Cultural sensitivity and tourism Report from Northern Norway

1 Cultural sensitivity and tourism Report from Northern Norway CAMILLA BRATTLAND KARI JÆGER KJELL OLSEN ELLE MARI DUNFJELL OSKAL ARVID VIKEN 2 3 ARCTISEN Culturally sensitive tourism in the Arctic Multidimensional Tourism Institute (MTI) Rovaniemi www.luc.fi/matkailu Design: Lappi Design / Tytti Mäenpää ISBN 978-952-337-207-8 3 Publications of the Multidimensional Tourism Institute Matkailualan tutkimusja koulutusinstituutin julkaisuja Cultural sensitivity and tourism Rovaniemi 2020 Report from Northern Norway CAMILLA BRATTLAND KARI JÆGER KJELL OLSEN ELLE MARI DUNFJELL OSKAL ARVID VIKEN 4 5 ARCTISEN Culturally sensitive tourism in the Arctic ARCTISEN Promoting culturally sensitive tourism across the Arctic Funder: Budget: Partners: Main result: Improved entrepreneurial business environment for culturally sensitive tourism that will be achieved by improving and increasing transnational contacts, networks and cooperation among different businesses and organizations. Improvement of business environment will also result in concrete products and services, locally and transnationally designed, that support the capacities of start-ups and SMEs to develop sustainable, competitive and attractive tourism businesses drawing on place-based opportunities. Northern Periphery and Arctic Programme University of Lapland (Lead Partner), Finland UiT The Arctic University of Norway Northern Norway Tourist Board Umeå University, Sweden Ájtte - Mountain and Sámi museum, Sweden Aalborg University, Denmark University of Waterloo, Canada WINTA - World Indigenous Tourism Alliance 1.455.547,88€ 5 6 7 ARCTISEN Culturally sensitive tourism in the Arctic Contents Introduction .............................................................................................. 8 Framework for culturally sensitive tourism in Norway ............................... 12 Existing guidelines and quality certificates ................................................ 12 Legal, territorial and cultural minority-majority challenges in tourism development ................................................................... 14 Demand for culturally sensitive tourism ..................................................... 14 Sensitive practices, challenges and needs ................................................ 18 Between criticism and deliberate approach to sensitivity in Sámi handicraft (duodji) ........................................................................ 20 Representing Sámi culture-nature and reindeer husbandry ...................... 22 Concluding reflections on the future tourism development ....................... 26 Tourism development in general ................................................................. 26 Needs for guidelines and regulation? ......................................................... 28 Concluding remarks ..................................................................................... 29 Acknowledgments .................................................................................... 32 Notes and references ............................................................................... 32 7 Introduction 8 9 ARCTISEN Culturally sensitive tourism in the Arctic the land and in what way they contribute to local communities. Such issues are particularly prominent in debates on fishing tourism but might also relate to other activities. Fishing involves competition for resources, a competition that is also found on land. Tourism, together with extractive industries, infrastructure and an increase in leisure activities, is part of a growing use of the landscape that competes with traditional uses such as reindeer herding. In the ARCTISEN project, we approach growth in tourism and its implications using the concept of ‘culturally sensitive tourism’1. The notion of sensitivity highlights negative experiences of cultural exploitation, accentuate that Indigenous peoples and locals’ control and determine how culture is used in tourism. Nevertheless, it is equally important to recognise the positive effects of tourism, whether economic, social or, as well, in fostering pride in local and Introduction Over the last 20 years, tourism has grown to become a central economic sector in northern Norway. Tourism in this area has developed from being primarily a summer-based activity to an activity that is, more or less, year-round. Winter tourism has gained momentum as a new peak season, and the previous tourism activities of gazing at the landscape, midnight sun and northern lights have been extended to a whole range of activities. Husky rides, igloos, whale safaris, snow hotels, fishing, randoneé skiing and mountain biking are among the many new activities that are sold to tourists. Visits to Sámi camps are among these activities offered to tourists and are a focus of this report. Even if many of these activities are new to the northern Norwegian context, they are still set in an Arctic landscape that is an important feature of the attraction. Even though there has been an increase in visitors to the area, growth is not evenly distributed. Nor is the degree to which local and indigenous people participate in tourism development. Some places are far from the beaten tracks of tourists, while others have grown into tourist hubs. The growth in tourism has caused conflicts over access to resources and land as well as the fear of its having a negative