Communality and solidary economy

^{Maldonado (2002:73)} explains that communality is the logic by which the social life of a community is defined and articulated. It is found in numerous rural communities that are ruled by reciprocity, which have systems of charges, assembly and collective work. The term was coined by two indigenous persons from Oaxaca, Floriberto ^{Díaz (2003)} and Jaime ^{Martínez Luna (2002)}; the first Mixe and the second Zapotec, within a socio-historical context of the struggle for the defense of their natural patrimony and lifestyle (^{Fuente and Ramos, 2013}).

Self-determination is a condition inherent to communality and it in turn generates the conditions for autonomy and has constituted a constant struggle for rural communities; in some cases self-determination was eliminated through what ^{Martínez-Luna (2002)} refers to as cultural homicide, but in many others it underlies every aspect of community life. In the political one through the existence of the assembly, maximum institution of authority where agreements are made by consensus, dynamic that forces an active political participation; in addition, it makes possible the existence of communality in social life. According to ^{Korsbaek (2009: 118)}, the materially strategic elements are territory, work and communal political power; these also make possible the self-determination in the territorial scope. Territory “constitutes the basis of the physical and social reproduction of any nation” (^{Martínez-Luna, 2002:3}). This type of selfdetermination has been one of the most difficult to sustain and is completely linked to the possibility of the economic one. However, to reach this, it is necessary first to go through territorial self-determination, since communality recognizes that without territory there is no nation (^{Martínez-Luna, 2010}).

Self-determination is a central element also in solidary economy, and it explains the existence of alternate forms of rationality that are capable of constructing economic alternatives of their own (^{Rosas et al., 2013}). As ^{Quijano (2000: 14)} mentions, in the most recent practices of growing social sectors trapped by processes of social polarization, the reorientation towards solidarity and resistance is shown as an alternative to the imposition of colonialism imposed by capitalism. In general terms, the type of society that solidary economy outlines suggests that harmony between natural and social reproduction can be achieved through human cooperation for the appropriation, utilization, exchange and development of social and material conditions. It also implies an active participation in political, social and economic decision making that derives into a conscious cooperative-democratic control. The concept of totality in nature-society relationships as a contradictory material and social unit, objective and subjective, exploiter and exploited, allows being aware of the sources of tension and crisis in human production.

Following Polanyi, ^{Laville (s.f.)} suggests four principles for a solidary economy: 1) the domestic administration principle, which consists in satisfying their own needs and those of their group; 2) the reciprocity principle, which corresponds to donations between individuals and groups, in the case of rural communities the tequio constitutes work that is not paid monetarily, but which is remunerated in function of social prestige; 3) the market principle, which allows the encounter between offer and demand of goods and services exchanged through price fixation; and 4) the redistribution principle, where part of the production is handed over to a central authority that has the responsibility of distributing it, which involves the demand of rules and procedures to regulate this redistribution. It is proposed that organizations in solidary economy possess two fundamental characteristics: “1) The hybridization of the resources, which consists in the combination of resources from different sources: donations and volunteer work (reciprocity principle), public financing (redistribution principle), and sale of goods and services (market principle); 2) The joint construction of the offer and the demand, where members and users participate in the definition of services in function of the users’ needs” (^{Bastidas Delgado and Richer, 2001:13,14}).

Origin and causes for the adoption of ecotourism activities

In 1986 the joint townships stipulated a series of projects in the short, medium and long term, based on a local development plan, where the idea of creating ecotourism was suggested. In 1992, the six-year term of the state governor Diódoro Carrasco began; he named the architect Martín Ruíz Camino, an old friend of the community of Benito Juárez, as Tourism Minister, who knew the development plans of the joint townships and, as a result of a series of meetings with the communal land owners, began the negotiations for the start of the ecotourism projects.

The first community incorporated into the activity was Benito Juárez, with walks to the forest zones and to the communities of La Nevería and Cuajimolollas; according to the key informant:

“When the activity started, there was no charge; visitors used to be told “Whatever you want to give”, that is to say, what the township wanted was to take good care of the visitor, and the costs were contemplated only later. Once the courses, workshops and all of that began, that’s when they told us: “all right, you can charge this much”, because you can’t just say “whatever you want”.

