QUESTION :

The Paragraph below is an excerpt from the research publication titled Limits to mass tourisms effects in rural peripheries, by Robin Biddulph, 2015.- Annals of Tourism Research

Originating in the 1980s, the livelihoods approach in development studies suggested that experts (both researchers and practitioners) need to step outside the assumptions and rationalities of policy, avoid the biases and misunderstandings generated by short field visits, and to invest more systematically in understanding situations from the viewpoint of people who are imagined as beneficiaries (Chambers, 1983, Scoones, 2009). Implicit in the approach, therefore, is that it does not begin from a particular sectorial view, but rather places different sectors in the context of peoples overall circumstances and intentions. In the livelihoods literature, household assets are commonly conceptualised as a pentagon of five kinds of capital: natural, physical, social, financial, human (Scoones, 1998). With respect to tourism and rural peripheries in the global South, the livelihoods approach has largely been used to study the effects of community-based initiatives, especially eco-tourism and wildlife tourism, setting peoples tourism-related activities in the context of a portfolio of livelihood activities. It is thereby possible to identify synergies or opportunity costs (e.g. Mbaiwa and Sakuze, 2009, Mbaiwa and Stronza, 2010, Simpson, 2009, Tao and Wall, 2009). A major theme in livelihoods research in the global South has been de-agrarianisation or the new rurality. While both national statistics and local cultural identities suggest that agriculture is dominant, livelihoods research has depicted rural households as less agriculture-dependent (Rigg, 2006) and characterised by widespread occupational experimentation (Bryceson, 2002, p. 725). The tourism literature, meanwhile, has tended to be somewhat bifocal, seeing declining rural agriculture (or fisheries) and seeking to evaluate tourism as the single alternative to this decline (Carte et al., 2010, Fabinyi, 2010, Gascn, 2014). The juxtaposition of the two literatures suggests that tourism scholarship should perhaps be more open to the possibility that tourism incomes are only one part of a broader process of rural income diversification.

Read the excerpt above carefully and answer the question below :

1. In a couple of sentences, paraphrase the text above. The summary should be comprehensive, it should reflect the original meaning that the author is trying to communicate whilst retaining any salient points (40 marks)

2. The full publication of the excerpt above has been attached to this assignment. You are to now read the full publication and using the full publication, discuss in detail any THREE (3) THEMES of the excerpt. These themes are the key ideas that the author is trying to communicate to the audience.

3. Discuss the following:

1. Discuss the main goal of the article?

2. Critique the appropriate or otherwise of the authors current methodology used for the study (10 marks)

3. Does the article adequately contribute to the field of study? Explain.