impact on local communities that receive high numbers of tourists and experience rapid changes. Furthermore, the way Indigenous and local cultures are turned into tourism products has also caused concern. Who has the right to commodify Sámi and local cultures, how should it be done and should it be stopped – these are longstanding and ongoing debates that have gained momentum in places experiencing tourism growth. There are also debates on the role of companies coming from ‘the outside’ to utilise 9 Indigenous cultures. Most of all, the report emphasizes the importance of participation by local and indigenous people in deciding the content and performance of cultural sensitivity. The purpose of this report is to give a background for and an analysis of the potential of cultural based tourism in Northern Norway from the perspective of cultural sensitivity. The report discusses about Sámi tourism providers' perceptions on intercultural understanding within the tourism industry, and how the culture-tourism-link can be managed for a more sensitive tourism development. The report is based on desk research and 23 interviews conducted during March and April2019 in Finnmark and Troms, in areas with people of Sámi, Kven*, and Norwegian origin. The interviewed persons represented 18 small and medium-sized tourism companies in rural and urban locations, and five other tourism related organisations such as public authorities, cultural organisations, NGOs and research institutes. The interview questions focused on the use of local cultural elements in tourism, the running of tourism businesses, the development of ideas, and the possibilities and challenges in tourism. The questions were connect- *Descendants of immigrants from Finland ed to the use of local culture in tourism, running tourism businesses, development ideas and the possibilities and challenges in tourism. The following chapters discuss why it is essential to consider cultural sensitivity when developing tourism in Norway, what kinds of challenges need to be addressed and how cultural sensitivity could be heightened through increased community participation in tourism development. By bringing up different voices, opinions and experiences, the report aims to create better understanding about the environment where tourism business is being developed and operated. "The focus is to what degree Sámi tourism providers perceive that there is an intercultural understanding within the tourism industry, and how the culture-tourism-link can be managed for a more sensitive tourism development." 16 17 ARCTISEN Culturally sensitive tourism in the Arctic 17 Sensitivity practices, challenges and needs 18 19 ARCTISEN Culturally sensitive tourism in the Arctic In this chapter, we will illustrate some of the practices and challenges among entrepreneurs and the needs related to developing cultural sensitivity in tourism practices. In particular, we explore how sensitivity is related to participation and how it may enhance Sámi community empowerment in tourism development. The hypothesis is that services and products where Sámi themselves are in control of the process and the product, will result in culturally sensitive tourism. There are however several questions raised by this approach. What is considered appropriate and culturally sensitive by one Sámi actor such as a highly educated activist might not always resonate with the opinions of entrepreneurs in rural or urban Sámi communities. Must a shop owner or event producer have control of all suppliers, their ethnicity, and material and production methods? Must tour operators and agents have control over their subcontractors, and how these represent Sámi culture? Participation is not always a guarantee for sensitivity, but it is a guarantee for the involvement of diverse voices in the production of tourism services and products. The trend in other sectors is moving towards certification or branding of places of origin, raw materials and producer descriptions. Could this be a solution also for Sámi tourism, where the level of community participation is one the main guarantees for cultural sensitivity? Based on interviews with mostly Sámi entrepreneurs, and field visits to these three locations, Sámi and non-Sámi entrepreneurs and businesses offering Sámi experiences can be located on a ladder of participation14 in tourism15, from a ladder of participation exists ranging “from ‘being consulted’ (often only being informed of a fait accompli) to being able to determine every aspect of the development process16. To address the challenges as broadly as possible, we have had a particular focus on the degree to which local and Sámi communities participate in tourism development. Sámi communities differ in size and institutional organization, from the level of the family to villages to national and pan-national institutions such as the Sámi Parliaments. We have explored individual, family and small and medium sized business participation in tourism in village Karasjok, in Tromsø which is the largest town in the region and its surrounding area, and the coastal villages in the Lyngen fjord district (northern Troms County). In conducting interviews and field visits, we focused on the parts of the transnational interview guide addressing what needs their own businesses had and about products they had or wanted to develop. They were also asked about the cultural sensitivity of products and experiences offered to