Ethnicity Measures, Intermarriage and Social Policy - Essay Example

?Ethni Measures, Intermarriage and Social Policy In “Ethni Measures, Intermarriage and Social Policy,” Paul Callister of Victoria of Wellington discusses the terms race and ethnicity and how they are defined in New Zealand today. Callister came to the conclusion that race is used to describe physical or genetic features, while ethnicity refers to the social construction of an individual. Statistics New Zealand recognizes a number of factors that contribute to someone’s ethnicity: name, ancestry, culture, dwelling place, race, nationality and/or place of birth, citizenship, and religion/language. Each individual’s definition of their ethnicity is also confined to how society views that person. For the New Zealand census, respondents have the freedom to choose their own ethnicity how they see fit. Of course, this can sometimes lead to skewed data. Another factor that contributes to unreliable data is how the questions about ethnicity are worded. In the New Zealand censuses of 1991, 1996, and 2001, the way questions about ethnicity are worded have varied considerably. Inevitably, responses have also varied depending on how the question is asked. For those who are of mixed ancestry, they can sometimes claim to have ties to a number of different races or none at all. Maori people in particular have a hard time responding to questions about ethnicity because they can often claim more than one. Interracial marriage has led to many people who have a stake in more than one culture, and this had led to questions about which group they truly belong to. However, because respondents have the ability to be able to choose which ethnic group they affiliate with the most, they are more likely to choose the group that they feel the most comfortable with. The definition of ethnicity in New Zealand will continue to provoke debate about how people are classed in terms of their ethnic groups. Due to the rise in interracial marriages, it is likely that this definition will become more clouded over the next few decades. In my mind, ethnicity is an important part of a person’s being because it gives them an identity. Without an identity, we are likely to become defined by how other people view us. If people are to be given the choice to choose which ethnic group they belong to, then there should be some measures put in place to make sure that census data does not become unreliable. From Statistics New Zealand’s Review of the Measurement of Ethnicity, I feel that a fractional ethnicity model from Gould would be the best option. This way, the total number of responses would equal the total population. Also, each part of a person’s ethnic background would contribute towards the total makeup of New Zealand’s population. This is better than forcing people who identify with more than one ethnicity to choose one over the other. Also, it would be more effective than randomly allocating prioritisation, where people of more than one ethnicity are randomly applied to only a single ethnicity. Politics, power and indigenous tourism In his article “Politics, power and indigenous tourism,” Michael Hall investigates how tourism is thought of in terms of politics and power. Power is something that is placed in the hands of those qualified to lead on a certain issue. For the tourism industry, many of the decisions are made without consulting the local people who perhaps have more expertise and cultural links to the tourist attractions that are made available. Power can be given or taken away depending on who has the power and what they have it over. Lukes identified three approaches that analyze power; a one-dimensional view (observable, over behaviour, conflict and decision-making), a two-dimensional view (decisions and non-decisions and observable conflict), and a three-dimensional view (decision-making and control over political agenda, observable and latent conflict). The one-dimensional view says that even though the community decision-making process is imperfect, it can at least be observed since two parties can often have conflict over an issue. Indigenous groups are often underrepresented, and this can cause dominant ethnic group to maintain control over indigenous tourism. In Australia, the government brought in laws to help indigenous peoples influence decision-making on tourism issues. For the two-dimensional view, non-decision-making, which is defined as the demand for change in how benefits are allocated is not allowed to be heard, helps those in power to maintain their hold on it because only their voice is allowed to be heard. In New Zealand in 1996, the government of the day made it a requirement for the New Zealand Tourism Board to consult with the Maori Ministry about how to set up Maori tourist. Often, indigenous groups do not have the money or power to be able to change tourism policies. For three-dimensional view, Lukes simply expands on the first two views of power; institutional bias and manipulation of preferences are the main differences. Indigenous people are forced to act in a certain way that is not considered normal these days. For example, Maori people involved within the tourism industry often wear cultural items that are considered outdated these days. I feel that power is something that is underestimated by many in the tourism industry. Indigenous people are often not aware that they have the right to control how their culture is viewed by tourists. This is because of pre-existing beliefs and assumptions that are held about that culture. In order to break the commonly held views of indigenous peoples, they must be involved more in the tourism industry. Power in the tourism industry usually falls into the hands of those who already hold power in other areas of society, such as politics. This is why allowing these people to have power in tourism results in indigenous people being undervalued and thought of as actors in the circus. If indigenous people are given power within the tourism industry, then they are likely to do a better job than those who are unfamiliar with the culture. Everyone could gain something is power was distributed more evenly. TOURISM, HYBRIDITY, AND AMBIGUITY: THE RELEVANCE OF BHABHA’S ‘THIRD SPACE’ CULTURES This article by Dr. Keith Hollinshead from Texax A&M University talks about the contributions that Homi Bhabha has made about cultural theoretical thought. Bhabha’s work, The Location of Culture, does not mention the tourism industry in particular but many of the points that he makes can be applied to the industry. Over the past few decades, the