IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/rcitxx/v16y2013i3p302-312.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Developing a framework for the analysis of power through depotentia

Author

Listed:
  • Bronia Hall

Abstract

Stakeholder participation in tourism policy-making is usually perceived as providing a means of empowerment. However, participatory processes drawing upon stakeholders from traditionally empowered backgrounds may provide the means of removing empowerment from stakeholders. Such an outcome would be in contradiction to the claims that participatory processes improve both inclusivity and sustainability. In order to form an understanding of the sources through which empowerment may be removed, an analytical perspective has been developed deriving from Lukes' views of power dating from 1974. This perspective considers the concept of depotentia as the removal of ‘power to’ without speculating upon the underlying intent, and also provides for the multidimensionality of power to be examined within a single study. The application of this analytical perspective has been tested upon findings of the government-commissioned report of the Countryside and Community Research Unit in 2005. The survey and report investigated the progress of Local Access Forums in England created in response to the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000. Consideration of the data from this perspective permits the classification of individual sources of depotentia which can each be addressed and potentially enable stakeholder groups to reverse loss of empowerment where it has occurred.

Suggested Citation

  • Bronia Hall, 2013. "Developing a framework for the analysis of power through depotentia," Current Issues in Tourism, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(3), pages 302-312.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:rcitxx:v:16:y:2013:i:3:p:302-312
    DOI: 10.1080/13683500.2012.688942
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/13683500.2012.688942
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/13683500.2012.688942?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:rcitxx:v:16:y:2013:i:3:p:302-312. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/rcit .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.