The place of planners in Tourism-Development-Planning: A ...

University of Calgary

PRISM University of Calgarys Digital Repository

Graduate Studies The Vault Electronic Theses and Dissertations

2014-05-02

The Place of Planners in

Tourism-Development-Planning A Case Study of San

Blas Mexico

Gonzalez De Aguinaga Ximena Maria

Gonzalez De Aguinaga X M (2014) The Place of Planners in Tourism-Development-Planning A

Case Study of San Blas Mexico (Unpublished masters thesis) University of Calgary Calgary AB

doi1011575PRISM28275

httphdlhandlenet110231494

master thesis

University of Calgary graduate students retain copyright ownership and moral rights for their

thesis You may use this material in any way that is permitted by the Copyright Act or through

licensing that has been assigned to the document For uses that are not allowable under

copyright legislation or licensing you are required to seek permission

Downloaded from PRISM httpsprismucalgaryca

UNIVERSITY OF CALGARY

The Place of Planners in Tourism-Development-Planning

A Case Study of San Blas Mexico

by

Ximena M Gonzalez De Aguinaga

A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES IN

PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE

OF MASTER OF ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGN

FACULTY OF ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGN

CALGARY ALBERTA

APRIL 2014

copy Ximena M Gonzalez De Aguinaga

ABSTRACT

Currently Mexico relies on a neoliberal strategy for development and the

improvement of life conditions As part of this strategy the state has guided urban

planning towards the creation of tourist enclaves However the anticipated

positive effects of tourism on the residents quality of life have been called into

question Given the economic character of the spaces produced subjective

components of space and their influence on wellbeing are neglected in the states

development model To support a qualitative shift in the urban planning

framework in the context of tourism development this work proposes a thorough

identification of the features of place that existing at the site prior to tourism

development are key for any discussion of wellbeing

ii

I

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

am immensely grateful to my supervisor whose knowledge patience and

optimism were key for the completion of this thesis Many thanks to my

professors in EVDS since every course I took became part of the foundations to

this thesis my special thanks go to Larissa Muller and Bev Sandalack without

whose wisdom and timely advice I may not have finished I am thankful to my

parents whose example taught me how to be a critical thinker Thanks to Dave

whose support kept me sane in the difficult months preceding the completion of

my degree And finally I am indebted to the fellow Mexicans who through their

contributions allowed CONACYT to provide me with the financial means

necessary to my invaluable experience in Canada

iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Abstracthelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellipii

Acknowledgementshelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellipiii

Table of Contentshelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellipiv

List of Tableshelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellipviii

List of Figureshelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellipix

List of Abbreviationshelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellipxii

Chapter 1

1 Introduction Planning and Placehelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip1

11 Positionalityhelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip3

12 Purpose and objectiveshelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip2

13 Conceptual Frameworkhelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip5

131 Defining Tourism - development - planninghelliphelliphelliphelliphellip7

132 Placehelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip10

14 Methodshelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip14

141 Case Study San Blas Nayarit Mexicohelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip15

142 Literature and document reviewhelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip17

143 Census and data collection analysishelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip18

144 Spatial visualization of census data

and mapping techniqueshelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip19

145 Key informant interviewshelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip19

146 Simple and participant observationhelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip22

iv

15 Limitationshelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip22

16 Organization of the thesishelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip23

Chapter 2

2 Emergence of the Tourism-Development-Planning

(TDP) Paradigm in Mexicohelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip26

21 Historical Evolution of Tourism as a

Development Strategy in Mexicohelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip26

22 Tourism as Developmenthelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip32

23 Peoples Role in the TDP Processhelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip38

231 A passive civil societyhelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip 42

24 Implications of Tourism for Urban Planninghelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip43

241 Urban planning process for tourist enclaveshelliphelliphelliphelliphellip45

242 Urban model of tourism enclaves

The examples of Cancun and Los Caboshelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip49

25 Conclusionhelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip57

Chapter 3

3 A Critical Look at TDP

Case Study of San Blas Mexicohelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip59

31 Perceived Usability of San Blas Featureshelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip60

311 Geographical featureshelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip61

312 Cultural featureshelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip62

32 Comparison of San Blas to Cancun and Los Caboshelliphelliphelliphellip65

33 Conceptualizations of San Blashelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip71

v

331 Demographic and economic realitieshelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip73

332 Institutional re-conceptualizations of San Blashelliphelliphelliphellip82

34 Tourism Whose Silver Bullethelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip103

Chapter 4

4 Discussion Socio-spatial Implications of TDPhelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip106

41 Wellbeing as Placehelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip107

411 Spatial gaps Sociabilityhelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip110

412 Spatial gaps Uses and activitieshelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip112

413 Spatial gaps Comfort and imagehelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip116

414 Spatial gaps Access and linkageshelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip120

42 The Production of Space Lefebvres Spatial Triadhelliphelliphelliphelliphellip124

421 Perceived spacehelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip126

422 Conceived spacehelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip126

423 Lived Spacehelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip127

43 Socio-spatial Implications of TDPhelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip130

Chapter 5

5 Conclusionshelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip133

51 Framework to evaluate the potential of a

TDP strategy to support peoples quality of lifehelliphelliphelliphelliphellip 134

52 Structural Weaknesses of TDPhelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip136

53 The Role of Planners in placehelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip136

54 Recommendationshelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip137

55 Further Researchhelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip129

vi

Reference Listhelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip140

Appendiceshelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip159

vii

LIST OF TABLES

1 Alignment and origin of urban development policieshelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip46

2 Population employed in tertiary sector activitieshelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip50

3 Marginality indiceshelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip70

4 Institutional framework of urban planning in Mexico helliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip83

5 Tourism attractive assetshelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip87

6 Lynchs performance dimensionshelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip108

7 Lallis dimensions of urban-related identityhelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip109

viii

LIST OF FIGURES

1 FONATUR Integrally Planned Resortshelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip27

2 Employment by economic sectorhelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip29

3 Butlers tourism life-cyclehelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip36

4 Arnsteins ladder of public participationhelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip40

5 Accumulated FDI growth since 1990helliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip50

6 Accumulated GDP growth since 1995helliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip50

7 Basic service provision in dwellingshelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip51

8 Spatial separation in Cancunhelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip54

9 San Blas Nayarit Mexicohelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip61

10 Nearby citieshelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip61

11 Heritage buildingshelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip62

12 Marinera churchhelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip63

13 Contaduriahelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip63

14 Virgen de Fatima Templehelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip64

15 Casa Lanzagortahelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip64

16 Garitahelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip64

17 Aduanahelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip64

18 Casa Deliuxhelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip65

19 Piedra Blancahelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip65

20 Gross GDPhelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip66

21 Municipal contribution to states total gross productionhelliphelliphelliphelliphellip67

ix

22 Percentage of FDI in tourismhelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip67

23 Employment rateshelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip68

24 Access to public healthhelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip68

25 Infrastructure provision in dwellingshelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip68

26 Income inequality at municipal levelhelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip69

27 Income inequality at state levelhelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip69

28 Accumulated demographic growthhelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip73

29 Demographic distribution by age groups in San Blas Townhelliphelliphellip74

30 Proportion of migrant population in San Blas Townhelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip75

31 Educational attainmenthelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip76

32 Average number of years of school attendancehelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip76

33 Economically active population by sector in San Blas Townhelliphelliphellip77

34 Unemployment rateshelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip78

35 Economic units in San Blas Townhelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip 80

36 Proportion of owners and relatives operating economic unitshelliphellip 81

37 Economic units in hospitality sector in San Blas townhelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip81

38 Gross number of visitors to San Blas Municipalityhelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip 82

39 Natural landscapehelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip84

40 El Borrego beach in San Blas Townhelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip88

41 Plaza principalhelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip89

42 Ramadas at El Borrego beachhelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip90

43 Street food vendors on Sinaloa Streethelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip91

44 No parkinghelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip92

x

45 Streets with informal vendorshelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip93

46 Current entryway to San Blas Townhelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip94

47 FONATURs entryway proposalhelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip94

48 Riviera Nayarit Tourism Corridorhelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip96

49 Structure of governmental powerhelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip97

50 Proposed residential useshelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip98

51 Mixed-use zoninghelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip99

52 Proposed touristic usehelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip99

53 Key qualities of placehelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip109

54 Activities and single-use areashelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip110

55 Touristic land-uses proposed and existing populationhelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip111

56 Historical evolution of San Blas Townhelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip112

57 Proposed land-useshelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip113

58 Density of hospitality businesseshelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip114

59 People sitting at the plazahelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip116

60 Streets of San Blas todayhelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip117

61 FONATURs urban design proposalhelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip117

62 FONATURs pedestrian mallhelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip118

63 Old Juarez Streethelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip119

64 Walking and cycling ratios in San Blas Townhelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip121

65 FONATURs road proposalhelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip122

66 Cyclists in San Blashelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip123

67 Lefebvres spatial triadhelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip125

xi

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

Banxico ndash Central Bank of Mexico

CONANP ndash National Commission of Natural Protected Areas

CONAPO ndash National Commission of Population

COPLADEMUN ndash Municipal Commission for Development Planning

CSO ndash Civil Society Organization

DOF ndash Mexicos Official Federal Gazette

FDI ndash Foreign Direct Investment

FONATUR ndash National Fund for Tourism Development

GDP ndash Gross Domestic Product

INAH ndash National Institute of Anthropology and History

IPR ndash Integrally Planned Resort

LGEEPA ndash Law for Ecological Balance and Environmental Protection

MDP ndash Municipal Development Plan

NDP ndash National Development Plan

NPTM ndash National Plan of Territorial Management

NSDP ndash National System of Democratic Planning

PED ndash States Development Plan

PONndash Nayarit states Official Gazette

PPS ndash Project for Public Spaces

RNTC ndash Riviera Nayarit Tourism Corridor

SECTUR ndash Secretariat of Tourism

xii

SEDESOL ndash Secretariat for Social Development

SEDUE ndash Secretariat of Urban Development and Ecology

SEMARNAT ndash Secretariat of Natural and Environmental Resources

TDP ndash Tourism Development Planning

TTMP ndash Touristic Territorial management plan

UDP ndash Urban Development Plan

ZOFEMAT ndash Federal Coastal Zone

xiii

CHAPTER 1 Introduction Planning and Place

The role of urban planning in the context of tourism and development is

yet to be approached in a thorough manner Urban planners are fundamental

actors in the improvement of many peoples life conditions However they are

often unaware of the political and ideological context preceding their work and as

a result urban planners may unwillingly act to the detriment of disempowered

groups Thus it seems relevant for planners to practice the identification of the

ideologies and power dynamics influencing their work in each specific context

In the global south economic growth has been adopted by many

governments as the primary means for development where development is

equated with quality of life In this context tourism has emerged as a so-called

silver-bullet for economic development and governments can move forward

quickly disregarding the potential disadvantages of tourism for the local

communities for the sake of promoting economic growth Tourism development

initiatives are made tangible in the construction of tourism enclaves conferring to

urban planners the enactment of a states development policies through design

strategies with the understanding explicit or implicit that these should support

economic growth purportedly in the best interest of the host community

Based on the methodological contributions to the processes of tourism

planning of Getz (1988) and Inskeep (1988) Dredge (1999) highlights the

necessity of a broader tourism planning framework to aid urban planners in the

design of better destinations Although Dredges (1999) observations are mostly

based on the satisfaction of tourist demands and expectations she does

1

recognize the fundamental task of urban planners to balance the interests of

tourism and the host community

In response to her remarks this work is an attempt to take the tourism

planning framework beyond a simple focus on the market and tourist

preferences That is this thesis proposes a planning approach that not only

explores and evaluates the local spatial patterns but acknowledges place as an

essential component of the quality of life of the local residents Keeping in mind

that development rhetoric uses the idea of improving quality of life this thesis is a

reminder to urban planners of their ethical duty to the communities they work

with particularly in the highly contested context of Tourism-Development-

Planning (TDP)

11 Positionality

This thesis represents my personal struggles and concerns as a Mexican

and as a professional interested in the influence of urban planning on peoples

quality of life Instead of just working on what I already knew how to do as a

architect and urban planner I chose to challenge my own beliefs and research

something I could not quite grasp in the beginning but that eventually became

clearer through this journey

Having already worked in urban planning projects in San Blas (Nayarit

Mexico) with connections to some of the authorities and decision-makers as

well as being a regular visitor to the town since I was a child I believed I knew

what was wrong with San Blas and how to change it Tourism was the key As I

2

began gathering academic evidence to support a tourism strategy in San Blas I

gradually started questioning our planning and design strategies in Mexico

where for decades urban planners have supported tourism as a silver bullet for

development in Mexico This document traces my path of critical discovery of the

place of planners and provides a framework for improving planning initiatives

that are linked to tourism development in Mexico and beyond

12 Purpose and Objectives

The primary focus of contemporary urban planning and urban design

research is on the identification and measurement of socio-spatial qualities that

derived from the contributions of Jacobs Whyte and Lynch are considered as

fundamental ingredients for the making of better places (Carmona 2010 Ewing

and Clemente 2013) Project Public Spaces (2001) for instance synthesizes the

qualitative principles enunciated by Jacobs Whyte and Lynch and complements

them with a series of variables resulting from the evaluation of several

successful places Here qualities related to sociability uses and activities

access and linkages and comfort and image are taken into account for the

making of better places (Project for Public Spaces 2001) However despite the

subjective approach to the characterization of these qualities the multiplicity of

meanings coexisting in place continues to be dismissed overshadowed by the

economic interests embedded in the management of space (Gunder 2010) The

case of urban planning in the context of tourism development (Tourism-

Development-Planning TDP) presents a notorious example of this situation Due

3

to their usually diverging backgrounds what may be regarded as an attractive

place by locals often differs greatly from an attractive place for a specific group

of tourists But given the influential role of the economy and attention to the

market urban planners design destinations to satisfy the perception of tourists

not locals (Carmona 2010)