That same year, resources were received in favor of conservation from the Canadian Fund and the North American Environmental Cooperation Commission, which were used for ecotourism in Benito Juárez and Cuajimolollas; the latter would be incorporated into this activity in 1994 (Figure 2).

Figure 2 Chronology of the ecotourism centers in the Sierra Norte of Oaxaca. 

“Well, visitors would come here, although invited by fellow countrymen who live in different places of the Mexican Republic; so then we realized that these people liked the place and, well, the idea was more than anything for the viewpoint that we have here, the view, which is the Ya-cuetzi (Zapotec name of the community), since we didn’t even know what ecotourism was then”.

The joint townships urged Ixtlán to elaborate its ecotourism project and, derived from the relationship of friendship and work in forest exploitation, the Ecoturixtlán Ecotourism Center was created in 1996 (Figura 2).

In 1998, in the community of La Cumbre, in the municipality of Santa Catarina Ixtepejí, another ecotourism center emerged (Figure 2); it made use of the cabins that had been used in past decades by the former Tuxtepec Paper Mill. The creation of the ecotourism center also sought to provide environmental education to visitors.

In parallel, in 1998, the ecotourism center in La Nevería was formalized and Expediciones Sierra Norte was created (Figura 2), which would serve as the official tour operator of all the ecotourism centers in the Joint Townships. The following year the ecotourism center of Latuvi was formalized and by the year 2000, that of Llano Grande (Figure 2), both from the Joint Townships. In that same year, through the negotiations by Juan Manuel Miñon, a Televisa reporter originally from the community of San Pedro Nexicho, access was gained to a SEDESOL project with which cabins were built to provide the service of lodging to visitors in the zone, with these being managed by groups of citizens of this community, giving rise to the ecotourism center of Nexicho (Figure 3).

Figure 3 Network of connections between actors incorporated into ecotourism. 

In 2001, the community of Santa Catarina Lachatao received support from Lachatao residents who lived in Mexico City and Los Angeles, California, to create “La Casa del Turista”, laying the foundations for what would later become Expediciones Lachatao (Figure 2). Later, in 2002, the community of San Miguel Amatlán, which was also part of the Joint Townships, was formally integrated into ecotourism (Figure 3), and to the operator Expediciones Sierra Norte.

“We have been told that the project began with the community of Benito Juárez; it started there with one that was called Turist Yu, and there they saw that it did work, so later they began to also build cabins in other communities from the joint townships. Later, Amatlán was also included because they saw that we did have activities to offer the client, thanks to the forest we have, and this was how ecotourism in the community emerged. Here the project was done to keep people from migrating”.

In 2004 Community Ecological Tourism “Capulálpam Mágico” was created (Figure 2) in the community of Capulálpam de Méndez, from a project that contemplated the exploitation of natural wealth and the generation of employment.

In 2003, it was discussed in the assembly and from there the whole project was approved, so the possibility of implementing the project in 2004 could be contemplated. At the end of 2003, the project was elaborated and at the beginning of 2005 the funding was received and it was built so that in March 2005 it could be launched.

In general terms, Table 3 shows the concerns of each community to build their ecotourism centers; these revolve around the creation of employment to reduce the problem of migration.

Table 3 Initial objectives for the creation of ecotourism centers. 

Source: authors’ elaboration with information provided by the interviewees, 2012.

Communality in the organization of ecotourism

One of the characteristics of ecotourism is the active participation of residents in the design processes and their implementation. “The participation not only has to do with achieving the best efficiency and equitable distribution of material resources, but rather with sharing the knowledge and transformation of the learning process in that of service for people who are undergoing development”⁵ (^{Okazaki, 2008}).

Ecotourism centers in Sierra Norte function without exception under control of the community through the general community assembly, which is the space where the positions in the ecotourism committees or administration council (case of Ecoturixtlán) are decided. Strategic decisions are made in the general assembly of communal land owners, that is, those that have to do with planning for the future, incorporating new areas, services and infrastructure, while the ecotourism committees are in charge of areas such as management and effectiveness of the ecotourism centers and they are also the ones responsible for selecting the staff, who are generally people from the community.