way that we think about culture has changed considerably, and Bhabha provides a view that is postmodernist. To him, culture is something that is always changing depending on the views of those who consider themselves part of that culture. This is why culture cannot be viewed as something static because culture never stays the same. For the tourism industry, Bhabha’s views encourage a culture to continually look at itself and how our culture is defined; is it by those to whom the culture belongs or those who experience the culture from the outside? Tourism is something that is nicely packaging by administrators who are responsible for the tourism industry, but perhaps they misunderstand what culture actually means. Some people either are not or choose not to fit the culture that has been defined for them by the tourism industry. Forcing people to conform to a culture that has since changed does not do anything to help the tourism industry. Even worse, the expansion of the tourism industry has forced local people to appear as though they are from some bygone era rather than the present day. The people who go through this are referred to as ‘in-betweeners’ who happen to fall into Third Spaces. That is, some people fall between what culture used to be and what it currently is now. In my opinion, culture is something that should be preserved because it is relevant to those whom belong to that culture. Minority cultures and languages are increasingly becoming extinct as dominant cultures overpower them and force those people who follow them to conform to the more popular culture. However, if the people of a minority culture want to change and adopt the more dominant culture, then they should be given the right to do so. The tourism industry, by forcing minority cultures to revert back to the way they were decades or even hundreds of years ago, wants to maintain a culture that is attractive for the foreign tourist, who is attracted to something which belonged to a different era. I feel that it is not fair to have to keep a culture stuck in the past when the very nature of culture is one that is constantly changing and adapting to new ideas. TOURISM AND CULTURAL PROXIMITY - Examples from New Zealand In this article, Professor Chris Ryan offers some insight into the differences in perception of Maori tourism products from the point of view of a foreign tourist and a domestic tourist. Cultural tourism is a relatively new form of tourism that allows tourists, both domestic and foreign, to learn about a culture through performances and rituals. For foreign tourists, they want to experience a part of the culture of the country in which they are visiting. It makes sense that they want to have a real life experience that makes their stay worthwhile. From the UN definition of cultural tourism, cultural tourists are not defined by their ethnicities, but rather by their willingness to learn more about cultural aspects of their own or a foreign culture. In New Zealand, tourism has largely been defined by the way Maori attractions are presented. The tourism industry has taken advantage of the appeal and interest in Maori culture and used this to provide great cultural experiences. However, Maori tourism products are sought after by foreign tourists more than New Zealanders themselves. As Maori related tourism relies upon foreign tourists, there is some risk involved. Because of familiarity, domestic tourists do not have the same need to experience part of Maori culture as a foreign tourist would. New Zealand’s history has largely been influenced by Britain, and this has resulted in a culture where Maori tourism is not thought of highly by locals. Although times have changed, the first impressions of Victorian travellers to New Zealand can be felt within the domestic tourism industry today. Non-Maori New Zealanders are likely to think of Maori culture as being separate to New Zealand culture rather than being part of or at least being a subset. Despite this, most New Zealand would consider all cultures to be treated equally and come under New Zealand culture. Carlson’s findings show that there is little emphasis on Maori tourism from many New Zealanders. Part of this could be that New Zealanders do not find Maori culture exotic, whereas foreign tourists find it strange yet appealing. I feel that Maori culture should take precedence in New Zealand tourism because of the way that is it perceived by foreign tourists. Domestic tourists do not have to appreciate Maori tourism, but they should at least support those efforts by also participating. More than New Zealand, this is an issue for many cultures to confront because it says a lot about the true value of a culture. The natural human inclination is to experience something that is foreign and fascinating, so this makes it easier for foreign tourists to be attracted to local cultural performances. For domestic tourists, if they do not feel part of the tourism industry, then it can be hard for them to be encouraged to support the industry. Domestic demand must still make a contribution to the local tourism industry, but it is reasonable to expect that foreign tourists will be more appealing. Indigenous Peoples in Comparative Perspective - Problems and Policies The term indigenous is one that is hotly debated. There is not one definition that all countries agree upon when it comes to defining indigenous. Because of this, it is left up to each individual state or territory to come up with its own definition. Throughout history, indigenous people have been treated differently by colonists who ruled the land. One consequence of a lack of framework for indigenous people has meant that they have been taken advantage of over the years. Discrimination, exploitation, and racism are just a few of the wrongs that indigenous peoples have faced. The concept of land is important for any race, and indigenous have suffered the most in this area. A lack of land rights can cause an indigenous people to live like nomads, moving from place to place. The UN has attempted to address this issue by protected the land rights of indigenous peoples, but they can only go so far. Globalization has somewhat affected the way that indigenous people live because their livelihoods are affected without concern from major global corporations. Laws have been enacted to help protect indigenous people from the loss of their land; the Philippines introduced the Indigenous Peoples Rights Act of 1997, which recognizes that land titles belong to the people whose ancestors once possessed the land. The historical aspect of land ownership is only one