Hence in order to genuinely support peoples wellbeing the overarching

goal of this thesis is to urge urban planners working in TDP to a) identify the

specific qualities of place being concealed by the dominant economic ideology

and b) to develop a methodology that acknowledging the multiplicity of places

existing at a location effectively reinforces peoples wellbeing For such matters

this work is meant to analyse the process of TDP to identify the implications of

TDP as a paradigm for the improvement of life conditions in Mexico to compare

the abstract elements identified by TDP to the subjective qualities of place

identified in the case study to determine the qualities of place neglected by TDP

and finally to recommend a methodological approach for urban planners to

improve the effectiveness of TDP in the attainment of better life conditions in

Mexico

The achievement of these objectives answers the following eight

research questions

bull What are the implications of using TDP as a paradigm for the

improvement of life conditions in Mexico

- How does a tourism destination emerge

- How is urban planning implicated

4

- How does TDP influence the omission of place

bull What are the aspects of place neglected when the quantitatively-

oriented TDP paradigm is used in the redevelopment of a host

community

- How has the Mexican government profiled San Blas for Tourismshy

Development-Planning (TDP)

- What could be the underlying causes of the omission of place

bull How can urban planners address the economic bias fostered by TDP

in the redevelopment of tourism destinations in Mexico

13 Conceptual Framework

In the 1970s research of humanistic geographers such as Yi-Fu Tuan

(1977) Edward Relph (1976) and Henri Lefebvre (1991) emphasized the

subjective dimension of space and the role of place in supporting peoples

wellbeing In spite of their theoretical contribution however contemporary urban

planning practice has come up short in the thorough understanding of the

multiple meanings that people have embedded in their place (Sorkin 1992 Arefi

1999 Hutchison 2000 Gotham 2000 Norberg-Schulz 2005 Madanipour 2005

Cuthbert 2006 2011 Anderson 2009) Gradually the purpose of the

contemporary city is increasingly seen as something to be consumed as a

commodity (Relph 1976 Gottdiener 2000 Zukin 2005 Cuthbert 2006)

Behind a democratic faccedilade contemporary urbanists (eg Andres Duany

Jan Gehl Richard Florida) regard good urban form (Lynch 1984) as the

5

aptitude of a place to provide attractive experiences to desirable social groups

ndashndashthink Floridas creative class However this approach has resulted in the

imposition of meanings that a) are assimilated by the users of a place or b) end

up displacing its less-desirable users These seem to be the outcomes of urban

planning when acting as an instrument for capital accumulation (Arefi 1999

Clarke 2005 Gunder 2010 Cuthbert 2011) rather than as means to improve

peoples life conditions

This practical weakness is even more clearly represented at tourist

enclaves in developing countries (Relph 1976 Lefebvre 1991 Gottdiener 2000

Zukin 2005) where the values dictated by the economy tend to be dominant

(Carmona 2010) At tourist destinations urban planners create what they

consider to be good urban form based on the preferences of the target market

(Dredge 2010) often overriding the relevance of the local sense of place in the

face of a doxa of capital accumulation (Liu and Wall 2006)

Thus as urban planners can be the ultimate enablers of the

transformation of host communities into consumption goods it seems critical to

re-emphasize the role of place so that they do not neglect their influence on

peoples wellbeing challenging the rather limited definition and measurement of

quality of life in terms only related to capital accumulation

6

131 Defining TourismndashDevelopmentndashPlanning (TDP)

After its massive popularization in the first half of the 20th century

development agencies began prescribing tourism as an effective development

strategy to improve wellbeing and quality of life in developing countries

essentially due to its potential to alleviate poverty and improve the standards of

living Given the apparent relationship between economic growth and the

improvement of peoples life conditions it seemed reasonable for developing

countries to align their urban planning strategies to the requirements of the

economic system (Liu and Wall 2006)

Although in 1979 the World Bank questioned the benefits of tourism as

an effective development strategy (Hawkins and Mann 2007) the United Nations

(UN) has continued to support adequately planned sustainable tourism as a

driver of socio-economic growth and development (UNWTO 2012) in developing

countries The UN affirms that tourism is not only an important source of foreign

exchange and employment (UNWTO 2012) but it also promotes environmental

protection (United Nations 2012) In this context since the creation of Cancun in

1974 (FONATUR 1998) the Mexican government has continued to support

tourism as one of its main development strategies striving to increase the

standards of living in underdeveloped regions of the country (Chapter 2)

The social and spatial implications of tourism in host communities have

been broadly scrutinized since the 1970s as the so-called benefits of tourism

rarely materialize (Butler 1974 Cohen 1988 Clancy 1999) even when

adequately planned In order to achieve its claimed benefitsthe United Nations

7

World Tourism Organization (UNWTO) recommends the enhancement of

destinations to increase their attraction potential For that purpose Dredge

explains urban planners are entrusted with the design of the most desirable

spatial structure of tourism in order to facilitate destination region design and

development (Dredge 1999 775)

Tourism enclaves are specifically [re]designed as production centres of

leisure and experiences (Shaw and Williams 2004) Tourism-Development-

Planning (TDP) is entrusted with the creation of distinctive and simultaneously

homogeneous environments that while providing novelty and exoticism to its

visitors also accommodate recognizable amenities (Smith 1977 Arefi 1999) that

fit closely with the particular lifestyle of the target market (Shaw and Williams

2004) This obvious contradiction can create a phenomenon that MacCannell

(1973) calls staged authenticity where as illustrated by Cricks (1989) study of

luxury tourism urban improvements are represented by the allocation of

infrastructure that is little utilized by the local population (Clancy 1999)

Considering that the economic value of a destination is constantly

affected by variations in the markets preference (Butler 1974 Urry 1990

Hoffman Fainstein and Judd 2003 Clarke 2005 Miles 2010) characteristic

monuments distinctive culture and scenarios along with shopping malls

restaurants theme parks and other recreative amenities become the branding

markers that represent a specific destination (Cohen 1988 Arefi 1999 Culler

1990 Gottdiener 1994) To remain competitive in the global market these

markers have to be continuously expanded and reinvented by urban planners

8

following the demand for new experiences by consumers (Butler 1974 Dredge

1999 Miles 2010) Consequently the creation and sustenance of competitive

tourism destinations implies not only the modification of local ecosystems and

environmental features (Butler 1974) but frequently leads to the relegation of

livelihoods and existing meanings in the host community (Butler 1974 Cohen

1982 1988 Arefi 1999) as illustrated by MacCannell

[The first touristic strategy for urban design] is the inflation of

an accumulation of possessions to the level of life itself even

all of nature which is subject to mimetic reproduction and

sold (MacCannell 2000 165)

Conceived for profit tourism destinations are created by a quantitative

approach that disregards local subjective elements as these are of little concern

to the market Although Dredge (1999) describes planning as the process of

establishing a vision for an area which reflects communitys goals and

aspirations and implementing this through the identification of preferred patterns

of land use and appropriate styles of development (774) the built environment

of tourism destinations is highly influenced by the economic and commercial

forces (Carmona 2010) planned to satisfy the demands of consumers that

expect exotic but still familiar experiences (MacCannell 1973 2000)

By evaluating and managing the existing assets in terms of exchange

value (Cohen 1988) urban planners materialize the commoditization of spaces

Influenced by the dominant economic ideology (doxa) (Bourdieu 1972) urban

planners tend to overlook the local subjective dimension of their proposed

9

transformations (Harvey 1989 Madanipour 2005 Cuthbert 2011) and by

extension to their detrimental effect on the local sense of place (Relph 1976

Tuan 1977 Bailly 1986 Entrikin 1989 Clarke 2005 Atkinson Fuller and Painter

2012) often leading to social alienation and environmental disruption (Norberg-

Schulz 2005)

Thus it appears relevant for tourism development planners to widen their

economically-laden scope by recognizing the importance of place as a pillar of

wellbeing in order to complement the efforts to mitigate the socio-spatial

implications of tourism that have historically hindered the wellbeing of residents

at host communities (Relph 1976 Bailly 1986 Lefebvre 1991 Whitaker 1996

Atkinson Fuller and Painter 2012)

132 Place

Because the importance of space extends beyond its economic

significance (Norberg-Schulz 2005) it cannot be simplified to its abstract aspects

(Relph 1976 Tuan 1977 Lefebvre 1991 Arefi 1999) In contrast to a

depersonalized conception of space humanistic geographers Relph (1976) and

Tuan (1977) defined place as a social construct related to the meanings and

experiences that root people into a location Place gives people a sense of

identity of meaning and of purpose (Relph 1976 Tuan 1977 Norberg-Schulz

2005 Madanipour 2005 Cuthbert 2006) by establishing ties with the physical

setting (Arefi 1999 183) As a result the emotional bonds that emerge through

experience give meaning to a space and generate a collective sense of

10

belonging that supports wellbeing through feelings of attachment (Halbwachs

1980 Altman and Low 1992 Gieryn 2000)

Unlike abstract space Rotenberg and McDonogh (1993) remark that

place is locally constituted at personal and collective scales In addition as it is

experienced by different people in different contexts place results from an

heterogeneous construction of meanings contested socially and physically

(Rodman 1993 Rotenberg and McDonogh 1993) This contestation becomes

more apparent Lefebvre (1979) argues when the use value produced by

peoples everyday life differs from the abstract value assigned by economic and

political practices

With specific reference to the topic at hand the neoliberal doxa

influences peoples experience of place (Gotham 2000 Carmona 2010 Miles

2010 Gunder 2010 Cuthbert 2011) tending towards the extended

commoditization of the everyday life (Sen 1985 Bailly 1986 Lefebvre 1991)

Thus the influence of the economic forces can result in the detachment of people

from place (Norberg-Schulz 2005) Since place is composed of unmarketable

subjective capital (MacCannell 2002) the attempt of tourism to commercialize

place (Cohen 1988 Gottdiener 2000) threatens to generate ldquosynthetic

landscapesrdquo that contrary to the qualities of ldquoauthentic placesrdquo (Relph 1976) are

disconnected from a broader physical cultural and emotional context (Arefi

1999 183) This leads to the erosion of the social ties and local identities (Arefi

1999) that support peoples wellbeing (Heidegger 1991 Lefebvre 1991 Relph

1976 Tuan 1977)

11

Running parallel to the ideas about place of humanistic geographers

urban planners such as Jane Jacobs (1961) William Whyte (1980) and Kevin

Lynch (1984) attempted to introduce to their practice the significance of peoples

perception and experiences for the conception of an improved built environment

Lynchs (1984) Theory of Good City Form stands up as an urban analysis

framework since it is based on what he called dimensions of performance

vitality sense fit access control efficiency and justice (Lynch 1984)

However in spite of their influential role in contemporary urban planning

and urban design practices (Carmona 2010 Ewing and Clemente 2013) the

contributions of Jacobs Whyte and Lynch are limited to design principles that

are still unlikely to acknowledge the multiplicity of places that Relph (1976)

remarks collide in the built environment

Instead of being genuinely acknowledged by contemporary planning

approaches the importance of human experiences for urban planning has been

simplified to the identification of material elements thought to support a more

desirable lifestyle (Gunder 2010 Cuthbert 2006 Miles 2010) In other words the

way in which different people experience the same place is ultimately

standardized by the economic value ascribed to it (Gottdiener 2000 Miles 2010)

Consequently the perception and experience of place appears to be subject to a

doxa subtly imposed by the economic system (Harvey 1989 Dredge 2010)

rather than to an authentic sense of place (Relph 1976)

In recognition of the contradictions that promoted by the economic

hegemony make difficult the identification of the non-commodifiable elements

12

basic to the purpose of human experience Lefebvre (1991) proposes a

framework of analysis that can be used to assist planners involved in TDP in

determining these subjective elements He coined the concepts of the perceived

conceived and lived dimensions of space that help to identify underlying

subjective qualities that are so often overlooked Use of such concepts could help

redirect urban planning to the effective improvement of peoples life conditions

(Lynch 1984 Fainstein 2000) For Lefebvre space is not confined to an abstract

nor a subjective definition In The Production of Space (1991) Lefebvre

describes space as the conjunction of three coexisting dimensions the

perceived the conceived and the lived Of these dimensions only the perceived

and conceived spaces are observed by the capitalist hegemony The former are

identified by Lefebvre as the abstract components existing in the landscape and

the latter represents the use-value assigned to them by urban planners and

architects The lived space Lefebvre (1991) contends is neglected by capitalism

(Lefebvre 1991) because of its subjective nature and impossibility to transform

into a commodity Nevertheless it is in the lived dimension Relph (1976)

presumes where space acquires its economic qualities contradicting the

capitalist conception of space as an abstraction

Upon the prescribed neglect of the lived space the contemporary city

has been transformed into what MacCannell (2000) described as the repository

of the accumulation of commodities (MacCannell 2000 163) That is by giving

rational support and validity to the interpretation of space as a commodity

(Carmona 2010) urban planners have become the material executors of the

13

economic dominance (Harvey 1973 Lefebvre 1991 Gottdiener 1994)

perpetuating the status quo of capitalism (Gunder 2010) This is particularly true

in tourism

In sum planners are involved in a model of development to improve

wellbeing that uses tourism as the engine However the neoliberal underpinnings

of this approach tend to be masked by the time urban planners get involved in

the process The goal of this thesis is to expose weaknesses in the TDP model

by drawing attention to key factors of place that are missing and that could

contribute to better and more successful planning with the ultimate goal of

improving quality of life in host communities and regions

14 Methods

For the purposes of this thesis mixed methods were employed The

overarching research method is a case study approach together with primary

and secondary methods The primary and secondary methods conducted are

literature and document review official census data review analysis and spatial

visualization techniques key informant interviews and simple and participant

observation

The research design was evaluated and approved by the University of

Calgary Conjoint Faculties Research Ethics Board review committee and a

certificate of ethics approval 7134 was obtained on December 2011

14

141 Case Study San Blas Nayarit Mexico

Case study is a specific form of inquiry based on the in-depth

investigation of a case where the social researcher observes a naturally

occurring situation (Hammersley and Gomm 2009) Rather than to provide a

generalization by answering to how and why questions (Yin 2003) the

purpose of case studies is to provide an exploratory descriptive or explanatory

framework of an often invisible research problem (Donmoyer 2009) to illustrate

a theoretical point (Hammersley and Gomm 2009) or to foreshadow phenomena

(Flick 2007) Gerring (2004) describes case studies as usually involving a single

case (Campbell and Stanley 1963 Eckstein 1992) qualitative methods

ethnographic research of field participant-observation (Yin 2003) process tracing