tourists. Sensitivity practices, challenges and needs 19 Low level of Sámi community participation Services and experiences where actors to some extent reflect upon the representation of Sámi culture in their own practice and express a desire to learn more. This is typically tour operators and businesses who do not have a Sámi cultural background, but who offer experiences based on Kven or Sámi culture, in collaboration with Sámi or Kven experience producers (small businesses offering camping, hiking, home visits etc). This can include actors who present Sámi cultural elements, such as Sámi handicraft (duodji) or a mix of Sámiinspired souvenirs and Sámi handicraft, with or without Sámi participation or ownership (typically in urban centre). High level of Sámi community participation The actors have a conscious/deliberate and critical view of the representation of Sámi culture in tourism. These can be businesses offering experiences and products produced by individuals or reindeer herding families within their own reindeer herding districts, either with Sámi as sole owners or in collaboration with local tour operators (the bulk of which can be found in Karasjok and Tromsø, typically reindeer herding families offering experiences such as visits to reindeer fences, marketing their offers through DMOs, social media or tour operators), as well as Sámi handicraft (duodji) producers. Across the different stages of the ladder, there are different boundaries for what is considered appropriate to practice and/or sell, based on the actors’ diverse cultural backgrounds and stand-points. Figure 2. Levels of Sámi community participation 20 21 ARCTISEN Culturally sensitive tourism in the Arctic Between criticism and a deliberate approach to sensitivity in Sámi handicraft (duodji) The Tromsø city has experienced an enormous growth in winter tourism, including experiences related to Sámi culture. Some of the ways in which Sámi are represented has been met with criticism. The Tromsø municipality has initiated a process together with Visit Tromsø to formulate guidelines for Sámi tourism in the area, thus addressing the criticism on the way Sámi culture is represented in souvenir shops and by tour operators. A particularly heated debate in the regional media prior to the fieldwork was an opportunity to discuss the criticism from Sámi stakeholders on the sale of Sámi handicraft (duodji) in the city. Among Sámi handicraft producers, the “Duodji” label is certificate ensuring the authenticity of the product as a traditional handicraft item. The items produced under this label are however expensive and generally sold through personal networks and on Sámi seasonal markets. Thus, the majority of products sold in tourist souvenir stores are cheaper products from factories in Finland, China and elsewhere that can be ordered online. Particularly in Tromsø, a city with an expanding souvenir market, there is a concern about apparently Sámi souvenirs, their production and who sells them. The number of tourists is so high that there are not enough traditional handicraft producers to meet the demand. Thus, handcrafted and manufactured “Sámi” items are displayed and sold side by side, such as copies of ancient drums, quality knifes by renowned smiths, and miniatures of Sámi traditional dress such as the “Arctic doll” from a Finnish factory (see image 1). One of the shops has moved through many profiles until it now follows the booming interest in Sámi handicraft. The owner has grown up with a diversity of Sámi souvenirs for sale to summer tourists along local roads, thus putting the contemporary selection of souvenirs offered by internet shops in perspective. For instance, he has chosen to sell the four-wind hat in Image 1. Souvenirs and the “Arctic doll” for sale in Tromsø. Photocredit: Camilla Brattland 21 his store. In his opinion the hat has become a part of Sámi cultural expressions. Also, when it comes to the naming of Sámi products and culture, he does not see the use of the term “lap” as problematic. “I am proud of being from Lapland, while for others it is the worst”, he says, emphasizing that different things might evoke emotions from person to person. In general, both in Tromsø and in the other areas, there is an increasing interest in Sámi products from the growing Sámi urban population, from locals and from tourists. Thus, the assortment in many gift shops includes woollen shawls from the renowned Sámi company Stoorstålka and silver jewellery from different silver smiths in Sápmi. Also, cheaper versions of silver and handicraft are offered. The copies of silver jewellery are popular among the locals, particularly Sámi families who use copies for their children, without fearing the cost of loss or damage to the jewellery. In many Sámi communities, however, duodji producers invest in quality materials and they invest time and resources to make products that are true to tradition and innovative at the same time. Products such as handwoven bands for shoes or even home-made cow skin shoes (gápmagat) are either given as gifts to family members or displayed in handicraft houses with a high prize. The costume itself is also subject to an increased anesthetization through its displays in stores, design markets and art exhibitions, thus leading to increased attention to the design of particularly sought-after duojars (artists). This illustrates some of the challenges that actors are facing when deciding what to include in