Ecotourism in the indigenous communities is framed by large consensual processes because “[the] community […] is directed by the interest of the whole” ^{Villoro (2003)}. This view makes for dialogues to be long and to seem never-ending for the rush of the modern world. This apparent eternity is because “each individual considers himself as an element that belongs to a totality, so that what affects it also affects him: when seeking his own wellbeing he seeks the wellbeing of all” ^{Villoro (2003:25)}.

The work by ecotourism committees is based on the system of charges, which consists in a series of community responsibilities. Whoever performs them are people recognized and respected by members of the community; the positions are rotated between the adult members of the community and are generally men, although women also participate⁶ (Table 4). The operation of ecotourism centers is in charge of the ecotourism committee, permanent staff and volunteers. The presence of women is important, with a representation of 41 %, particularly in jobs preparing food, as maids and receptionists. The positions generally rotate after a year, although in some communities these rotate every three years; the charges are unpaid and can absorb between half and all of the work hours (^{Carlsen, 1999}). However, in the structure of the centers according to the level of affluence of visitors, some positions are already paid, mostly those of women.

Table 4 Types of charges and remuneration in ecotourism centers. 

Source: authors’ elaboration with information provided by the interviewees, 2012.

The rotation of the ecotourism committees in Sierra Norte is determined by the duration of the charges, which range from one to three years in most of the cases. Table 5 shows a heterogeneous behavior of times and income receipt in ecotourism centers.

Table 5 Characteristics of the work in the ecotourism committees. 

Source: authors’ elaboration.

According to Okasaki (2008), community participation in the process of ecotourism planning is necessary in the implementation of sustainable tourism. The characteristics of the property system and the social organization of indigenous communities, especially in Oaxaca, generate an economy directed towards auto-consumption as a fundamental objective, but also towards sharing with the other members of the community, in which there is a lack of capitalist entrepreneurial spirit, according to ^{Martínez-Luna (2010)}.

The ecotourism centers in Sierra Norte have a great variety of infrastructure in services such as cabins, restaurants, multiple use rooms, temazcales, zip lines, community museums and trout farms, where the visitors are offered extreme recreational activities, such as zip line, rappel, mountain cycling, and other more relaxing ones, such as hiking, horseback riding, bird observation, agro-tourism, environmental education workshops, and outdoor camping. Each one of these services and activities has been incorporated throughout time with community participations through tequio, which have emerged as the result from the interaction with other external actors within a process of collaboration and participation with the communities.

Incorporation of external actors and hybridization of resources

The combination between communality and the development of ecotourism gives sense to a form of economy that may be studied through solidary economy; it is focused on the study of economic practices, which result from forms of non-capitalist economic rationality, and identifies elements such as solidarity and reciprocity in the reorientation of social and economic relationships. Laville proposes that organizations in solidary economy have two fundamental characteristics: “1) The hybridization of resources, which consists in the combination of resources from different sources: donations and volunteering (reciprocity principle), public financing (redistribution principle), and sale of goods and services (market principle); 2) The joint construction of the offer and the demand, where members and users participate in the definition of services in function of the needs of users” (^{Bastidas-Delgado and Richer, 2001}).

According to this perspective, throughout the history of ecotourism centers in the Sierra Norte, various actors were incorporated (and continue to be) for the generation of services. These actors (Table 6) have provided material, financial and intellectual resources, and others that are equally valuable for the development of ecotourism, such as management and lobbying with the communities themselves.

Table 6 Actors identified. 

Figure 3 shows the large number of external actors who have collaborated for the generation of ecotourism services in communities of the Sierra Norte. The size of the shapes represents the number of actors connected; that is, the largest are the ecotourism centers or external actors with most connections and vice versa. The size of the lines is represented in proportion to the interactions; the thicker the line, the greater number of interactions between ecotourism centers and external actors, and vice versa.