(George and Bennet 2004) and the analysis of a single phenomenon

Case studies are criticized in three primary aspects generalizations

extensiveness theories and authenticity One of the critiques of this approach is

that because of the theoretical character of their findings case studies tend to

infer or make generalizations trying to facilitate the transfer of findings from one

setting to another (Hammersley and Gomm 2009) Another critique is that case

studies are not extensive enough to identify causal relations through comparative

analysis Also the nature of the theory analysed is perceived as a limitation of

case studies as theory must make sense of the case as a bounded system The

authenticity of this sort of research is also criticized since findings can be

interpreted in different ways like art and literature Hammersley and Gomm

15

(2009) explain which leads to the weakness of researchers speaking on behalf

of others

These critiques are countered by those who emphasize the benefits of

the case study approach Donmoyer (2009) identifies three advantages for

conducting case studies their accessibility seeing through the researchers

eyes and decreased defensiveness Accessibility is referred to as the opportunity

given to the research consumer to experience unique situations and contexts

otherwise impossible Case studies allow the reader to look at the world through

the researchers eyes and in the process to understand a phenomenon from a

different perspective And finally case studies appear to be helpful in the

reduction of a perceived threat by a novel situation

Since the purpose of this thesis is to provide an in-depth understanding

of the TDP paradigm in Mexico and its implications to urban planners ethics San

Blas Town in the State of Nayarit Mexico has been selected as the case study

for three primary reasons a) the historical relationship of San Blas Town with

TDP b) the apparent disconnection between the current life conditions in San

Blas Town and its economic potential and c) the recent pressure of the

government to execute the urban development and urban design plans both

products of TDP Thus the exploration and description of the context in which

TDP is being imposed in San Blas along with the description of seemingly

invisible phenomena caused by TDP are meant to answer the questions posed

in this thesis and provide a plausible explanation to be tested in further research

16

142 Literature and document review

The theoretical framework that supports the premises of this research is

sourced on a literature review In order to frame the context in which San Blas

Town is studied relevant peer-reviewed literature and governmental documents

regarding the historical emergence of the Tourism-Development-Planning

dynamics are analysed and synthesized

On the one hand literature related to development tourism and urban

planning and the relationships among the three of them are reviewed Critical

analyses of the premises that equate economic growth to bring development as

well as alternative definitions of development are reviewed to gain a more

exhaustive understanding of the underlying ideology guiding development

strategies in Mexico In order to explore the positive and negative effects of

tourism as well as to identify its gaps and contradictions a broad range of

literature is also critically examined Theoretical and methodological frameworks

guiding urban planning including the theoretical framework of place are also

reviewed and contrasted to determine the degree of influence that development

ideologies and tourism-as-development strategies have on the outcomes of

urban planning practice

On the other hand a substantial number of laws policies regulations

and by-laws of federal state and municipal levels concurring in the urban

planning process of San Blas are examined and critically analysed For instance

the background of the policies regarding development in Mexico outlined in the

National Development Plan is to be found in the Mexican Constitution The

17

regulations mandating public participation in the planning process guided by the

National System for Democratic Planning (NSDP) are transferred through and

across governments secretariats For the purposes of this thesis only the

participation policies corresponding to the Secretariat for Social Development

(SEDESOL) the Secretariat of Natural and Environmental Resources

(SEMARNAT) the Secretariat for Tourism (SECTUR) the National Fund for

Tourism (FONATUR) and the laws of Human Settlements and Civil Associations

are analysed Furthermore the descriptions evaluations and suggestions for

development carried out by the government are independently crafted by every

governmental ministry at federal state and municipal levels This situation leads

to the synthesis and consequent comparison and triangulation among the

planning documents crafted by SEDESOL SEMARNAT SECTUR FONATUR

Nayarit states government the Secretariat of Urban Development and Urban

Works of Nayarit (SOP) and San Blas Municipal government much of this

material is found in Chapter 2

143 Census data collection and analysis

Official census data comprising demographic and economic information

is used to reveal economic biases influencing governmental planning documents

Raw data collection was done online through the websites corresponding to the

National Institute of Statistics Geography and Information Technologies (INEGI)

the Labour Ministry the National Commission of Population (CONAPO) the

National Commission of Evaluation (CONEVAL) and Mexicos Central Bank

18

(Banxico) These raw data are then analysed in order to provide a demographic

and economic context to the development tourism and urban planning policies

coinciding in San Blas Town Then for the purposes of this thesis tables charts

and maps are crafted to clearly illustrate and fill in the gaps occurring among the

broad range of governmental documents in their attempt to support tourism as a

strategy for development This analysis is used to answer the questions posed in

Chapter 3

144 Spatial Visualization of Census Data and Mapping techniques

In order to further illustrate the economic inclination of the governmental

documents processed census data is mapped at urban block and census tract

scales allowing a direct comparison between the urban strategy for San Blas

that was proposed by the government and some of the characteristics

overlooked by such a strategy These original maps are produced to illustrate the

demographic and economic profiles as well as the physical location of the

proposed tourism strategies clearly identifying the shortcomings of the strategies

proposed by the government Finally mapped census data is also helpful for the

identification of demographic and economic qualities that are regarded as

components of place This material is highlighted in Chapter 4

145 Key informant interviews

Given the nature of the Mexican government the primary decision-

makers tend to be the heads of the secretariat or governmental office at federal

19

state and municipal level For the purposes of this thesis the identification of the

key informants is related to their position in the decision-making process leading

to the urban planning policies in San Blas Town

The individuals with the most influential role in TDP at state and local

scales are requested an interview as they are regarded as key informants for the

purpose of this work

- Representative of the Social Development Secretariat in Nayarit

(federal)

- Head officer of the Social Development Secretariat of Nayarit (state)

- Head officer of the Tourism Secretariat of Nayarit (state)

- Head officer of the Development Secretariat of Nayarit (state)

- Head officer of the Economic Development Secretariat of Nayarit

(state)

- Head officer of the Urban Development Commission of Nayarit

(state)

- Head Deputy of the economic development commission at the

Chamber of Deputies of Nayarit (statemunicipal)

- Mayor of San Blas Municipality (municipallocal)

- Head officer of the Urban Planning Commission of San Blas

Municipality (municipallocal)

- Representative of the Tourism Development Office of San Blas


20

- President of the Association of Hotels and Motels of San Blas (civil

association municipallocal)

In order to explore the attitudes of decision-makers towards development

in San Blas an general interview guide approach is conducted with a set of

open-ended questions (Appendix A) The relevant observations stated by the

interviewees are put in writing by the interviewer in-situ In addition as a

measure to allow decision-makers to go off the official discourse their names

are not mentioned as a source of the statements instead only the office they

lead is referenced

In January and February of 2012 it was necessary to travel to Mexico

and set up interviews to be carried out in the offices of these influential

individuals These premises are located in the cities of Tepic and San Blas

Prior to each interview a letter introducing myself and explaining the purpose

of this research was sent to their offices to request an interview only those

who accepted were interviewed one person declined because of prior

commitments during the research period The interviews lasted an average of

1 hour and were not taped but the interviewees agreed to allow notes to be

taken during the interview A total of 10 interviews were carried out

Due to my perception that the interviewees had not thought critically

about the diversity of possible impacts of tourism development in the

jurisdictions under their purview their voices as decision-makers merge with

the overall TDP rhetoric in this thesis This attitude of individuals in positions of

political power is characteristic of Mexican political culture

21

146 Simple and participant observation

Patterns of uses and activities are identified by simple and participant

observation Observations are conducted through field work and Google Street

View By complementing the census data participant observation in this work

enhances the accuracy of the evaluation of place using the qualitative variables

suggested by Project for Public Spaces participant observation leads to the

visual illustration of the multiplicity of places being contested in San Blas Town

In addition simple observation is conducted in field research to gain a direct

insight on the matters being researched in San Blas and regarded by the official

documents and decision-makers as negative or positive permitting a broader

understanding of place

15 Limitations

In addition to the limitations already mentioned in the methodology

section one the constraints of this work is related to the inconsistencies of official

government and statistical records Definitions and categories change from

census to census making comparisons difficult especially in categories related

to government-supported situations such as tourism constraining the accuracy of

its examination and interpretation In addition data regarding quality of life and

human development indices were only available at municipal and state scales

that given the inequality gaps in Mexico cannot be considered accurate at a

local scale consequently these data were dismissed for this analysis

22

Another limitation is the reliability of the insights provided by the key

informants Given the political nature of their role it is possible that the responses

of the key informants were partial as they felt they had to protect their own

political interests or those of the sector or agency they were representing opting

to use the rhetoric of the official documents in their answers In one of the cases

the interviewee was unaware of the connection of his ministry to TDP Time

constraints made it difficult to corroborate and triangulate the interview data with

information from other sources such as local Civil Society Organizations (CSO)

During the time period when interviews were conducted although the leaders of

the local CSOs Alianza de la Costa Verde and Grupo Ecologico Manglar were e-

mailed phoned and visited at their facilities it was not possible to make contact

with them

It was beyond the scope of this thesis to conduct interviews with local

residents since the goal of this work was to identify policy approaches The

results of the thesis do however frame a subsequent research study of resident

attitudes

16 Organization of the thesis

The study of the evolution of San Blas Town characterizes the

implications of the current TDP approach for the making of place by urban

planners This thesis is comprised of five chapters The second chapter is a

description of the emergence of tourism as a development strategy in Mexico

Through an in-depth policy analysis the connections linking development and

23

tourism to urban planning are explained Furthermore a literature review

examining the historical results of the TDP strategies questions the effectiveness

of a quantitative approach to destination redevelopment

Widening the scope and scale of the statistical analysis executed by the

governmental TDP framework chapter three poses the questions How does a

tourism destination emerge How is urban planning implicated How does TDP

influence the omission of place A quantitative analysis of demographic and

economic profiles shows the existing contradictions between the social and

economic realms that prior to this work had remained concealed by the

governmental analyses supporting TDP In a quantitative manner the subjective

qualities of place that are being disregarded are revealed and highlighted in this

chapter

Chapter four is divided in two parts In the first part a socio-spatial

analysis compares the current spatial configuration of San Blas to the urban

plans to be implemented by the government This comparison brings into focus

the displacement of the subjective qualities of place supporting quality of life in

San Blas In the second part Lefebvres theory of the production of space is used

in discussing and articulating the causes of the gaps encountered in chapters 3

and 4 As space is not perceived conceived and lived homogeneously by its

multiple users deconstructing the qualities of place into this triad reveals some

of the points of contestation among the multiplicity of places occurring in San

Blas

24

To conclude chapter 5 synthesizes the qualities of the places contested

in San Blas leading to the recommendation of a critical approach using TDP as a

measure to improve the effectiveness of planning in the attainment of a life of

quality at Mexican destinations and beyond

25

CHAPTER 2 Emergence of the Tourism Development Planning (TDP)

Paradigm in Mexico

The overarching goals of this chapter are a) to explain why the analysis

of the TDP framework is important to urban planning and b) to illustrate how and

why TDP has resulted in a quantitative approach that comes from above The

answers to these questions are related to the relationship between ideas of

development and economic growth at a global scale the emergence of the

tourism sector in Mexico and their connection to urban planning strategies at a

local scale

To understand the nature of that relationship today and how it affects

urban planning and urban growth this chapter provides a thorough description of

the processes that led to the emergence of tourism as the quintessential

development model for certain regions of Mexico as well as why the

governments voice is heard above those of the local community when it comes

to urban planning in the context of tourism development

21 Historical Evolution of Tourism as a Development Strategy in Mexico

Since the conclusion of the Mexican Revolution and with the decree of a

new constitution in 1917 the Mexican State defined economic growth as its main

goal as an effort to integrate to the capitalist world Equating economic growth to

economic development this still current constitution commissions the State to

direct the strategies of economic development in the country In this context

26

territorial planning has become the primary tool of the government to manage

more efficiently the economic assets of the country (DOF 1993)

NORTH

Loreto

Playa Espiritu CancunLos Cabos Gulf of

MexicoMexico CityRiviera Nayarit Riviera Maya

Pacific Ocean Ixtapa

Huatulco FONATURs Integrally Fig 1 FONATUR IPRs Planned Resorts

500 Km 1000 Km Source wwwfonaturgobmx

In order to become a developed country the 1917s constitution

mandates the creation of a National System for Democratic Planning

(Montemayor 1983) Integrated by representatives of all departments of

government together with stakeholders belonging to the private sector and

invited civil society groups the NSDP (DOF 1983) defines from its central

position the strategies and actions it deems necessary to increase economic

growth in Mexico However it was not until a couple of decades later in the

1930s that the first Planning Law was created in order to improve the

development planning process and ensure the coherence of state and municipal

development plans with the National Development Plan (Montemayor 1983

Gutieacuterrez 2009)

