Chok Macbeth

8/8/2019 Chok Macbeth

1/19

LABOUR JUSTICE &SUSTAINABLE TOURISM

Presenter: Stephanie Chok June 2009

Asia Research Centre

This research is funded by Murdoch University, WA

and the Sustainable Tourism CRC, Australia

Mega Tourism Projects and Labour Supply Chains - A Formula for SustainableExploitation?


2/19

SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT or SUSTAINABILITY

BEWARE! A VALUE-LADEN Concept

In SD debate, tug-of-war over what is to besustained (biodiversity or economic

growth?) and how (preventive measures oruser-pays?) essentially contestation of

diverse and/or competing values(Dresner 2002, p.64)


3/19

Different Sustainability PositionsVery weak (a traditionally

resource exploitativeperspective)to the very strong (anextreme preservationist

perspective)Hunter (1997:853)


4/19

V Weak to V Strong Sustainability Positions(Hunter 1997)

VERY WEAK WEAK STRONG VERY STRONG

*Anthropocentric & utilitarian

* ResourceExploitative

*No limits to growth:

Continued well-beingassured through economicgrowth and technicalinnovation

*Anthropocentric & utilitarian

*Resourceconservationist

*Growth managed and

modified. Concern for distribution of developmentcosts and benefits throughintra-and intergenerational equity

*Decoupling negativeenvironmental impacts fromeconomic growth

*(Eco)systems perspective

*Resourcepreservationist

*Zero economic and

population growthBelief in a steady-stateeconomy*Adherence to intra- and inter-generational equity

*Recognizes primary valueof maintaining functionalintegrity of ecosystems over

and above secondary valuethrough human resourceutilization

*Bioethical and eco-centric

*Extreme resourcepreservationist utilizationof natural resourcesminimized

*Anti-economic growth andreduced human population


5/19

The Crisis:

Widespread acceptance at general

framework level but fierce politicalcontest over its actualimplementation (Macbeth 2005; Jacobs 1999)


6/19

SUSTAINABLE TOURISM - A Clash of Contested Concepts

Assumption : ST is the same as SD justapply to tourism;

Critical Distinction : Difference betweensustaining development that contributes to(human and non-human) welfare andsustaining tourism development per se.

For e.g. meeting the needs of present tourists is not an SDobjective;

Majority of the worlds population does not participate intourism - poses significant challenges to sustainabledevelopments equity principles .


7/19

EQUITY: Fulcrum of

Sustainability

SUSTAINABILITYPRINCIPLES

INTER- andINTRA-GENERATIONAL

EQUITY

Ecological Protection& Enhancement

(Dale 2001;Robinson & Tinker 1996)

Protection & Enhancementof

Social & Cultural Capital(Dale 2001)Steady-State

Economics(Daly 2002; Dale 2001)

Participatory

Democracy(Mog 2004; Dale 2001;Macbeth 1997;Holcombe 1995;)

PrecautionaryPolicy Approach

(Fennell & Ebert 2004)

Recognition of Complex,Adaptive Systems

(Farrell & Twinning-Ward 2005)


8/19

EQUITY: Fulcrum of

Sustainability

SUSTAINABILITYPRINCIPLE

INTER- andINTRA-GENERATIONAL

EQUITY

Necessitates Recognition of Gross Inequalities:

Resources & Power

REDISTRIBUTION/

REDISTRIBUTIVE JUSTICE

EQUITY: Implies need for FAIRNESSin distribution of gains & losses,

and entitlement of everyone toan acceptable qualityand standard of living

(Beder 1996:145)


9/19

lick to edit Master text stylescond level

Third level Fourth level

Fifth level

When Equity is Central,New Questions Emerge:

Should an eco-mall becelebrated if itsconstructed by an army of underpaid workers?

What if an environmentally-friendly resort is built onland acquired by displacinglocal villagers?

Are toxin-free greenproducts becomingexclusive eco-labels onlythe wealthy can afford?


10/19

Mega Tourism Projects &Labour Supply Chains

A Formula for Sustainable Exploitation?


