1. Cultural Values in Sustainable Tourism: Conflicts between indigenous culture and recreation in protected areas Dr Heather Zeppel James Cook University Cairns BEST EN THINK TANK IX “The Importance of Values in Sustainable Tourism” June 15 -18, 2009 James Cook University, Singapore

2. Indigenous Cultures & Recreation * Community Sustainability - Environmental Sustainability -Inclusive, Healthy Lifestyles * Indigenous people relate to natural areas via CULTURE * Non-Indigenous people relate to natural areas via RECREATION

3. INDIGENOUS CULTURE IN NATURAL AREAS

4. Culture & Recreation Conflicts Indigenous cultural conflicts with recreation users & management agencies. Amenity Use of protected areas in the USA, Australia, & New Zealand. Different World Views about landscapes, resource use & recreation Cross-cultural conflicts about recreational use of natural areas. Social Values conflicts & Interpersonal conflicts Limited research about indigenous cultural conflicts with recreational users in protected areas.

5. Types of Recreation Conflicts Conflicts between Recreation Users & Non-Recreation Activities *Conflicts between recreation activities & cultural *Conflicts between recreation activities & cultural beliefs/practices of indigenous groups. beliefs/practices of indigenous groups. e.g. Climbing Uluru (Australia) & Aoraki (NZ) Rock climbers at Devils Tower (USA) Rock climbers at Devils Tower (USA) Snowmobiles, dog sledding vs. reindeer herders (Lapland) 6 types of cultural conflicts Sacred sites/religious beliefs Resource use (e.g. hunting) Land use Visitor infrastructure Recreation activity Place names

6. Definition of Conflict “Conflicts occur wherever two or more groups compete for similar resources and one finds that another group interferes with its pursuit of a particular goal – such as recreation, indigenous hunting or collecting” (Eagles et al, 2002, p. 56)

7. Social Values Conflicts & Interpersonal Conflicts Social Values Conflicts are Indirect - different norms & values (i.e. worldviews, beliefs) about recreation activities & landscapes e.g. hikers & climbers on sacred mountains Interpersonal Conflicts are Direct - goal interference between different recreation activity/user groups in direct contact e.g. hikers & Indian ritual ceremonies

8. Social Values Conflicts knowledge of other users“Individuals perceived an event/situation as a problem and were bothered by knowledge of other users” (Vaske, Needham & Cline, 2007) Groups differ in norms/values about activities, from direct contact or beliefs/social acceptability e.g. domestic stock, pets, air tours, fishing in PAs e.g. sport hunters & fishers vs. wildlife viewing Where 2 or more groups differ in their values, Social Values Conflict is dominant.

9. Conflict Evaluation (Vaske, Needham & Cline, 2007) Perceived Problem: No Perceived Problem: Yes Observed: NoNo ConflictSocial Values Conflict Observed: YesNo ConflictInterpersonal & Social Values Conflict Observed: YesNo ConflictInterpersonal Conflict

10. Culture-recreation conflicts in parks Resource use/Land use *Ski resort expansion & snowmaking with recycled water - San Francisco Peaks (Arizona) Visitor Infrastructure *Walkways, barriers & signs at rock art sites - Keep River NP *Campground relocated & walking trails moved - Mootwingee NP *Viewing platform & visitor centre, Bighorn Medicine Wheel, USA *Visitor centre blocked spiritual trail to Devils Tower, USA Sacred Sites/Religious beliefs *Tourists climbing Uluru & Mt Warning (Wollumbin) (Australia) *Mountain climbers on Aoraki (Mt Cook) (New Zealand) *Rock climbers on Devils Tower (USA)

11. Indigenous Cultural Conflicts *Non-Indigenous recreational users in conflict with Indigenous subsistence use & religious rituals/ceremonies *Cross-cultural conflicts about resource use & amenity use of protected natural areas *Conflicts about Indigenous rights, cultural beliefs, traditional values & subsistence activities Social Values Conflict dominates

12. Components of Conflict (Kluwe & Krumpe, 2003) Tangible ConflictIntangible Conflict Micro level Interpersonal/intergroup conflict Commercial vs. private recreation Subsistence vs. recreation users Subsistence vs. sport hunting/fishing Societal value conflict Clash of value systems Non-locals don’t understand or respect traditional ways Macro level Societal level interpersonal/intergroup conflict Conflict with agencies Commercial permit administration Societal level value conflict Rights issues Land access Decision making Self-determination