27

In the following decades despite the strength of primary sector activities

industrialization became the development strategy pursued by the Mexican

government (Garcia 2010) However the centralized process of industrialization

produced deep equality gaps among regions (Aguilar and Vaacutezquez 2000 Cortez

and Delgadillo 2006 Gutieacuterrez 2009) Mexico City was increasingly the centre of

all economic activity from the federal governments main offices to industrial

development So even though these were times of great economic growth most

of benefits remained in Mexico City attracting people from rural areas and other

cities throughout Mexico a situation that prompted rapid demographic growth

rates and urban sprawl of Mexico City during the 1970s and a gradual

weakening of the primary sector (Aguilar and Vaacutezquez 2000 Mojarro and

Beniacutetez 2006 Bazant 2010)

As regional inequalities deepened in the 1970s (Unikel 1975) and

demographic growth of Mexico City became difficult to manage efficiently the

government decided to complement the development policies based on

economic growth with social policies that would address poverty in

underdeveloped regions of the country in order to prevent more immigration to

Mexico City (Unikel 1975) One primary strategy to accomplish this objective was

the creation of development poles so the state started creating industrial towns

from scratch or by transforming formerly rural villages and agricultural lands

(Hiernaux 1983 Cortez and Delgadillo 2006 Hiernaux and Torres 2006) The

underlying belief was that bringing urbanization and economic growth to other

regions of the country would not only benefit the local communities but also

28

increase investment (Delgadillo Torres and Gazca 2001 Cortez and Delgadillo

2006 Delgadillo and Torres 2006 Hiernaux and Torres 2006 Delgadillo 2007) It

is important to notice though that in spite of the industrialization efforts primary

sector activities remained as the main source of employment in the country until

the late 1980s (INEGI 2014)

Fig 2 Employment by economic sector

70

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Po

pula

tio

n P

erc

enta

ge

1970 1980 1990 2000 2010

Primary Sector Secondary Sector Tertiary Sector

Compiled by author from INEGI 2014 data

In order to facilitate the creation of these new development poles the

government itself built the required infrastructure providing investors with the

amenities and connectivity that made Mexico City such a competitive industrial

hub (Hiernaux 1983 Garza 1983 Hiernaux and Torres 2006) Nevertheless

since certain regions in Mexico were of difficult access ndash such as the peninsular

areas of Yucatan and Baja California ndash the industrial poles were located in

regions closer to Mexico City that were economically more feasible to connect

and provide with infrastructure such as the states of Puebla Queretaro and

Aguascalientes (Garcia and Cordoba 2006)

29

The NAFTA agreement signed in 1994 affected in great measure

Mexican labour employed in both industrial and agricultural activities boosting

Mexican tertiary sector activities which today are the strongest employment

generators and have the highest GDP share (Aguilar and Vaacutezquez 2000)

In such a context the National Development Plan corresponding to the

2007-2012 administration describes tourism benefits as its ldquohigh productivity and

well paid employmentrdquo (Gobierno de la Republica 2013 119) providing so-called

backward regions with development opportunities Tourism is seen as a

development agent since the construction of infrastructure and public services

also serves the host communities by extension ostensibly improving quality of

life for all (DOF 2004c Gobierno de la Republica 2007 2013) Another presumed

advantage of tourism development is that the activities related to this sector can

be developed relatively quickly and require smaller investments than other

sectors and as it requires immediately a large number of workers of diverse

skills tourism provides cheaper and better paid sources of employment

(Gobierno de la Republica 2013)

According to FONATUR the advantages of tourism for development in

Mexico are ldquothe generation of more and better jobs foreign currency attraction

that will compensate commercial imbalances and tourisms contribution to close

inequality gaps among regionsrdquo (FONATUR 2006 6) Tourism is also regarded as

a key factor in the conservation of the nations archeological and historical

heritage along with environmental conservation ldquocontributing to the preservation

30

of the national identity and the sustainable use of natural resourcesrdquo (FONATUR

2006)

The reports and evaluation of tourism carried out by FONATUR and

SECTUR are derived from market trends and statistics (FONATUR 2006) such

as indices of hotel occupancy tourist arrivals and competitiveness levels taking

as given that these increases in market and economical trends would bring social

benefits to the host communities With economic growth identified as such a

great priority for the state and upon the persisting inequalities among regions

some analysts argue that the government has been creating development plans

and policies solely to benefit investors therefore they argue the resulting

subordination of the state to private economic concerns instead of those of the

citizens has increased the social equality gaps (Unikel 1975 Hiernaux 1978

Garza 1983 Pradilla 1995 1998 2009 Delgadillo Torres and Gazca 2001 Ruiz

2006) However FONATUR continues to claim that its tourist mega-projects

concept has proved to be efficient in the attraction of private and foreign

investment as well as in ensuring the basic objectives of social equality quality

housing and environmental protection (FONATUR 2006)

Although the names of the governmental agencies plans and

regulations change regularly Mexican developmental policies and general

objectives have not really changed for almost a century as they are still aimed

towards increasing economic growth promoting investment and creating

salaried jobs factors considered as fundamental components of development

as they provide the means for urbanization infrastructure institutional buildings

31

public services health and education (Garcia and Cordoba 2006 Pradilla 2009)

all of these are expected to improve the quality of life of the residents of a region

deemed as ldquobackwardrdquo This development is questioned by Delgadillo (2006)

and Hiernaux and Torres (2006) who argue that no matter the strategies chosen

regional inequalities have not only prevailed through the last century but

worsened Part of this failure others argue is due to the low priority given to

public participation in the vertical process of decision making (Ziccardi 2006)

More recently the extreme process and pressures of globalization have

brought new challenges to bear on this development process as regions now are

not only competing internally but globally giving the government an urge to

create more economically competitive regions planning and managing a more

opportunistic use of economic assets existing in a region One mechanism for

economic growth that has become increasingly prevalent in the development

discourse and by extension in planning is tourism

22 Tourism as Development

As previously mentioned during the late sixties and early seventies the

Mexican government created development poles as a strategy to address

regional disparities and bring economic development and prosperity to so-called

backward regions of the country (Hiernaux 1985 Clancy 1999 Bringas 1999

Benseny 2007 Castro 2005 Calderoacuten and Orozco 2009) Wishing to address

these circumstances and based on the economic success that Acapulco had

been experiencing since the 1940s as a renowned international tourist

32

destination the state decided to promote tourism in regions that seemingly had

no economical assets beyond their natural beauty (SECTUR 1982 Hiernaux

1985 Clancy 1999 2001 Benseny 2007) Consequently in 1963 the federal

government created the Integral Plan of Tourism Development a planning

instrument that accommodated tourism within the developmental discourse and

legitimized the construction of tourism enclaves by the government (Hiernaux

1985 Bringas 1999 Benseny 2007 Castro 2007 Calderoacuten and Orozco 2009)

To jump-start the process the state carried out an analysis of a variety of

regions in Mexico in order to determine if a tourism enclave would be successful

according to its existing assets (Ayala 1993 Hiernaux 1999 Clancy 2001

FONATUR 1998 2006) Such an analysis showed that given its privileged

location on the Caribbean Cancun presented attractive natural features for high

class tourism that would compete internationally with non-Mexican Caribbean

destinations (Ayala 1993 Hiernaux 1999 FONATUR 1998 2006) Thus it came

to pass that the government carried out the master planning and construction ndashas

in all the other development polesndash a whole connectivity infrastructure network

urbanization plans and service provision for tourists and workers (Hiernaux

1985 1990 1999 Clancy 2001) all in the name of bringing the development that

had not yet arrived to the southern region of the country (Hiernaux 1985 1999

Clancy 2001 Benseny 2007 Ambrosie 2013)

The economic success of Cancun was little critiqued during the following

decades especially in light of the continued decline of the Mexican primary and

secondary sectors (Hiernaux 1999 Clancy 2001) As a result the government

33

strengthened the focus on tourism as an important economic activity that would

increase growth and development more effectively (Hiernaux 1999 Clancy

2001) The premise was that the wealth produced would trickle down to the local

people and communities an assumption that was not seriously challenged until

recently (Clancy 2001 Hiernaux 1999 Torres and Momsen 2005 Ambrosie

2013)

For the last few presidential terms of office in Mexico tourism has been

embraced as the governments primary developmental strategy and this is

clearly stated in the National Development Plan (NDP) based on the notion that

given the natural and cultural features of the country Mexico has superlative

potential for a globally competitive tourism development (SECTUR 1982

Gobierno de la Republica 2007 2013)

[T]he cultural and natural wealth in Mexico implies the

existence of broad opportunities for the development

of tourism activities hellip To make tourism a national

priority to generate investment employment and fight

poverty in the areas with competitive tourism-

attractive-assets (Gobierno de la Republica 2007

119120)

According to the governmental discourse of development plans tourism

is an effective developmental strategy because it has the potential to increase

economic growth through private and foreign investment which it was assumed

would result in an improvement in quality of life for people of the region that is it

34

was a prime vehicle for regional development Besides the spatial benefits

related to economic growth tourism allegedly helps to empower and educate

people as more jobs and entrepreneurship opportunities are made available and

with an increased competition people will need to improve their education in

order to succeed (Hiernaux 1983 Hiernaux and Rodriguez 1999)

In addition tourism is often described as environmentally friendly as it is

supposedly a clean industry not burning any sort of fuel or creating toxic wastes

as long as tourism development is adequately planned (Cohen 1978 SECTUR

1982 Clancy 2001 Hiernaux 2003) Another of the claimed traits of tourism is

that as the population makes its living mostly out of the natural assets then it will

embrace environmentally sustainable practices in order to preserve those very

assets that have allowed them to improve their quality of life (SECTUR 1961

1982 FONATUR 2006)

[T]he state policy will motivate [hellip] the protection

conservation and improvement of the [hellip] basic

elements that intervene in tourism activities and

whose continuous balance is necessary a) tourism

resources natural beauties hellip (SECTUR 1961 3)

Traditional tourist destinations have been found to be more prone to

reach a so-called decline stage (Butler 1974) in which destinations face a

declining market because they are unable to compete with newer attractions

ultimately completely losing their touristic function (Butler 1974 Bringas 1999

Benseny 2007) To avoid this the Mexican government decided that an effective

35

strategy to extend a destination life would be to carefully craft master plans in

advance providing ndashor at least planningndash the infrastructure supply facilities and

amenities that the experts foresee as required to satisfy the needs of the

incoming tourists and the resident population over the long term and thus avoid

the decay factor (Butler 1974 FONATUR 2006)

Fig 3 Butlers tourism life-cycle Source ldquoThe social implications of tourist developmentsrdquo (Butler 1974)

The government therefore not only observed that tourism was creating

economic growth and decided to increase support for this sector but also was

cognizant of the cycle of tourist centres according to research (FONATUR 2006

Benseny 2007) and was eager to take steps to mitigate the cycle and ensure

that economic growth would be sustained With all of this in mind the

government adopted tourism as a primary priority for sustained development

(Castro 2007 Benseny 2007)

From the beginning tourism as development has been in the hands of

the state and involved urban planning (Clancy 2001) Urban planning and

36

architecture have been critical to the development and implementation of tourism

projects in this context of development in Mexico This is a three-pronged model

where development is the motivating idea tourism is the vehicle and urban

planning the executor Thus to denominate this process the term Tourism-

Development-Planning has been coined in this thesis indicating clearly the

context in which urban planners might find themselves working

Since 1956 site planning and the provision of basic infrastructure of IPRs

was assigned by the state to FONATUR and there is little evidence that local

residents have ever had a say in the construction process (Clancy 2001) Lands

were expropriated and cleared by FONATUR but despite the conflicts arisen

from this top-down strategy people were relocated (Clancy 2001) Today

although it claims to be more flexible and participative (FONATUR 2006) the

state continues to control TDP through FONATUR

FONATUR describes its current planning approach as

[being] oriented towards strengthening public-private

cooperation and agreement supporting a greater

interact ion between the local and nat ional

departments (FONATUR 2006 4)

However the legitimacy of this participatory framework is questionable

since the consultation process of TDP focuses on the team work of tourism

experts governmental entities and private enterprises related to the tourism

sector (FONATUR 2006)

37

23 Peoples Role in the TDP Process

Often regarded as a consolidated democracy (Olvera 2010) it might be

expected that citizen participation would be a part of any planning process in

Mexico However as it is described in the following paragraphs when economic

interests are on the table citizen participation in Mexico remains far from what

Arnstein (1969) has called citizen control

National Development Planning is defined by the Law of Planning (DOF

1983) as

the rational and systematic management of actions

that based on the attributions of the federal

government in matters of regulation and promotion of

economic social political cultural and environmental

protection and exploitation activities has the purpose

to transform the reality of the country (DOF 1983 1)

In the planning process [being] responsible of the integral and

sustainable development of the country (DOF 1983 1) the state commissions

itself with the definition of the objectives goals strategies and priorities of

development In this so-called democratic process Mexicos Tax Collection

Agency is responsible for the coordination of

state and municipal governments as well as

consultation with social and indigenous groups and if

given the case to incorporate the recommendations

and proposals they make (DOF 1983 3)

38

In this regulatory context Hevia Vergara-Lope and Aacutevila Landa (2011)

and Saacutenchez (2010) have identified several flaws that undermine a genuine

power of citizens in the decision-making process Still a fairly new practice in

Mexico it has been limited to indirect modes of participation (Saacutenchez 2010) On

the one hand citizens put in practice their representative democratic rights by

voting for their decision makers with the understanding that politicians and their

expert advisors are more knowledgeable and will make the best decision in the

public interest On the other hand according to the democratic planning law

citizens are considered to be participating in the government by having access to

all sorts of governmental information and data (Saacutenchez 2010) This participatory

context according to Arnsteins (1969) ladder of public participation could be

seen to have strong qualities of tokenism

In an attempt to legitimate public participation in 2005 the government of

Mexico supported the creation of Civil Society Organizations (CSO) through the

introduction of the Law of Public Participation (DOF 2005 Ziccardi 2006) These

organizations are stakeholder groups that once approved by the authorities are

entitled by the Law of Public Participation to participate among other activities

with governmental commissions in the consultation stage of the planning

process as well as in the observance of the outcomes of development plans and

programmes (Ziccardi 2006 Hevia Vergara-Lope and Aacutevila Landa 2011)

