.png){kind=icon}
.png){kind=icon}
Return
Is Community-Dominated Tourism More Pro-Poor Than Enterprise-Dominated Tourism? Empirical Evidence From Two Miao Villages in Southwest China
.png){kind=icon}
PRE
AI
J
J
J
H
DOI：10.1002/sd.71533.png)
.png){kind=icon}
Original request for help.png){kind=icon}
Share.png){kind=icon}
Save
Abstract
En 中文
Eradicating poverty is a tough worldwide challenge and is listed as the top priority among the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) by the United Nations. Tourism plays a positive role in fighting against poverty. This paper examines which of the two is more pro-poor: community-dominated tourism or enterprise-dominated tourism. The authors conduct a comparative study both horizontally and longitudinally on the pro-poor effects of tourism under different development models in Xijiang Miao Village and Upper Langde Miao Village in southwestern China. The results indicate that: (1) There are significant differences in the pro-poor effects of tourism under different tourism development models. However, the community-dominated tourism development model is not necessarily more pro-poor than that dominated by an enterprise. (2) For tourist attractions like ethnic minority villages, what development model to be adopted in practice to be more pro-poor should depend on what local conditions they have. Specifically speaking, for large villages with high tourism popularity, the enterprise-dominated tourism development model is better; for small villages with high tourism popularity, the community-dominated model is more pro-poor. However, for such ethnic villages with low tourism popularity, the tourism development model of “government aids + community participation” should be adopted in the early stage, and then a switch should be made to either the community-dominated or enterprise-dominated model when high tourism popularity is achieved.
Keywords:
community-dominated tourism
enterprise-dominated tourism
ethnic minority village
poverty alleviation
pro-poor tourism
tourism development
Journal
IF:
8.2
Papers:
3.9K
Citations:
1.2W
Organization
Cited Papers