part; the other is religious or spiritual links that indigenous people have with a piece of land. This is often underestimated by outsiders who fail to understand the significance of land to indigenous peoples. Civil war has often resulted from a lack of understanding about indigenous peoples and their rights to land. There are numerous examples, such as in Colombia, Ecuador, Guatemala, and Rwanda. Because indigenous peoples often have little political or corporate power, it is easy to see why their rights of often not respected by those who have power over them. I think that indigenous people are often misunderstood by people who have no link with a location and thus act in an ignorant way. If these people were educated about indigenous peoples and their way of life, then I am sure that more compromises could be reached. Indigenous people have no monetary benefit from using land whereas outsiders often have a hidden motive for using land that is of no obvious consequence for them. AUTHENTICITY AND SINCERITY IN TOURISM In “Authenticity and Sincerity in Tourism,” John P. Taylor discusses whether tourism is authentic or fake. When tourists travel to foreign countries, they want to experience a part of that culture. Foreign tourists usually have pre-conceived notions about the culture and what to expect based on their own knowledge. Too often foreign tourists enter a culture that is made up specifically for them; they do not get to experience daily life, which many foreign tourists want to experience for themselves. In New Zealand tourism, many images of Maori warriors are displayed, even if they are irrelevant in today’s society. Taylor quotes Benjamin, who says that something can only be authentic when the original is present. What he fails to take into account though is that culture, like authenticity, can change over time. Just because it is not the same as the original does not make it any less authentic. Because of this, authenticity must be defined by local values and not from the views of foreign tourists. The New Zealand Tourist Board used a travel brochure to claim that foreign tourists would be able to experience New Zealand before humans moved there, but in reality this is not authentic since New Zealand is now a different place that it was hundreds of years ago, and to try and claim otherwise does not show authenticity. For the local culture itself, it may be that society and culture is changing, usually for the better, and they do not want to return to a past that was not beneficial for them. What is required is a balancing act whereby part of a culture is preserved yet modern day culture is also shown in tourist activities. In The Tourist, MacCannell claimed that the primary motivation for Western tourists was to seek out authenticity. The reason why they do so is because they want to experience something that is different to their own culture and feels real at the same time. There would be no point in foreign tourists coming to a place where they experience something that is not authentic because they would be cheated. From my point of view, tourism should be authentic because it foreign tourists are unable of the local culture and so cannot know whether a performance or attraction is authentic or not. The problem is that to make something attractive for foreign tourists, authenticity sometimes has to be sacrificed. Because foreign tourists are often unaware of this, there is no real incentive to provide authenticity. The only requirement is to present a culture as a foreign tourist sees it and not how it actually is today. Culture is something that is flexible and changes over long periods of time due to social changes and outside influences, so it can be hard to present a culture as authentic. RETHINKING AUTHENTICITY IN TOURISM EXPERIENCE In Nina Wang’s article, “Rethinking Authenticity in Tourism Experience,” she discusses the different concepts of authenticity in tourism. Authenticity is relevant in a tourism setting because it shows a representation or something from the past. The validity of a past form determines how authentic it actually is. Wang discusses three different approaches to this phenomenon: objective authenticity, constructive authenticity, and existential authenticity. Objective authenticity focuses on the authenticity of the original performance or product. Constructive authenticity is the feelings that tourists have about what they feel witnessed in regards to their prior expectations. Existential authenticity has nothing to do with toured objects but has everything to do with the state of being derived from tourist activities. The author defines authenticity as whether or not a work of art or ritual is authentic as defined by the local customs and traditions. Authenticity in tourism can be broken down into two areas: tourist experiences and tourism objects. Handler and Saxton comment that tourists feel that a tourist experience is only authentic when they feel that their experience is authentic and the cultural object they have witnessed is authentic. If toured objects are felt to not be authentic by the tourist, then existential authenticity shows that tourists can seek out an authentic experience somewhere else. In many types of tourism, the tourist focuses on whether or not what they feel is authentic rather than the object or activity that they have witnessed or participated in. Bruner comments that because culture is always changing and adapting, there can be no reference point; as such, it is difficult to try and prove that a tourist experience is authentic or not. Because of this, the experience of the tourist is more important then whether or not the perceived culture at the time is authentic. I think that authenticity is an important part of any tourism experience because tourists want to be able to experience the real culture. In looking at the three approaches to authenticity in tourism, I would rank existential authenticity first, constructive authenticity second and objective authenticity third. This is because the least important aspect of tourism is if the cultural product or performance is authentic or not. Because of the ever-changing definitions of culture, it is impossible to know for certain whether or not a cultural object is authentic. Secondly, constructive authenticity is based around the prior expectations of a tourist, and these expectations are often wrong in the first place or are not met. Finally, existential authenticity is the most important because the state of being derived from tourist activities determines if a tourist has gained or learnt something. Read More