Coordinated at the federal level by the NSDP in order to promote a more direct

public participation at the state level commissions composed of governmental

officers CSOs academic groups and universities labour unions and private

39

corporations are set up to participate of the consultation stage of all planning

processes (eg development urban development) (Ziccardi 2006 Saacutenchez

2010 Olvera 2010 Hevia Vergara-Lope and Aacutevila Landa 2011) However

instead of promoting discussion and participation among groups it has been

shown that these commissions are intended only to ldquoinform analyse propose

criticize evaluate decide and reorient the proposed governmental

actionsrdquo (Hevia Vergara-Lope and Aacutevila Landa 2011 69) In other words the

CSOs are only able to react to government proposals without input into the

process of the formation of these projects That is they are reactive rather than

fully participatory can be considered tokenism (Arnstein 1969)

Fig 4 Arnsteins ladder of public participation Crafted by author from ldquoA ladder of citizen participationrdquo (Arnstein 1969)

40

Nevertheless even if CSOs get involved in at least the consultation and

evaluation stages there is no security that any corrective governmental actions

will be taken (Fox 2006 Saacutenchez 2010) As Hevia Vergara-Lope and Aacutevila

Landa (2011) describe the participation of civil society is limited by the fact that

ldquocitizens have a voice but not a voterdquo in the planning process

In addition the legitimacy of public participation is questioned by Fox

(2006) and Hevia Vergara-Lope and Aacutevila Landa (2011) as the from above

process through which CSOs are constituted does not guarantee the participation

of engaged citizens that will look for the public interest Hevia Vergara-Lope and

Aacutevila Landa (2011) note that most of these organizations information is not

available to the general public making it not only difficult to evaluate the

performance of those people having a voice in the planning process but to know

their purpose as an organization

Thus the role of the civil society in development planning is reduced to

the consultation and evaluation stages Circumstances that would situate the role

of Mexican civil society between the fourth and fifth level of Arnsteins ladder of

public participation (1969) where citizens are symbolically involved in decision

making but still not having a real impact on decision making as it is probable that

the citizens involved are not really representing the public interest (Kaufman and

Purcell 1980)

In sum although the public is considered as an actor of the

development planning process the government seems relentlessly reluctant to

delegate any power since participation of citizens is not well incorporated into the

41

decision making process The government has more power as a decision-making

actor relative to the voices of other stakeholders and actors Aware of this

situation civil society has been rather inactive as people do not expect to have

an equal voice to the government (Saacutenchez 2010 Hevia Vergara-Lope and Aacutevila

Landa 2011) Due to these factors it could be expected that there would be little

citizen participation and civil society input in TDP

231 A passive civil society

Although Mexican democracy is representative (Ziccardi 2006 Saacutenchez

2010) given the novelty of social inclusion in the development planning process

after centuries of decisions made by the governmental oligarchy paternalism is

one of the major constraints to achieving the true empowerment of civil society in

Mexico (Fox 1994) That is Mexico is still living the ravages of centuries of an

authoritarian governmental structure Even though contemporary Mexican society

seems to believe in democratic values (Booth amp Seligson 1984) Reyna (1977)

asserts that ldquoparticipation is constrained by structural authoritarianismrdquo that is the

legacy of previous more authoritarian government structures (Booth and Seligson

1984) In this context Hevia Vergara-Lope and Aacutevila Landa (2011) conclude that

given the conditions in which CSOs are created and included in the planning

process it is not clear if public participation is a genuine expression of citizenship

or a simulation perpetuating the top-down approach by the government (Fox

2006) This assertion reinforces the argument made decades earlier by Booth

and Seligson that ldquothe corporatist-populist elite of Mexico may in essence delude

42

Mexicans to support for democratic values that simultaneously reinforce the

systemrdquo (Booth and Seligson 1984 120) This is the situation of structural

authoritarianism despite todays democratic principles of government

In these circumstances it is evident that development in Mexico

continues to be approached from above The role of citizen participation in

TDP is to legitimize the government mandates (Torres and Momsen 2005) Thus

It is not surprising that civil society in Mexico is still skeptical of the spaces

created by the government for participation remaining seemingly passive and

apathetic (Booth and Seligson 1984)

24 Implications of Tourism Development for Urban Planning

Following the capitalist argument that economic growth will provide the

adequate circumstances for an improved quality of life by reducing poverty and

regional disparities over the medium and long term territorial planning is defined

by the Federal Law of Human Settlements (DOF 1993) as an economic tool that

will analyse the assets of an area and determine the most profitable management

and use of such assets ldquoin order to increase economic efficiencyrdquo (SEDESOL

2001 9) and to promote investment (DOF 1993) Thus the design of human

settlements is guided by economic values that are supposed to ldquoguarantee the

lifestyle desired by the Mexican peoplerdquo (SEDESOL 2001 9) As previously

mentioned the government and the authorities feel they are in a better position to

adequately make decisions in this matter rather than citizens

43

This situation leads directly to a quantitative approach to development

and by extension to a quantitative approach to city planning where the existing

features ndasheither geographic and demographicndash are measured and given an

economic purpose ignoring any features that seem to lack of any profitable

value That is commodification is the main tactic

In addition according to the discourse used by the government in the

Law of Human Settlements and the Law for Social Development quality of life is

represented physically in terms of a built environment defined by the provision of

housing supplies infrastructure public services institutional buildings and

educational and health facilities and this is complemented by social statistics in

the reduction of poverty unemployment and inequality indices (DOF 1993

2004b)

Accordingly the construction of medium-sized cities is supported in the

Law of Human Settlements to create nodes and development corridors

replacing the previous development poles as a way to homogenize physical and

economic growth in a broader region instead of a single city This approach has

the goal of increasing private investment in so-called under-utilized regions with

the assumption that such investment will result in an improvement of the quality

of life of their inhabitants

The simulated process of public participation described earlier comes

into play when the federal and state Human Settlement Law leave public

participation as an option open to the discretion of the local governments (DOF

1993) In this context facilitated by the government private economic interests

44

and the market are easily positioned as the main decision makers in the urban

realm (Pradilla 2009)

241 Urban planning process for tourist enclaves

Born from the economic approach to development in 1937 one of the

objectives of the Secretariat of Tourism stated by the General Law of Tourism

(DOF 2009) is to plan and support the construction of infrastructure and

institutional buildings required for the attraction and growth of investment in

touristic activities Consequently local development plans in areas considered of

touristic importance should acknowledge the tourism plans created by this

secretariat (DOF 1983 2009) The National Fund for Tourism Development

(FONATUR) is a governmental initiative whose overarching goal is to promote

tourism investment in Mexico (FONATUR 1998) Since it was created in 1956

FONATUR has been in charge of the ongoing identification of regions with

touristic potential and the consequent planning financing and construction of

tourism enclaves To evaluate the tourism potential of a site FONATUR makes a

SWOT analysis of the existing natural and cultural landscape Then based on

the preferences of the target market to ensure profitability FONATUR assesses

features such as climate comfort the proportion of sunny versus rainy days

probability of natural phenomena such as earthquakes and hurricanes and the

viability of these assets to be acquired and commodified by the fund (eg land

tenure natural protected areas) (FONATUR 2006) Finally the relative proximity

to settlements with the capacity to serve an increased demand for housing

45

services and transportation as well as to provide experienced labour are an

asset (FONATUR 2006) Once an area with potential is confirmed as worthwhile

for investment based on these criteria FONATUR coordinates the federal

(SEMARNAT and SEDESOL) state and municipal authorities with investors in

order to stimulate the process to get a project started and guarantee the

alignment of plans between the government and private sector

Upon the coordination of these agencies a Touristic Territorial

Management Plan (TTMP) is created by the federal government this document

mandates the scheme for the creation of urban development plans (DOF 2009)

Aligned to TTMPs local urban development plans regulate the economic

activities and land-uses that according to this top-down process will make the

most out of the existing resources in a sustainability context as the natural

landscape culture and authenticity are all considered as attractive tourism

resources (FONATUR 2006 DOF 2009) That is urban development plans at

locations selected by FONATUR for TDP are crafted in close observance to the

preferences of the tourism market as these give place to the master plans to be

created and executed by FONATUR

FEDDERAL

Office Document

SEMARNAT Territorial Plan of Ecological

Management

SEDESOL National Plan of Urban

Development

SECTUR Touristic Territorial Management Plan

STATE

Office Document

SOP Urban Development

Plan

Table 1 Alignment and origin of urban development policies Compiled by author from policy analysis

46

Master-planning for competitiveness

Master plans are regarded by FONATUR as ldquothe main tool to guide the

development of a touristic-urban project with a long-term visionrdquo (FONATUR

2006 72) The main purpose of FONATURs master plans is to ensure that

tourists and investors expectations of the destinations will be reached (SECTUR

2001 FONATUR 2006)

Master plans FONATUR describes are of an

integrative nature [that] requires the active participation of the

actors linked to the project federal state and municipal

authorities tourism service providers professional and

opinion leaders (FONATUR 2006 72)

As the expert in tourism matters and in order to ensure competitiveness

FONATUR has defined an urban planning and design criteria to be

accommodated by the urban development plans at a planned destination In

other words FONATUR consolidates all the planning functions The first stage of

the master plan is the expropriation of strategic lands These expropriated lands

usually belong to the federal government although some are granted to

communities in usufruct as ejido property (Bringas 1999) If any of the selected

lands happen to be occupied by human settlements optimally the residents are

relocated to areas beyond the development of tourist activities as it occurred in

Los Cabos (Rodriguez 1994)

47

The following stage consists in the definition of separate zoning and

branding schema for tourist and urban areas with the purpose of not only

distancing visitors from the chaos inherent to any city but also to provide a

feeling of being ldquocloser-to-naturerdquo and to promote ldquoenvironmental

conservationrdquo (FONATUR 2006) This differentiation of zones consists in the

land-use allocation for touristic uses such as lodging vacation housing

recreational facilities shopping malls golf courses marinas and yacht clubs in a

tourist-exclusive area separated from the more urban uses primarily illustrated

by high-density residential uses governmental offices public services and

institutional buildings In other words tourists and workers are not supposed to

use the same areas for the same purposes

The design criteria for public spaces is defined by the character

assigned by FONATUR to the host community That is architectural features

regarded as authentic and attractive are enhanced and reproduced as branding

markers by the urban design strategy homogenizing the look of the tourist area

to appeal to visitors (FONATUR 2006) According to this marketing approach to

spatial design defining the destinations concept will provide it with

ldquodistinctiveness and exclusivityrdquo supposedly guided by principles of

environmental integration and conservation (FONATUR 2006) Hence the urban

design concept ndashndashwithin the tourist-exclusive areandashndash must be ldquoaligned to the

market concept complementing the local cultural context with modern

infrastructure such as roads lined by indigenous greenery wide enough to

accommodate cars bikes and pedestrian lanesrdquo (FONATUR 2006) Once an IPR

48

is in operation FONATUR remains surveillant of the operation of the area in

order to provide more infrastructure to the host communities or create additional

urban design strategies that will adapt better to the latest tourism trends keeping

the destination profitable

All these planning strategies guiding FONATURs master plans have the

purpose of preventing tourist areas from reaching the decay stage (Butler 1974)

as FONATUR concluded that the perceived decay of Acapulco and Puerto

Vallarta was due to the spontaneous character of these places that is to say

they were not adequately planned (FONATUR 2006) It is a remarkable feature

however that despite of all of these careful planning efforts FONATUR leaves

the local government in charge of the urban zone (FONATUR 2006) with

consequences illustrated by Cancun and Los Cabos analyses

242 Urban model of tourism enclaves The examples of Cancun and Los

Cabos

FONATUR as one of the primary government-led promoters of tourism

development in Mexico has created so far six Integrally Planned Resorts (IPR)

Cancun-Riviera Maya (1974) Ixtapa (1975) Los Cabos (1978) Loreto (1980)

Huatulco (1987) and Nayarit (2000) In consequence it would be optimal to carry

out an analysis of these sites in order to know if tourism has in fact delivered the

expected results

FONATUR (2006) reports that Cancun and Los Cabos are according to

their criteria the most successful master planned destinations in Mexico since

49

more than 90 of the people in states where these IPRs are located are

employed in the tertiary sector (INEGI 2014)

Population Employyed in Tertiary Sector Activities

1980 1990 2000 2010

Baja California Sur 9718 9789 9912 9524

Quintana Roo 9784 9865 9907 9678

Table 2 Population employed in tertiary sector activities Compiled by author from INEGI 2014 data

According to state scale data GDP and FDI have been rising in these

areas during the last decades Such a situation is related by the government to

the increase of employment in tertiary sector activities which has increased by

almost 300 (INEGI 2014)

Fig 5 Accumulated FDI growth since 1990 Fig 6 Accumulated GDP growth since 1995

1990-2000 2000-2010 1995-2000 2000-2005 2005-2010

Baja California Sur Compiled by author from INEGI 2014 data

Quintana Roo

Additionally although it is not possible to infer if this is originated directly

by tourism activities basic service provision and dwelling quality have improved

considerably in both IPRs (INEGI 2014) However despite these apparently

0

100

200

300

400

0

250

500

750

1000

1250

1500

50

0

25

50

75

100

Perc

enta

ge o

f D

welli

ng

s

positive results there have been no consistent changes in overcoming what the

government (CONAPO) defines as marginality indices

Cancun and Los Cabos are not only two of the oldest planned

destinations but also the tourism enclaves that have shown an improvement in

most of the variables identified as tourism development goals (DOF 2004) This

situation has given SECTUR and FONATUR a valid argument to apply the same

model in the planning of future IPRs and tourism corridors they have met their

goals Fig 7 Basic service provision in dwellings

1990 2000 2005 1990 2000 2005 1990 2000 2010

Water Sewage Electricity

Cancun

Los Cabos Compiled by author from INEGI 2014 data

The location of FONATURs most renowned IPRs Cancun and Los

Cabos (Barbosa amp Santamaria 2006) was defined not only by their close

proximity to the United States and tourist-attractive natural assets (FONATUR

1998 2006) but also because they were considered by the government as

hinterlands of the country at the times when each of them were developed ndash

Cancun in the late 60s and Los Cabos in the early 80s As part of the definition

of their perceived remoteness population size in Cancun and Los Cabos

together before development represented less than 01 of the national

population (INEGI 2014) and both places were based on subsistence

economies (FONATUR 1998)

