Author
Abstract
The typical problem of tourism studies at the level of tourism destinations is when a destination has started to run well, it may arise contestation between actors in the management of tourism destinations. From a traditional view, tourism resources are static physical elements such as land, forest, water, or wildlife that put more emphasis on physical signs itself but putting aside the important human role on it. Indeed the contemporary study of tourism does not just cease at these physical signs. Unequal distribution of resources and management of resources will lead contestation in management to become acrimonious. From a development viewpoint, government programs can be constructive and also destructive when the rationality of the government in constructive development collide with the rationality of social capital that has grown with the community. So the development of Community-Based Tourism (CBT) as one of the tourism model, it is necessary to study so that it constantly become a booster of regional economies. This paper will conduct studies and comparisons of several leading tourist villages in Indonesia that will conform to the specificities of East Java to be implemented. Findings in this paper are the investment in the tourism sector is an interesting alternative investment. Tourism offers long-term benefits which are environmentally friendly. A proper implementation of CBT, social cohesiveness should be the primary value, and it is exactly important to reinforce social capital instead of financial capital. It is due to the continuity of CBT will be longer when using empowerment approach to strengthening social capital instead by money driven. The potential of cohesiveness among Muslims through religious institutions such as Nahdatul Ulama has a huge role in supporting the achievement of CBT in East Java, given the strength of social capital that already exists in the community. What is needed is leadership that is able to create triggers so that the development of tourism sector can be run supported the existing social capital mechanism, so that its hopes CBT more sustainable, given social capital including capital that will not run out
Suggested Citation
Download full text from publisher
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:osf:osfxxx:hfpxy. 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: OSF (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://osf.io/preprints/ .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.