: Transforma-
tions of travel and theory. New York, NY: Routledge.
Roland, L. K. (2011). Cuban color in tourism and la lucha:
An ethnography of racial meanings. Oxford, UK: Oxford
University Press.
Rufino, M., & Rufino, D. (2009). Turismo solidário e comu-
nidades do entorno das águas em Manaus (AM). Natal,
Brazil: Natal Press.
Ruggles-Brisse, O. (2012). Tourism: Latin America’s travel
boom and challenges. Americas Quarterly, 6(3), 5–6.
Salazar, N. B. (2013). Imagining mobility at the “End of the
world.” History and Anthropology, 24(2), 233–252.
Sammarchi, M. (2001). Situación actual del turismo en la
Argentina. Cuadernos de Turismo, 8, 129–144.
Sánchez, P. M., & Adams, K. (2008). The Janus-faced char-
acter of tourism in Cuba. Annals of Tourism Research,
35(1), 27–46.
Santana Talavera, A. (1997). Antropología y turismo: Nue-
vas hordas, viejas culturas? Barcelona, Spain: Ariel.
Scarpaci, J. L. (2004). Plazas and barrios: Heritage tourism
and globalization in the Latin American centro histórico.
Tucson, AZ: University of Arizona Press.
Scher, P. (2011). Heritage tourism in the Caribbean: The
politics of culture after neoliberalism. Bulletin of Latin
American Research, 30(1), 7–20.
Schluter, R. (1988). In search of cultural identity: Latin
American tourism literature. Annals of Tourism Research,
15(2), 285.
Schwartz, R. (1999). Pleasure island: Tourism and temp-
tation in Cuba. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska
Press.
Selebri, J. J. (1970). Mar del plata, el ocio represivo. Buenos
Aires, Argentina: Tiempo Contemporáneo.
IP: 76.111.174.212 On: Wed, 06 Jun 2018 19:37:00
Article(s) and/or figure(s) cannot be used for resale. Please use proper citation format when citing this article
including the DOI, publisher reference, volume number and page location.
Delivered by Ingenta
View publication stats
Sheller, M., & Urry, J. (2006). The new mobilities paradigm.
Environment and Planning A, 38(2), 207–226.
Smith, V. L. (1977). Recent research on tourism and cultural
change: 1976 symposium. Annals of Tourism Research,
4(3), 129–134.
Smith, V. L. (1979). Women the taste-makers in tourism.
Annals of Tourism Research, 6(1), 49–60.
Smith, V. L. (Ed.). (1989). Hosts and guests: The anthropol-
ogy of tourism (2nd ed.). Philadelphia, PA: University of
Pennsylvania Press.
Spoor, M. (2000). Two decades of adjustment and agricul-
tural development in Latin America and the Caribbean.
Santiago, Chile: CEPAL.
Stronza, A. (2001). Anthropology of tourism: Forging new
ground for ecotourism and other alternatives. Annual
Review of Anthropology, 30, 261–283.
Stronza, A., & Durham, W. H. (Eds.). (2008). Ecotourism
and conservation in the Americas. Wallingford, UK:
CABI.
Swain, M. B. (1989). Gender roles in indigenous tourism:
Kuna Mola, Kuna Yala, and cultural survival. In V. Smith
(Ed.), Hosts and guests: The anthropology of tourism
(pp. 83–104). Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsyl-
vania Press.
Toniol, R. (2011). “O caminho é aqui”: Um estudo antropológico
da experiência do caminho de Santiago de Compostela em
uma associação de peregrinos do Rio Grande do Sul, Brasil.
Pasos, 9(3), 69–82.
Tribe, J. (2006). The truth about tourism. Annals of Tourism
Research, 33(2), 360–381.
Turner, L., & Ash, J. (1975). The golden hordes: Interna-
tional tourism and the pleasure periphery. London, UK:
Constable & Robinson.
United Nations World Tourism Organization. (2008). Tour-
ism highlights. Madrid, Spain: Author.
United Nations World Tourism Organization. (2012). Tour-
ism highlights. Madrid, Spain: Author.
Van den Berghe, P. L. (1980). Tourism as ethnic relations:
A case study of Cuzco, Peru. Ethnic and Racial Studies,
3, 375–392.
Vivanco, L. (2001). Spectacular quetzals, ecotourism, and
environmental futures in Monte Verde, Costa Rica. Eth-
nology, 40(2), 79–92.
Webster, D. (2008). Jamaican vinyl tourism: A niche within a
niche. In M. Daye, D. Chambers, & S. Roberts (Eds.), New
perspectives in Caribbean tourism (1st ed., pp.  61–78).
New York, NY: Routledge.
Williams, E. L. (2013). Sex tourism in Bahia: Ambiguous entan-
glements. Champaign, IL: University of Illinois Press.