51

Although FONATUR (2006) reports that the locations chosen for Cancun

and Los Cabos IPRs were uninhabited there existed small human settlements

relatively close that were already serving visitors (Barbosa and Santamariacutea 2006

Benseny 2007) For instance the closest touristic communities to Cancun in the

1960s were Cozumel and Isla Mujeres a situation that was seen as an asset by

FONATUR (FONATUR 1998 2006 Barbosa and Santamaria 2006) as these

nearby communities were already receiving tourists The population there was

considered to be somewhat experienced in the tourism sector providing a

potential source of labour for the forthcoming tourism enterprises In the case of

Los Cabos there were already two near-by settlements San Jose del Cabo and

Cabo San Lucas both small communities somewhat involved with tourism

activities as this region had also become popular for sport fishing (Lopez-Lopez

Cukier and Saacutenchez-Crispiacuten 2006 Hoffman 2009) However given the proximity

of the community of Cabo San Lucas to Los Cabos IPR as a strategy to ease the

tourism development process part of the population of Cabo San Lucas was

relocated to new settlements in San Jose del Cabo (Rodriguez 1994) In the

1960s both Cancun and Los Cabos presented notable accessibility and basic

infrastructure deficits (Lopez-Lopez Cukier and Saacutenchez-Crispiacuten 2006 Hoffman

2009) Cancun was better connected through a road network to the rest of the

country (Lopez-Lopez Cukier and Saacutenchez-Crispiacuten 2006) albeit at a great

distance while Los Cabos was still lacking of such infrastructure (Lopez-Lopez

and Sanchez 2002) That was the primary reason for FONATURs choice of

52

Cancun over Los Cabos as the first IPR and to hold off tourism development in

Los Cabos for two more decades (Gamez 2003 INEGI 2014)

Cancun IPR was planned by FONATUR ldquounder a criteria of privatization

of natural resources which are subject to the needs of the tourist zonerdquo based on

ldquomodern engineering and architectural practicesrdquo (FONATUR 2006) and urban

structures based on ldquothe consumption of natural spaces and landscapesrdquo were

planned to create a ldquo l ineal system of developments along the

shorelinerdquo (Calderon and Orozco 2009) where all the hotels faced the beach

(Hiernaux 1999) a pattern repeated in the Los Cabos IPR two decades later

(Lopez-Lopez and Sanchez-Crispin 2006) This urban structure was intended to

give priority to motorized vehicles designing wide roads that were supposed to

prevent congestion but neglected pedestrians (Calderoacuten and Orozco 2009)

In terms of zoning and land use management the main spatial design

feature of these IPRs is as described by Hiernaux (1999) that planners followed

a Le Corbusierian urban model that separated work spaces from leisure space

creating a clear division between the tourist zone and the urban services zone

where the workers live (FONATUR 1998 2006 Hiernaux 1999 Bringas 1999

Lopez-Lopez Cukier and Saacutenchez-Crispiacuten 2006 Calderon and Orozco 2009

Aldape 2010) As Aldape (2010) illustrates Cancuns urban structure is

conformed by belts parallel to the beach making the beach easily accessible

from the tourist zone but difficult from the urban zone a situation that according

to Lopez-Lopez Cukier and Saacutenchez-Crispiacuten (2006) was replicated in Los

Cabos In addition the geographical and topographical features of the IPRs are

53

used to enhance such a separation For example the tourist zone in Cancun is

located on Isla Cancun which is an island-like formation surrounded by water

bodes (Caribbean and Nichupte lagoon) while an urban zone is located on

mainland In the case of Los Cabos rock formations irregular topography and

the freeway maintain a separation between the tourist and urban zones (Lopez-

Lopez and Sanchez-Crispin 2006)

Tourist Zone

Urban Zone

Fig 8 Spatial separation in Cancun

Source Urban Development Plan of Benito Juarez 2011

The spatial separation between tourists and workers is justified by

FONATUR with the argument that as the local population grows the settlement

of new residential communities should not risk the ldquoadded value safety

exclusivity and landscape value of a tourism developmentrdquo (Aldape 2010 184)

that is sought by transnational tourism developers according to Lopez-Lopez

Cukier and Saacutenchez-Crispiacuten (2006) FONATUR (2006) claims that this urban

54

configuration allows tourists to avoid the urban ldquochaosrdquo of local service areas

(FONATUR 2006) and also helps maintain the elevated land-values of tourist

areas (Lopez-Lopez Cukier and Saacutenchez-Crispiacuten 2006)

Furthermore the division between these zones includes the definition of

public and private beaches As Aldape (2010) and Lopez-Lopez Cukier and

Saacutenchez-Crispiacuten (2006) note those beaches located at the tourist area can only

be accessed through the resorts which being private property limit beach

accessibility to those who are lodged at a resort despite the legally-established

public character of beaches in Mexico (DOF 2004)

However separations are not limited to the physical realm they are

institutionalized in governmental jurisdictions FONATUR is the entity in charge of

the master-planning infrastructure provision and maintenance at the tourist

zones while the provision of housing institutional buildings basic services and

infrastructure at the urban zones is in the charge of the local government and

SEDESOL (DOF 2004b 2009 Lopez-Lopez Cukier and Saacutenchez-Crispiacuten 2006

Aldape 2010)

As Cancun and Los Cabos have become more popular throughout time

demographic growth has increased at a pace that exceeds the planned

expectations (Lopez-Lopez Cukier and Saacutenchez-Crispiacuten 2006 Aldape 2010)

causing the well-planned tourist zones to have better infrastructure and basic

service provision than the less-well-planned sprawling surrounding areas This

situation has prevailed in newer IPRs despite FONATURs efforts to take into

account in their master-plans previous shortcomings such as fresh water

55

availability demographic features of the existing population and urbanization

costs (Rodriguez 1994)

Despite their planning similarities both tourism development projects are

targeted towards slightly different market niches Cancun was designed to appeal

to sun-and-sand tourists who could also feel attracted to aquatic activities such

as scuba diving or snorkelling at the Caribbean coral reefs and cenotes or to

cultural sites such as the nearby Mayan ruins For its part Los Cabos was

focused less towards the beach and more towards sport fishing and golf tourism

(Lopez-Lopez Cukier and Saacutenchez-Crispiacuten 2006) In addition a novelty at Los

Cabos IPR was the creation of mega-projects that FONATUR (2006) describes

as resort towns Unlike Cancun where a single overarching master plan defined

zoning regulations and specific land uses of the destination as a whole mega-

projects are regarded by the master plan as a single touristic land-use open to

any sub-uses within it That is the specific land-uses would be defined by the

private interests of the developer giving land owners a great deal of freedom to

manage and develop their property while also avoiding legal requirements

regarding zone for institutional buildings and public infrastructure (Lopez-Lopez

Cukier and Saacutenchez-Crispiacuten 2006)

In the case of Los Cabos the private sector has a considerably larger

influence on the configuration of the urban structure exacerbating the deficient

provision of urban services at the non-tourist zone (Lopez-Lopez Cukier and

Saacutenchez-Crispiacuten 2006) Whilst in the case of Cancun its rapid growth has

56

resulted in a poorly served urban zone and irregular settlements (Calderon and

Orozco 2009 Aldape 2010)

However with the recent acknowledgment of Cancuns expanded role as

a regional hub urban development is no longer focused exclusively on tourists

demands Current urban development plans are aiming towards urban

densification to make more efficient the distribution of goods and services at a

regional level (Aldape 2010) Almost 40 years after its settlement Cancun is now

an important regional city one of the largest cities in the Caribbean whose

economy is primarily but not entirely focused on tourism

25 Conclusion

As a questionable strategy of the government to ensure competitiveness

and economic growth urban planning at tourism destinations selected by

FONATUR as IPR is always executed by this fund This situation results in the

neglect of the local residents at two primary scales physically and institutionally

But in spite of the criticisms to the outcomes of the states top-down approach to

TDP the government still maintains that measured in their own quantitative

terms they have successfully accomplished their goal of improving living

conditions of the population in a sustainable and egalitarian manner (DOF

2004b SECTUR 2014 Gobierno de la Republica 2013) In other words

increases in GDP FDI currency exchange direct and indirect employment

higher wages higher education rates urbanization and infrastructure provision

and the conservation of environmental and historical assets at the host

57

communities (FONATUR 2006) (considering tourist and non-tourist areas as a

whole) are interpreted as equivalent to an improved quality of life

Upon such a narrow evaluative scope within the states own quantitative

terms urban planners ndashndashas the ultimate executors of TDP policiesndashndash should be

cautious and question the premises framing TDP in Mexico As will be discussed

in the next two chapters many questions are yet to be explained with regard

TDP as a successful strategy for development in Mexico

58

CHAPTER 3 A Critical Look at TDP Case Study of San Blas Nayarit

Mexico

The research question to be answered by this chapter is what aspects

of place are neglected when the quantitatively-oriented TDP paradigm is used in

the (re)development of a host community Answering this question is essential

to ascertain if prior to tourism development FONATURs master-planned

destinations in fact are lacking of the expected benefits that TDP is supposed to

bring forward for the improvement of the residents living conditions

Given the paucity of accurate information regarding the before

characteristics of the destinations planned by FONATUR San Blas town has

been selected as a case study to a) explore the thoroughness of FONATURs

framework to evaluate a potential destination and recommend TDP as a

strategy to improve the living conditions of its residents b) to situate San Blas

within FONATURs scale of desirable living conditions and c) to identify and

characterize the gaps in the prescriptions of the government to transform San

Blas into a successful tourism destination in the context of a re-

conceptualization of San Blas assets These goals are accomplished first by

comparing on the one hand the supposedly satisfactory results in terms of

GDP FDI employment wages and infrastructure realized in Cancun and Los

Cabos ndashndashregarded by FONATUR as its most successful destinationsndashndash and on

the other the current characteristics of San Blas Then in the specific context of

San Blas these variables are broken down into their quantitative and qualitative

components and compared with the policies guiding TDP in San Blas This

59

enables the identification of major inconsistencies presumably neglected by the

states TDP framework

31 Perceived Usability of San Blas Features

As mentioned earlier Mexicos developmental policies are driven by the

so-called benefits of economic growth based on the exploitation of natural and

cultural resources As a result tourism has become a key strategy for

development in the country It has been shown that these development

strategies have been guided by a rational-comprehensive framework that being

of a quantitative nature relies solely on the existence and potential profitability

of the existing assets As described in Chapter 2 the Mexican government has

undertaken the function of identifying and evaluating the touristic potential of

economically stagnant regions according to the market attractiveness of their

natural and cultural assets Consequently FONATUR performs quantitative

assessments of a regions natural and cultural resources in order to prescribe

the strategies that are supposed to ensure economic success

Endowed with natural and cultural features potentially attractive to

tourists as well as the necessary amount of vacant land available for tourism

development FONATUR has recently identified the coast of San Blas as suitable

for stage three of its Riviera Nayarit Tourism Corridor (FONATUR 2006)

60

311 Geographical features

The geographical location of San Blas has been considered strategic ever since its

settlement by the Spanish conqueror Nuntildeo Beltran de Guzman in the XVI century although it

was for commercial reasons then it is for its potential tourism attraction now San Blas is the

closest ocean beach to Mexicos second largest city Guadalajara (270 km away) to

Nayarits state capital city Tepic (70 km) as well as to two important tourist destinations of

the Pacific Coast Mazatlan 277 km to the north and Puerto Vallarta 150 km to the south

(INEGI 2014)(Appendix) As such the municipality of San Blas has been eagerly promoted

by the local and state government since 2007 to become an elite tourism destination part of

the Riviera Nayarit tourism corridor (PON 2009 2012)

However it is not only the location of San Blas that makes it attractive for tourism Fig 9 San Blas Nayarit Mexico

development Its natural wealth is also a key factor of attractiveness as specified by

FONATUR For instance the interaction among the existing physiographic conditions soils

climate and abundance of water create two scenic tropical landscapes mangrove forest and

tropical rainforest that enable this area to function as habitat for 54 protected fauna species

(CONANP 2007) Since mangroves and wetlands are scattered all over the region similar to

Cancun San Blas Town is surrounded by water and immediately adjacent to an

internationally recognized natural protected area Marismas Nacionales a 113000 hectares

association of mangrove forest wetlands rivers and streams it is the largest mangrove

forest on the Mexican Pacific Coast In close proximity adjacent to Marismas Nacionales and

east of San Blas Town exists another similar system Singayta-La Tovara-Los Negros which

has been suggested as a subject of environmental protection (CONANP 2007)

NORTH

Mexico

Nayarit

Nayarit

San Blas Municipality

San Blas Town

Crafted by author from INEGI 2014 data

Fig 10 Nearby cities


San Blas Town

Tepic

O

O

O

O

Puerto Vallarta Guadalajara

500 km 1000 km

61

paintings of an ancient prehistoric tribe known as Los Concheros 312 Cultural features

Founded in the 18th century San Blas Town contains a number of historical buildings

and cultural traits that are considered an asset by the state and municipal development plans

and urban development policies The primary function of these buildings in an economical

context is thus to attract visitors

Built in 1769 the Marinera Church (Fig 14) located on top of the Basilio hill where

San Blas Town was once settled was the first permanent building in town and it is also the

only building remaining from the old San Blas settlement Recently renovated by the National