Government institutions at the three levels of government have provided financing for infrastructure, training and promotion. Practically all the ecotourism centers in the Sierra Norte have received some sort of financing from institutions. The ones that have participated most are the Tourism Ministry of the State of Oaxaca (Secretaría de Turismo del Estado de Oaxaca, SEDETUR), the National Commission for the Development of Indigenous Nations (Comisión Nacional para el Desarrollo de los Pueblos Indígenas, CDI), and the National Forest Commission (Comisión Nacional Forestal, CONAFOR) (Figure 3). Next in importance are the Ministry of the Environment and Natural Resources (Secretaría de Medio Ambiente y Recursos Naturales, SEMARNAT), the Ministry of Social Development (Secretaría de Desarrollo Social, SEDESOL), the National Commission for Natural Protected Areas (Comisión Nacional de Áreas Naturales Protegidas, CONANP), the Ministry of Rural Development (Secretaría de Desarrollo Rural, SEDER) and the Ministry of Economy (Figure 3).

Also, diverse educational institutions have contributed to the ecotourism centers through studies, intellectual material, signaling, advertisement, and elaboration of magazines that have served as promotion. La Nevería is the ecotourism center that has had greatest interaction with educational institutions, and has even been subject of collaboration with foreign universities such as the universities of Texas and Winsconsin (Figure 3). Non-governmental organizations (NGOs) have contributed funds, primarily for the start of projects of ecotourism and consulting. The Canada Foundation stands out (Figure 3), which in 1996 was one of the first to support ecotourism in the Sierra Norte, strengthening the recently created ecotourism centers of Benito Juárez, La Nevería and Cuajimolollas, and was the spearhead for the creation of Ecoturixtlán. The World Wild Fund (WWF) (Figure 3) has also supported ecotourism from the perspective of conservation. The religious organization Congregación Mariana Trinitaria (Figure 3) has also had an important participation to support four ecotourism centers in Sierra Norte. Some private companies have made agreements for the promotion of ecotourism and to facilitate access for tourists (Figure 3), although their interest has been more commercial; these have helped to strengthen organizational areas, such as information from markets.

Ecotourism networks

According to ^{Martínez-Luna (2010)}, communality is understood as a way of life that is constructed from the need for social rediscovery and reinvention: “we are communality, the opposite of individuality, we are communal territory, not private property; we are sharing, not competition; we are polytheism, not monotheism. We are exchange, not business; diversity, not equality, although in the name of equality we have also been oppressed. We are independent, not free” (^{Martínez-Luna, 2010:17}).

These elements characterize the constitution of the two ecotourism networks; these act as operators: they promote, manage and give corporate identity to the ecotourism centers. We are an example of the relationships of cooperation and reciprocity that characterize solidary economy, in addition to being a means for collective management of the supports that various government offices provide. The networks are: Expediciones Sierra Norte⁷ and Red Integradora de Ecoturismo Sierra Juárez de Oaxaca (RESDJO)⁸ (Figure 4).

Figure 4 Connection of ecotourism networks. 

Expediciones Sierra Norte is a Social Solidarity Society (Sociedad de Solidaridad Social, SSS) created in 1998 to be the official tour operator of the Joint Townships: Benito Juárez, La Nevería, Cuajimoloyas, Llano Grande, Amatlán and Latuvi. The operations provided by it consist in giving information regarding the services that are offered in the different destinations of the Joint Townships, serving as a means of promotion for the six communities and the routes that interconnect them.

Expediciones Sierra Norte gives legal capacity before the law and corporate identity, without losing the autonomy of each ecotourism center. It is also through Expediciones Sierra Norte that the centers have carried out negotiations to improve the services, as was recently done by obtaining the certification from Norma Mexicana de Ecoturismo NMX133 and by obtaining the “M” badge of quality in tourism services. Expediciones Sierra Norte is part of the organizational structure of the enterprises in the Joint Townships; the person responsible of the general coordination is a position that the General Communal Land Owners’ Assembly designates as a paid charge, which lasts three years. There is also administrative staff that is made up of a secretary, two assistants and a legal adviser, positions that are occupied by people from the Joint Townships and which are approved also by the community authorities.