the selection of products for sale. Both locals and tourists desire cheap and nice products, while there is a pressure and desire also to include the traditional items with the “Duodji” label or produced by local duojars/handcrafters. One of the trendsetters in the discussion on Sámi traditional handicraft is the cultural network around the Riddu Riđđu festival and the Centre for Northern Peoples in Gáivuotna/Kåfjord. As a Sámi cultural institution supported by the national government, the festival has a responsibility that goes beyond that of private shop owners. Practicing sensitivity and a critical approach to the representation of Sámi culture is key to the institutions, and the Riddu festival both participates in the debate on duodji and is also host to a Sámi handicraft market during the festival which takes place in July every year. During a focus group discussion around the issue of sensitivity, the festival director made it clear that they prioritized products with high participation by Sámi themselves. The slogan “Nothing about us, without us”, is used as a guiding principle for the selection of items sold at their own market, and also in debates on how tourism in Troms should represent Sámi culture. The festival has however also experienced challenges in drawing boundaries between what to include and exclude. For instance, locals have criticized the exclusion of some popular market that according to a new festival management did not fit the “local and indigenous handicraft” profile. Such critics are hard to ignore for an organization that relies on the goodwill of local village and local volunteers year after year. In other words, sensitivity needs to be negotiated on many levels. 22 23 ARCTISEN Culturally sensitive tourism in the Arctic Representing Sámi culture-nature and reindeer husbandry Both in Tromsø and Karasjok, reindeer herder families are the main developers of Sámi tourist products. They offer experiences such as feeding, sledding and visiting reindeer fences (see image 2) and even participating in spring migration. This is partly due to the fact that a growing number of reindeer herders are being forced out of the reindeer herding industry and have had to find other ways to continue to work with reindeer and within the Sámi reindeer herding culture. Both in Karasjok and in Tromsø we met women with higher education struggling to find new ways to continue working with reindeer. In coastal Sámi communities, local businesses are not related to reindeer herding and draw upon the revitalisation of local Sámi culture that has been ongoing since the 1990s. Their tourist products are based on Sámi values concerning the use of nature and the revitalisation of Sámi and local cultural practices such as handicraft and traditional music mixed with modern art. Many of these areas have a problem being recognised as Sámi by outsiders because of the consequences of assimilation policies and the dominant image of the Sámi in tourism. The minority culture of the Kvens is hardly visible in tourism, even though in this area it is difficult to tell the difference between Norwegian, Kven and Sámi cultures in many villages and communities. However, those applying the Sámi markers, common in tourism, emphasise the Sámi heritage in their heterogeneous background, making the Sámi presence visible. There are enormous differences between Karasjok and Tromsø, with Karasjok as a Sámi township and destination and Tromsø, where the Sámi constitute a minority and a minor ingredient to tourism products. This also implies that challenges differ, as do attitudes among tour operators. The reindeer herders in Karasjok operate tourism beside a migrating herd and a herding that is strongly regulated by law, whereas the reindeer tourism in Tromsø is operated and controlled within temporary reindeer fences, more or less independent of reindeer herding operations. There are also yearly events in Tromsø and other Nordic/Arctic cities during the Sámi week in February where reindeer races are organized with tourist classes, and handicraft and other Sámi products including reindeer meat is sold at winter markets. In Karasjok reindeer herding and Sámi culture come first, and tourism is a secondary and part-time activity, whereas in Tromsø tourism can be a full-time job, and in many cases employing many people. Therefore, the sensitivity issues are also different. In Karasjok the concern is much about how tourists can behave and tourism operations take place without disturbing the reindeer and herding. In Karasjok, basically a Sámi community, those involved in tourism are sure about their Sáminess, whereas those in Tromsø are more concerned with whether what they do is Sámi or not. The coastal Sámi areas are somewhere in between. Due to the strong Norwegianisation processes they have been through, and the following period of Sámi awakening and revitalisation, they are more experimental and open to innovations concerning their Sámi expressions and identities – but also more aware of the cultural challenges that modern life and tourism represent. In other words, in being challenged to reflect upon how culture is being revitalised, they are also more sensitive to how culture is presented by themselves and others. Social media such as Instagram have become an extremely important communication channel for Sámi reindeer husbandry actors in addition to tourist destination management web sites. Social media profiles are