Institute of History and Anthropology (INAH) this church is currently available for private

events

Most of the heritage buildings of San Blas Town (Fig 12) were built in the 19th

century and had a commercial purpose The Contaduria (Fig 15) building that functioned as

a warehouse during the commercial bonanza period the Aduana (Fig 19) an old customs

office that after being refurbished by INAH works as a museum and governmental offices

and the Garita (Fig 18) a former guard house located right at the harbour now being used

as the towns library Besides the old church at San Basilios hill a new church was finally

built downtown in the 19th century the Virgen de Fatima temple (Fig 16) This building is

currently closed to the public as it presents safety hazards

An area of cultural interest is the Wixarika sacred site located across the El Pozo

stream (Appendix A) This place is part of Wirikuta a traditional pilgrimage carried out by the

Huichol people from highland Jalisco state every year La Piedra Blanca (Fig 21) a sacred

hut and a cave in this area are the ritual shrines for Haramara the mother of the sea

Furthermore in the near surroundings of San Blas Town there are vestiges and rock

NORTH

El Pozo River

3 2 1

5 4 6

7

LEGEND 1Marinera Church 2Contaduria 3Virgen de Fatima

Church Pacific Ocean

4Casa Lanzagorta 5Aduana 6Casa Deliux Fig 11 Heritage buildings 7Garita 500 m 1 km Crafted by author from San Blas UDP 2010 data

62

Given the touristic potential of these natural and cultural qualities the

strategy of the government of Nayarit state for San Blas is to commercialize

these assets achieving economic growth rates comparable to Cancun and Los

Cabos Consequently Nayarit states government has aligned its development

and urban planning policies to suit FONATURs requirements (PON 2010 2012

2013) the first step in the TDP process (Chapter 2)

Fig 12 Marinera Church Source wwwpanoramiocom

Fig 13 Contaduria Source wwwpanoramiocom

63

Fig 15 Casa Lanzagorta Source wwwpanoramiocom

Fig 14 Virgen de Fatima Temple Fig 16 Garita Source wwwsanblascommx Source wwwpanoramiocom

Fig 17 Aduana Source wwwpanoramiocom

64

Fig 18 Casa Deliux Source wwwsanblascommx

Fig 19 Piedra Blanca Source Ximena Gonzalez

32 Comparison of San Blas to Cancun and Los Cabos

FONATUR regards TDP as the main reason of the success of Cancun

and Los Cabos Such a success is measured in terms of economic growth

foreign investment job creation and infrastructure improvements Presumably

the measurement of the conditions prior-development show the backward

conditions to be addressed with the prescriptions of TDP

The touristic boom occurred in the late 1990s in the southern coast of

the Nayarit state has originated economic growth rates comparable to those of

Cancun and Los Cabos This situation has highlighted the continued economic

stagnation of San Blas Municipality as this perceived lack of economic growth

is considered by the state and municipal government as the primary constraint

for progress in San Blas

The Mexican government affirms that by increasing economic growth

and foreign currency flows tourism has a great potential to improve peoples life

65

conditions As FDI and GDP increase it is expected by the state that the levels

of employment access to health and education as well as infrastructure

provision will also increase In addition in the face of tourism development

indices of poverty and inequality are supposed to show a positive shift

On the one hand following the national trend since 1995 GDP has

shown a continuous increase in the states of Baja California Sur Quintana Roo

and Nayarit where Los Cabos Cancun and San Blas are respectively located

Fig 20 Gross GDP

$200000000

$180000000

$160000000

$140000000

$120000000

$100000000

$80000000

$60000000

$40000000

$20000000

$0

Baja California Sur Quintana Roo Nayarit


The economic relevance of Cancun and Los Cabos at a state scale can

be observed in their contributions to their states economy In the ldquosuccessfulrdquo

cases of Cancun and Los Cabos they contribute to 5596 the former and

4483 the latter Whereas San Blas Municipality contributes only to 119

Nayarits gross production

MX

P

1995 2000 2005 2010

66

Fig 21 Municipal contribution to states total gross production

10

20

30

40

50

60

70 1998 2003 2008

0 Los Cabos Benito Juarez San Blas


On the other hand a strong connection between tourism development

and FDI seems to appear in the states of Baja California Sur and Quintana Roo

where more than 75 of the FDI is in the tourism sector (INEGI 2014) The

increase of FDI in Nayarit in 2005 8802 (INEGI 2014) can be related to the

execution of the strategies preceding the creation of the ldquoRiviera Nayaritrdquo

tourism corridor in 2007 Fig 22 Percentage of FDI in tourism

100

80

60

40

20

0 Baja California Sur Quintana Roo Nayarit

2000 2005 2010 2013


67

Nevertheless the differences of San Blas as compared to Los Cabos

and Cancun may be limited to FDI and GDP Despite the almost irrelevant

contribution of San Blas Municipality to the states production and receiving

only 122 of Nayarits FDI (SEDECO 2014) San Blas Town shows levels

similar to Cancun and Los Cabos in terms of employment access to public

health and infrastructure

Fig 23 Employment rates Fig 24 Access to public health

90

92

94

96

98

100

20

40

60

80

Po

pula

tio

n P

erc

enta

ge

0Los Cabos Cancun San Blas Los Cabos Cancun San Blas

1990 2000 2010 2000 2010

Fig 25 Infrastructure provision in dwellings

7000

7750

8500

9250

10000

Los Cabos Cancun San Blas

Water Electricity Sewage


68

Income inequality and marginality indices

In 2000 Mexico ranked among the 20 countries with the highest

inequality index (CONAPO 2000) San Blas Municipality has tended to remain

below the inequality levels present in the municipalities where Cancun and Los

Cabos are located (CONAPO 2000 2005 2010) However at a state scale

income inequality at Quintana Roo and Baja California Sur has improved as in

2010 these states showed lower inequality indices than Nayarit

Fig 26 Income inequality at municipal level Fig 27 Income inequality at state level

0393

0436

0479

0521

0564

0607

0650

GN

I In

dex

040

045

050

055

060

GN

I In

dex

035 1990 2000 2010

0350 1990 2000 2010

Mexico San Blas

Los Cabos Benito Juarez

Quintana Roo Baja California Nayarit

Sur

Compiled by author from CONAPO 2000-2010 data

However in terms of marginality1 all three cities have presented a rising

trend In 2005 San Blas Town and Los Cabos presented a very low marginality

level In 2010 this index rose for to a ldquolowrdquo marginality level for both cities

Whereas in 2005 Cancun had an index of marginality described as

medium (CONEVAL 2005) that rose to ldquohighrdquo in 2010 In addition although

1 This index is composed by employment income inequality access to health care education infrastructure in dwellings and dwelling occupancy (CONAPO 2010)

69

Nayarit state presents a large amount of settlements categorized as having

ldquohighrdquo and ldquovery highrdquo marginality indices the region where San Blas Town is

located comprises small villages with very low to medium marginality indices

(CONAPO 2010) Whereas Cancun and Los Cabos are surrounded by medium-

sized towns and small villages ranking from medium to very high marginality

levels (CONAPO 2010)

Marginality Index Very High

High Medium Low Very Low

Number of Settlements in Baja California Sur

61 258 85 91 104

Number of Settlements in Quintana Roo

86 340 34 20 37

Number of Settlements in Nayarit

512 442 214 122 33

Table 3 Marginality indices Compiled by author with CONAPO 2010 data

In this analysis it can be observed that despite its so-called stagnant

economy San Blas ranks parallel to Cancun and Los Cabos in matters of

employment infrastructure and public health service provision That is if

FONATURs framework intends to measure quality of life with these variables

San Blas has already met the mark Thus the so-called benefits of tourism may

not result in a significant contribution to the standards of living in San Blas In

fact given the common negative effects of tourism the situation in San Blas

may become worse Then the question arises why is San Blas negatively

depicted by the government The answer to this question can be found by

examining the towns demographic and economic profiles and contrasting them

to the conceptualizations made of San Blas by the state

70

33 Conceptualizations of San Blas

Established four centuries ago as a departure point for the misioneros

and Spanish conquerors on their journey to Las Californias (current state of

California in the United States) San Blas Town eventually became an

international commercial hub in the late 19th century However as a result of a

decline in previous activities in the region perceived as a failure the

development policies and plans guiding the economic and urban strategies for

San Blas have shifted towards tourism Since San Blas Municipality can be

shown to possess the assets identified as ideal by FONATUR to become a sun-

and-sand tourism destination the re-design and re-branding space of San Blas

Town ndashndashalong with all the shoreline settlements of the Municipalityndashndash is meant to

be defined by the development model imposed by FONATUR as it is claimed

by the government that tourism development is a guaranteed path to economic

success

In the past decade federal programs municipal and state development

plans economic development strategies as well as tourism documents with

marketing purposes refer to San Blas as a once successful town of

international relevance However the history of San Blas has been one of

several ndashndashand perhaps fortuitousndashndash ups and downs (Luna 2004) With an

unstable population subject to a variety of political economical and

environmental forces it has taken San Blas three centuries to consolidate as a

community

71

Since the 1970s the discourse of development plans and programs

created by the government have intended to bring San Blas out of the ldquosevere

crisisrdquo it has been experiencing since the late 19th century (FONATUR 2005)

Transforming San Blas Town from being considered ldquoa somnolent villagehellip

existing off fishing farming and delusory tourist traderdquo (Schultheis 1979) to

restoring its role as a dynamic international commercial hub has remained as

the unfaltering goal of the state government Governmental strategies have

focused on the recovery of the ldquoprosperous pastrdquo of San Blas through the

intensification of economic activities such as fishing aquaculture agriculture

and tourism In 2005 tourism was determined as the economic strategy that

would finally ldquorescuerdquo San Blas Town from ldquobackwardnessrdquo (FONATUR 2005)

Today San Blas Town is a regional hub of commercial activities and

public service provision However in blatant disregard of the role San Blas

currently plays at a regional scale the current plans prescribe the

transformation of San Blas into a tourism enclave as a strategy to boost

competitiveness and economic gains despite the fact that current standards of

living in San Blas are already comparable ndashndashin terms of employment and

infrastructure provisionndashndash to those in Cancun and Los Cabos

A comparison of the current demographic and economic profile of San

Blas to the planning guidelines that the federal state and municipal government

prescribe for the transformation of San Blas highlights a range of abstract and

subjective features that although concealed by the framework of TDP support

quality of life

72

331 Demographic and Economic Realities

San Blas Municipality has ranked from representing almost 6 of the

total population of Nayarit in the seventies to less than 4 in 2010 without

showing relevant changes in its demographic growth rates since 1960 (INEGI

2014) San Blas Town peak demographic growth happened in 1960 (INEGI

2014) caused by among other factors the national phenomenon of rural-to-

urban migration occurred in that period

In 1990 and 2000 population in San Blas had been predominantly

young (younger than 19) In 2010 this segment of the population represented

only 23 Although San Blas Municipality and San Blas Town have not shown a

remarkably different trend (INEGI 2014) the amount of people in economically

productive age in San Blas Town (20-59 years old) has been steadily increasing

for the last twenty years (INEGI 2014)

Fig 28 Accumulated demographic growth

500

0

167

333

-167 1920-1930 1930-1940 1940-1950 1950-1960 1960-1970 1970-1980 1980-1990 1990-2000 2000-2010

San Blas Town Nayarit Municipality


73

According to the Municipal Development Plan (PON 2011) the

comparative difference between the current amount of people in economically

productive age compared to those under 19 in the previous decade show the

tendency of people of that generation to leave town However this statement

cannot be proved yet with the available data

Fig 29 Demographic distribution by age groups in San Blas Town

1990

2000

2010

0 20 40 60 80 100

lt19 20-39 40-59 gt60


Although youth population has decreased by 15 in twenty years the

growth rate of the population between 20 and 59 years old has increased by

almost 10 since 1990 (INEGI 2014) This trend summed to the low

unemployment rates in the town (Fig 23) and the proportion of people with

access to public health care (Fig 24) may indicate that against the MDPs

affirmation (PON 2011) San Blas is not lacking of jobs nor access to public

health care (INEGI 2014)

Nayarit state seems to be attracting a high rate of national migration

since 2000 While only 6 of the people moved out of the state in 2010 almost

74

20 of the states total population has been born outside of Nayarit Although

Nayarit seems to attract mostly national immigrants San Blas Municipality

presents the highest proportion of residents of an international origin in Nayarit

(INEGI 2014) Closely following Nayarits migratory trends 18 of the residents

in San Blas Town immigrated from a different region in Mexico or another

country Whereas 6 of the population left the town Such a situation seems to

contradict the governmental discourse that in order to support the TDP strategy

claims tourism will revert the high emigration trend (PON 2011)

2000

2010

Immgrants Emigrants Total Population

Fig 30 Proportion of migrant population in San Blas Town

0 20 40 60 80 100


Compared to Nayarit state the number of people in San Blas Town with

secondary and post-secondary education can be considered average however

the average number of years of school attendance is 9 in both Nayarit and San

Blas Town that is in average people only finish compulsory education (INEGI

2014) In 2010 almost 25 of the population in San Blas Town has graduated

from high school or attended university (INEGI 2014)