11/19

WORKING CONDITIONS

Long hours - 80-90 hours a week;more then 350hours a month;

24 hours shifts;7 days a week;No overtime pay;

Arbitrarydeductions;Poor safetystandards;

Click to edit Master text stylesSecond level


Fifth level


Third level Fourth level Fifth level


12/19

LIVING CONDITIONSClick to edit Master text styles

Second level Third level

Fourth level Fifth level

Click to edit Master text styles

Second level Third level




Fifth level


Third level Fourth level Fifth level


13/19

OTHER PROBLEMS

Workplace Injuries under-reporting; compensation;

Withheld wages;

Breach of contract fees;Oppressive ManagerialControl:Withholding of key personaldocuments (work permits &passports);

Threats: blacklisting;

Repatriation (or threat of);


14/19

CHALLENGES Transnational Labour Migration Regime;

Foreign Enterprises; Recruitment Agents in Sending& Receiving Countries; Transnational Corporate Law;Different legislative frameworks;

Complex Labour Supply Chains;Main contractors, many sub-contractors;

Inadequate Legislative Protection;Stratified migration regime;

Pro-business, global political economy;Highly Politicized Issue;

Controversial locally;

Situation of STRUCTURAL INJUSTICE


15/19

STRUCTURAL INJUSTICE: Socio-political realities for low-wage (migrant) workers

Click to edit Master text stylesSecond level Third level


Click to edit Master text stylesSecond level Third level


Click to edit Master text sSecond level Third level


Average (Bangladeshiworker): Agency Fee is

2000% of salary;Will work 20 months just

to pay off agency fee

Average (Chineseworker): Agency Fee is

1000% of salaryWill work 11 months

just to pay off agencyfee


16/19

IMPLICATIONS

TOURISM INDUSTRY:Worlds largest industry;

Worlds largest employer;

Complex & fragmented supply chains;Wide-reaching impacts;

Emphasis on mega projects to stimulateeconomic figures & provide jobs;

Pro-poor Tourism emphasis on Development: At what cost and to whom? Development inwhat manner?


17/19

FINAL QUESTIONS: Is sustainable tourism fuelling sustainable

exploitation? ( Virtuous or Vicious Cycle? )Are we exacerbating inequalities? How?If we are not part of the solution, are we contributing

to the problem?

Why is Equity NOT recognized as a fundamentalsustainability principle IN PRACTICE? (who standsto gain the most from this blind spot?)

What are the consequences of ignoring the EquityPrinciple in Sustainable Development andSustainable Tourism?

VALUES in ST : What values? Whose values? Whostands to gain? Who loses?


18/19

THANK YOU FOR

LISTENING!Acknowledgements:This research is funded by MurdochUniversity and the Sustainable Tourism

CRC.This research project is supervised byAssociate Professor Jim Macbeth &Associate Professor Carol Warren,School of Social Sciences &

Humanities,Murdoch University.


19/19

REFERENCESBeder, S. 1996. The Nature of Sustainable Development, 2nd edn. Scribe Publications, Australia.

Dale, A. 2001. At the Edge: Sustainable Development in the 21st century. UBC Press, Canada.

Daly, H. 2002. Reconciling the economics of social equity and environmental sustainability. Population and Environment , 24 (1):47-53.

Dresner, S. 2002. The Principles of Sustainability . Earthscan Publications, London.

Farrell, B. and Twinning-Ward, L. 2005. Seven s teps towards sustainability: tourism in the context of new knowledge. Journal of Sustainable Tourism , 13 (2):109-122.

Fennell, D. and Ebert, K. 2004. Tourism and the precautionary principle. Journal of Sustainable Tourism , 12 (6):461-479.

Holcome, S. 1995. Managing to Empower: The Grameen Banks Experience of Poverty Alleviation . Zed Books, London.

Hunter, C.1997. Sustainable tourism as an adaptive paradigm. Annals of Tourism Research , 24 (4), 850-867.

Jacobs, M. 1999. Sustainable development as a contested concept. In A. Dodson (ed.) Fairness and Futurity , OxfordUniversity Press, Oxford, pp.21-45.

Macbeth, J. 2005. Towards an ethics platform for tourism. Annals of Tourism Research , 32 (4), 962-984.

____. 1997. Tourism and the District of Omeo : Final Report of the Omeo District Sustainable Community Project (Abridged). Murdoch University, Perth, Western Australia.

Mog, J. 2004. Struggling with Sustainability A Comparative Framework for Evaluating

Sustainable Development Programs. World Development, 32 (12), 2139-2160.

Robinson. J. and Tinker, J. 1996. Reconciling Ecological, Economic and Social Imperatives: Towards an AnalyticalFramework. Sustainable Development Research Institute, University of British Columbia. Paper prepared for theInternational Development Research Centre, April 1996. [Online]. Available:http://www.sdri.ubc.ca/documents/Reconciling_Ecological.pdf [2004, August 29]

Documents

Chok Macbeth