updated regularly during the tourist season with pictures of reindeer, winter 23 Image 2. Advertising nature in Tromsø. Photocredit: Camilla Brattland landscapes and some of the activities provided. It is however hard to communicate about culture through social media. During tourist visits, Sámi actors often experience a lack of knowledge about Sámi culture, and often questions are based on stereotypical notions. “They wonder whether we are real Sámi, they ask about the Sámi language, and why we do not have dark skin”, says one of the Sámi culture and reindeer experience providers. In the coastal Sámi villages at the coast, however, many struggle to explain how Sámi culture and history is part of the nature experience even though it is not obvious to outsiders. Nature guides for instance, discover that once the principles behind their approach to nature use is explained as part of the Sámi worldview, it gives an added value to the tourists’ experience. However, coastal Sámi operators are seldom met with preconceived notions of Sámi culture as tourists’ in general associate Sámi culture with reindeer husbandry. 24 25 ARCTISEN Culturally sensitive tourism in the Arctic 25 Concluding reflections on the future tourism development 32 33 ARCTISEN Culturally sensitive tourism in the Arctic Notes 1. Olsen et al., 2019. 2. Næringsog fiskeridepartementet. Meld. St. 19, 2016–2017. 3. Nasjonalparkriket, 2019. 4. Convention on Biological Diversity, 2019. 5. Visit Norway, 2019a. 6. Visit Norway, 2019b. 7. Sámi Parliament, 2016. 8. Sámi Parliament of Finland, 2018. 9. FeFo, 2019. 10. See e.g. Visit Tromso. 11. Recreational Act, 1957. 12. Sámi Law, 1987. 13. Finnmark Act, 2005. 14. Cf. Arnstein, 1969. 15. Murphy, 1985. 16. Cole, 2006, p. 631. 17. Suopajärvi, Viken, Svensson & Pettersson, 2020. References Arnstein, S. R. (1969). A ladder of citizen participation. Journal of the American Institute of planners, 35(4), 216-224. Cole, S. (2006). Information and Empowerment: The Keys to Achieving Sustainable Tourism. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 14(6), 629-644, DOI: 10.2167/jost607.0 Convention on Biological Diversity (1992). Retrieved from https://www.cbd.int/traditional/guidelines.shtml FeFo (2019). Retrieved from https://www.fefo.no/om-fefo/retningslinjer-for-fefo/ Finnmark Act (2005). Retrieved from https://lovdata.no/ Murphy, P. E. (1985). Tourism: A community approach. London: Methuen. Nasjonalparkriket (2019). Retrieved from https://www.nasjonalparkriket.no/ Næringsog fiskeridepartementet. Meld. St. 19 (2016–2017). Opplev Norge – unikt og eventyrlig https://www.regjeringen.no/ no/dokumenter/meld.-st.-19-20162017/id2543824/ Olsen, K. O., Abildgaard, M. S., Brattland, C., Chimirri, D., De Bernardi, C., Edmonds, J., ...Viken, A. (2019). Looking at Arctic tourism through the lens of cultural sensitivity: ARCTISEN – a transnational baseline report. Rovaniemi: Multidimensional Tourism Institue. Retrieved from http://urn.fi/URN:ISBN:978-952-6620-39-8 Recreational Act (1957). Retrieved from https://lovdata.no/ Sámi Law (1987). Retrieved from https://lovdata.no/ Sámi Parliament (2016). Sametingsmelding om areal og miljø. Karasjok, Sametinget. Sámi Parliament of Finland (2018). Principles of Responsible and Ethically Sustainable Sámi Tourism. Retrieved 3 May, 2019, from https://www.samediggi.fi/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/ Vastuullisen-ja-eettisesti-kest%C3%A4v%C3%A4n-saamelaismatkailun-toimintaperiaatteet_hyv%C3%A4ksytty_24092018-3. pdf Acknowledgments This report is based on the willingness and goodwill of actors and local communities in Tromsø, Karasjok, Kåfjord, and Nordreisa. Thank you for taking the time to talk to us and share your experiences. 33 Suopajärvi, L., Viken, A., Svensson, G. & Pettersson, S. (2020). Social license to operate – is local acceptance of economic development enhancing social sustainability? In McDonagh, J. (Ed.) Sharing Knowledge for Land Use Management. London: Edward Elgar Publishing. Tosun, C. (2006). Expected nature of community participation in tourism development. Tourism management, 27(3), 493-504. Timothy, D. J. (2007). Empowerment and stakeholder participation in tourism destination communities. In Church, A. & Cole, T. (eds.) Tourism, power and space (199-216. London: Routledge. Tosun, C. (1999). Towards a typology of community participation in the tourism development process. Anatolia, 10(2), 1113134. Visit Norway (2019a). Retrieved from https://business.visitnorway.com/no/barekraftig-reiseliv/sustainability-and-tourism-in-innovation-norway/ Visit Norway (2019b). Retrieved from https://business.visitnorway.com/no/verktoy/merket-for-baerekraftig-reisemaal/ Visit Tromsø (2019). Retrieved from https://www.visittromso. no/no 34 35 ARCTISEN Culturally sensitive tourism in the Arctic 35 36 37 ARCTISEN Culturally sensitive tourism in the Arctic Cultural sensitivity and tourism Report from Northern Norway This national report approaches community participation in Sámi tourism in Norway and its relationship with cultural sensitivity. To what extent does participation and empowerment guarantee cultural sensitivity in tourism? In which ways can Indigenous peoples and other local communities utilize their cultural heritage and contemporary life in creating successful tourism products and services? Based on interviews among tourism actors, the report offers an overview and discussion of cultural sensitivity in Sámi tourism in Norway.