13. INDIGENOUS CULTURAL ISSUES IN PARKS ‘To climb or not to climb at Uluru & Aoraki’ (Weaver, 2001: 265-267)

14. Indigenous cultural landscapes ”a place valued by an Aboriginal group (or groups) because of their long and complex relationship with the land. It expresses their unity with the natural & spiritual environment. It embodies their knowledge of spirits, places, land uses & ecology” (Buggey, 1999) WHA - Associative Cultural Landscape “powerful religious, artistic, or cultural associations of the natural element” e.g. Indigenous spiritual significance of mountains & other natural areas 1993 - Tongariro NP (NZ) 1994 – Uluru-Kata Tjuta NP (Australia)

15. Values of Protected Areas ____________________________________________________________________ Tangible Values (Material) Intangible Values (Nonmaterial) Conservation (i.e. wildlife, ecosystem services)Recreational & Therapeutic Economic (i.e. tourism revenue, scenery)Spiritual & Cultural Land*Artistic & Aesthetic Infrastructure* (i.e. buildings, roads, utilities)Educational & Scientific Peace (i.e. equity, social justice) Existence & Identity (i.e. symbolism) ____________________________________________________________________ Notes: * = tangible values for parks added by the author; Peace values also equate to humanitarian values Source: English & Lee, 2003; Harmon, 2003

16. Intangible values of parks Intangible or non-material values Recreation, Education, Science (Individual) Spiritual, Cultural & Identity (Community) Indigenous subsistence gathering activities = culture & recreation, education & identity “Indigenous cultural-identity values often transcribed into an ancestral landscape” (Harmon, 2003) Non-indigenous recreation = satisfaction, individual achievement, health & wellbeing.

17. Culture-Recreation Conflicts Tangible Conflict - Macro level Societal level interPERSONAL/interGROUP conflict (IPC) Use of environment (conflict with agencies, commercial permits, zoning) Competition over resources Physical incompatibility Enjoyment (achievement, satisfaction) Intangible Conflict - Macro level Societal level VALUE conflict (SVC) Use of environment (rights issues, land access, ownership, self- determination) Competition over resources Cultural incompatibility Identity (cultural practices & beliefs)

18. Managing cultural conflicts Management agency responses Temporary climbing ban, Sacred sites fenced off (Uluru) Respectful climbing below summit (Aoraki, NZ) June voluntary climbing ban (Devils Tower, USA) Infrastructure removed or realigned (Mutawintji) Temporal &/or spatial zoning to allow for subsistence activities Interpretation of indigenous cultural & spiritual values Indigenous responses to recreation conflicts Blockades (Mutawinjti, Australia) Protests (Devils Tower, USA) Road & hiker access closed (‘Chief’ Mountain, USA) Litigation (Navajo - San Francisco Peaks, USA) Treaty claims (Ngai Tahu Maori – New Zealand)

19. Managing cultural & recreational users Manage both recreation and non-recreation uses (i.e. cultural, spiritual, subsistence). Address different cultural & social values of park users. Incorporate indigenous cultural values in park management and tourism plans.

20. Managing cultural & recreational users Consult with indigenous groups about recreation activities & visitor infrastructure in parks. Use temporal or spatial zoning to allow for indigenous subsistence & ceremonial uses. Need to reduce/minimise both physical and cultural incompatibility between user groups in parks and tourism.

21. Maori Values in NZ Tourism Strategy 2015 * guardianship of resources *hospitality, knowledge & beliefs

22. References Eagles, P.F.J. et al. (2002). Planning for protected area tourism-managing conflict. In Sustainable Tourism in Protected Areas: Guidelines for Planning and Management. (pp. 56-59). UNEP/IUCN/WTO. Harmon, D. (2003). Intangible values of protected areas. Policy Matters (IUCN), 12: 53-63. Kluwe, J. & Krumpe, E.E. (2003). Interpersonal and societal aspects of use conflicts. International Journal of Wilderness, 9(3), 28-33. Vaske, J.J., Needham, M.D. & Cline, R.C. (2007). Clarifying interpersonal and social values conflict among recreationists. Journal of Leisure Research, 39(1): 182- 195.