75

Fig 31 Educational attainment

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

2000 2010

Fig 32 Average number of years of school attendance

30

25

20

15

10

5

0 Elementary School Junior High School High School University

Nayarit San Blas Municipality San Blas Town


Although this data is inconclusive the governments affirmation that

emigration is a problem in San Blas Town seems to differ in this analysis In

addition the assumption that San Blas youth population are leaving the town

looking for better ldquoopportunitiesrdquo as San Blas Development Plan describes

cannot be proved or disproved with the data available

76

Economic profile

The municipality of San Blas is a region mainly rural comprised of 83

rural villages and one urban town the latter being the object of this study San

Blas Town Given its natural features in the 1970s the main economic activities

in San Blas Town were agriculture fishing and aquaculture closely followed by

commercial activities and services

As the number of visitors started to increase in the same period (INEGI

2014) a growing number of residents shifted towards tourism-related activities

the so-called hospitality industry Currently the occupied population percentage

in tertiary activities at municipal level is of almost 70 which was the same

proportion of people employed in the primary sector forty years ago (INEGI

2014) Fig 33 Economically active population by sector in San Blas Town

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

1970 1990 2000

Secondary Sector Primary Sector Tertiary Sector


Although Nayarit was a primarily agricultural state in the seventies a

dramatic shift occurred in 1990 following the national transformation from a

resource-based to a service-based economy Since 1990 the tertiary sector has

employed up to 60 of the economically active population in Nayarit state

77

(INEGI 2014) In spite of the states employment turn the primary sector in San

Blas Municipality has remained as the principal source of employment The

trend for the primary sector at the municipal level is also a contracting one

although at a lower rate at the municipal level tertiary sector activities have

also been steadily increasing since 1970 (INEGI 2014)

Usually presenting a larger proportion than in the rest of Nayarit due to

the large number of people of ages between 20 and 59 the proportion of

economically active population in the municipality has doubled since 1970

(INEGI 2014) whereas San Blas Town has continued to present a higher

proportion of economically active population than Nayarit state (INEGI 2014)

In terms of employment San Blas presents unemployment rates

remarkably below Nayarit states average In 2000 San Blas Municipality and

San Blas Town showed peak low levels of unemployment by 2010

unemployment increased in San Blas Town following the state and municipal

trend (INEGI 2014) Fig 34 Unemployment rates

Nayarit

100

200

300

400

San Blas Municipality San Blas Town

0 1990 2000 2010


78

San Blas Town presents a different scenario in the 1970s the primary

and tertiary sectors employed together almost 80 of the population whilst the

secondary sector employed less than 20 of the economically active population

(INEGI 2014) In 2010 80 of the population of San Blas Town is employed in

only in tertiary sector activities whilst the primary sector has shrunk almost 50

since 1970 (INEGI 2014)

Even though the contributions of Nayarit state in aquaculture and fishing

activities to Mexicos economy are not representative these activities along

with agriculture are the most important at San Blas Municipality almost 20 of

Nayarits aquaculture and fishing activities take place in San Blas Municipality

However in spite of the high indices of people employed in fishing and

aquaculture activities at the municipal level in San Blas Town economic

activities have been increasingly focused towards the tertiary sector (INEGI

2014)

In Nayarit more than 60 of the economically active population is

employed in the tertiary sector 18 of these jobs are provided directly by the

hospitality industry (INEGI 2014) In San Blas Municipality tertiary sector

activities employ 4315 of the economically active population In San Blas

Town 6192 of the population work in tertiary sector activities

In this context 58 of businesses in San Blas Town belong to the

tertiary sector however only 20 of these are related to tourism activities

Given the importance of San Blas Town as a regional hub as well as the

perceived attractiveness of the beach-front the primary economic activities in

79

the town are retail and hospitality as the largest number of economic units and

highest employment rates focus in these realms

Although their number is not representative at a state level most

businesses in the municipality are related to agricultural activities closely

followed by retail and hospitality enterprises 60 of these economic units are

located in San Blas Town However San Blas Town is rather focused on

commercial activities as 40 of the total businesses in the town are related to

retail activities and 20 to hospitality even though almost 50 of the

enterprises related to fishing and aquaculture of the municipality are located in

San Blas Town (INEGI 2014) Fig 35 Economic units in San Blas Town

Agriculture farming fishing and aquaculture Retail Government related Hospitality Other


In average 6630 of the population working at the municipalitys

economic units are either the owners or relatives to the owners This situation is

more noticeable in retail real estate health and social welfare recreation and

cultural activities as 75 of the population employed are the owners or related

to the owners of these economic units

80

Fig 36 Proportion of owners and relatives operating economic units

90

75

60

45

30

15

0 San Blas Municipality (2010)

Retail Transportation and storage Media Real estate Professional services Waste management Health and social welfare Recreation and culture Hospitality Other services but government San Blas Municipality Compiled by author from INEGI 2014 data

Hospitality Sector

Within the hospitality sector food and beverage establishments are the

most representative at municipal and local levels(INEGI 2014)

Fig 37 Economic units in hospitality sector in San Blas Town

25 Lodging Food and Beverage

20

15

10

5

0 1996 2001 2005 2009


Although only 6 of tourists in Nayarit visit San Blas Municipality San

Blas Municipality has followed the state trend and in 2010 the number of

Mexican visitors to San Blas increased by almost 40 (INEGI 2014)

81

Fig 38 Gross number of visitors to San Blas Municipality

0

20000

40000

60000

80000

100000

1995 2010

Gro

ss N

um

ber

of

Vis

ito

rs

National origin International origin


The economic and demographic profiles of San Blas Town present high

levels of employment access to public health care and infrastructure provision

in dwellings similar to the conditions present in Cancun and Los Cabos despite

the broad differences in economic growth and FDI

The livelihoods of most of the people living in San Blas Town depend on

commercial and tourism activities serving the regional demand of goods and

services Although it is not conclusive the data available suggests that more

than half of the businesses are locally owned and family managed The

confirmed accuracy of this data may indicate the presence in San Blas Town of

characteristics that provide strong foundations to peoples quality of life

332 Institutional re-conceptualizations of San Blas

From the federal to the local levels a number of governmental agencies

are involved in developing the recommendations directing San Blas Town

towards the national goal of economic growth When applied the spatial

configuration of San Blas Town will be subject to changes that are supposed to

82

better accommodate the actions proposed by the influencing governmental

offices Specifically governmental offices ultimately guiding the spatial

configuration of a town in Mexico are

FEDDERAL STATE MUNICIPAL

SEMARNAT CONANP SEPLAN COPLADEMUN

SEDESOL SOP

SECTUR FONATUR SEDUE

Table 4 Institutional framework of urban planning in Mexico Compiled by author from policy analysis

All of these agencies concur with the recommendation that tourism activities are

the preferable strategy for economic growth in San Blas Municipality and San

Blas Town As a result these offices have created a number of legal documents

shaping what the future of San Blas Town ought to be

SEMARNAT

SEMARNAT is the governmental entity in charge of the regulation

management and protection of the natural landscape in Mexico This

secretariat creates regional plans that recommend the economic activities that

are supposed to be environmentally-friendly Given their federal character

these plans must be accommodated by all subsequent territorial management

plans of state and municipal scales

83

In the two territorial management plans that comprise San Blas

SEMARNAT (2006) lists and assesses the natural features of the landscape and

their vulnerability On the one hand the National Plan of Territorial Management

(NPTM) (SEMARNAT 2012) ndashas coordinated with SECTUR and FONATURndash

defines tourism activities as the most adequate use for the physiographic region

where San Blas Town is located recommending the integration of economic

clusters and corridors

4

2 1

1 Mangrove forest 3 2 Low rainforest 3 Non-irrigated agricultural land 4 Halophytic vegetation

Fig 39 Natural landscape Source INEGI 2014

On its part the Plan of Ecological Management for the Mar de Corteacutes

Region (SEMARNAT 2006) aligned with the NPTM prescribes fishing and

tourism as the most adequate uses of San Blas natural features whose

environmental vulnerability status is estimated as medium by this entity

(SEMARNAT 2006)

84

However these plans note that San Blas lacks the adequate equipment

and infrastructure to be competitive in fishing activities at a national scale As a

result tourism is identified by SEMARNAT as the most suitable productive

activity to be carried out in the region (SEMARNAT 2006 2012) Even though

infrastructure required for tourism is also judged to be substantial the results of

SEMARNATs evaluation consider the beaches immediately adjacent to San

Blas Town as being of great economical value for the tourism sector

Contributing to this would be the presence of charismatic species such as

marine turtles tropical birds and fish as well as the nearby natural protected

area of Marismas Nacionales In addition these analyses dictate the

requirement of San Blas to improve its urban structure suggesting the creation

of an urban development plan (UDP) that ldquoguarantees the construction of

housing in an urban context that provides adequate infrastructure public

services institutional buildings and legal certaintyrdquo (SEMARNAT 2012 41)

In light of the possible conflict between environmental conservation

challenges and tourism activities SEMARNAT maintains that if tourism activities

are properly planned basing their profit on the existence of environmental

assets agreements between tourism and conservation would take place

(SEMARNAT 2006) Such recommendations are meant to ldquostrengthen regional

developmentrdquo through ldquosustainable economic growthrdquo (SEMARNAT 2012) Thus

this federal government agency clearly favours tourism development putting

environmental concerns on the back burner

85

FONATUR

As described in chapter 2 FONATUR is the governmental entity

commissioned by SECTUR to ensure that tourism activities are adequately

planned and therefore competitive at a global scale The TDP strategies are

regulated at a regional scale by SECTURs Sectorial Program of Tourism and

executed by FONATUR at the local level In response to the objective of the

latest Sectorial Program of Tourism (2008) FONATUR (2006) has characterized

San Blas Town as a priority zone for TDP

In order to

make a better use of the natural and cultural

resources and their capacity to be transformed into

productive tourism products creating services and

destinations that lead to development and wellbeing

for the local residents and enterprises (DOF 2008

34)

FONATUR has evaluated the potential of the natural and cultural

qualities existing in San Blas to satisfy the demands of the target market

FONATURs study includes an analysis of the real estate market concluding

that there is enough land available to sustain the markets requirements as well

as basic infrastructure provision in San Blas Town (FONATUR 2005 2006) In

addition the presence in the region of an economically active population

somewhat familiar with the hospitality industry is also counted as an asset

(FONATUR 2005 2006)

86

The features that FONATUR (2006) describes as ldquotourism assetsrdquo in

San Blas are the following

Natural Assets Architectonic and Historical Assets

Cultural Assets

El Borrego Beach

Marina

El Pozo River

San Basilio Hill

El Vigia Hill

La Marinera Church

Nuestra Sentildeora de Fatima Church

Aduana Building

Garita Building

Plaza Principal

Lighthouse

Charming people

Cuisine

History

Religious Celebrations


In alignment with the criteria used by FONATUR to select its

destinations San Blas Town presents an accessible location the possibility to

adapt tourism infrastructure to the cultural and environmental context space to

create innovative recreational infrastructure and modern amenities certification

of water quality in beaches and streams and outstanding authenticity and

identity traits (FONATUR 2005 2006)

Given the confluence of these characteristics according to FONATUR

(2005) the settlements located on the shoreline of San Blas Municipality as it is

the case of San Blas Town have the potential to attract to the kind of elite

tourists that are already visiting the southern edge of the Riviera Nayarit

corridor expanding the existing touristic offer to what FONATUR has called

ldquohigh-end ecotourismrdquo (FONATUR 2005)

87

Fig 40 El Borrego Beach in San Blas Town Source Ximena Gonzalez

FONATUR regards San Blas concerns to the economic political and

social realms (FONATUR 2005) The Fund inculpates the local people for the

apparent lack of competitiveness in San Blas Town a necessary trait to succeed

as a tourism destination (FONATUR nd) A marketing analysis carried out by

FONATUR (nd) for San Blas Town identifies the local population as one of the

main constraints for tourism development Finally FONATUR (nd) condemns

the ldquopassive attituderdquo (FONATUR nd 108) of San Blas people towards tourism

characterizing the locals as having a ldquoweak tourism oriented culturerdquo (104) that

ldquolacks an envisioning of the business opportunities tourism can createrdquo (107)

This is because FONATUR believes that the host community ldquodoes not

recognize the importance of tourismrdquo (FONATUR nd 104) for development The

only significant positive feature of the local residents for tourism development

88

as perceived by FONATURs analysis is the large number of people at a

productive age who although they lack the ldquodesired skillsrdquo are potentially a

cheap source of labour (Appendix B) It is also held that this ldquoassetrdquo is being

threatened by the high rates of emigration and the lack of training required to

attract and retain the kind of high-class international visitors desired (FONATUR

nd Nayarit 2009)

Fig 41 Plaza Principal Source Ximena Gonzalez

In its urban design proposal FONATUR (2005) expresses its discontent

with the current physical state of San Blas as the town is not perceived as

being attractive to tourists For instance the town is described as ldquodirty noisy

and disorganizedrdquo as well as lacking ldquoquality amenitiesrdquo and ldquospatial

89

homogeneityrdquo features that are supposed to be key for successful tourism

development (FONATUR 2005)

In their proposal FONATURs planners also characterize local

businesses as unable to satisfy the demands of the high-class tourists that the

fund is aiming to attract in order for the tourism development model to succeed

For example due in part to the lack of formally trained staff rustic beach-front

restaurants known as ramadas are described by FONATUR (2005) and

governmental officers interviewed as dirty and having ldquoinadequate facilitiesrdquo for

food service

Fig 42 Ramadas at El Borrego Beach Source Ximena Gonzalez

90

Street food vendors are also seen as obstructions to the right of way of

cars cyclists and pedestrians as well as interfering with the appreciation of the

architectural scale and as polluting the environment with ldquofoul smells and

soundsrdquo (FONATUR 2005 Appendix B) Weekend activities at the plaza

although they are not object of negative criticism by decision makers are not

considered to be adequate in number and quality to satisfy the target markets

desires either (FONATUR 2005)

Fig 43 Street food vendors on Sinaloa Street Source Ximena Gonzalez

The heavy traffic conditions that San Blas Towns main streets calle

Juaacuterez and calle Sinaloa (Appendix C) show during the week is portrayed by

FONATUR (2005) as ldquochaoticrdquo and apparently worsened by the insufficiency of

on-street parking the affluence of cyclists and pedestrians as well as puestos

91

(street food stalls) All of these are seen as obstructing the efficient flow of

vehicles from the towns entryway to the the downtown core The

heterogeneous architectonic and urban character of San Blas consequence of

the evolution of the social realm through time is regarded as defective (2005)

since according to FONATUR (2005) the mixture of building typologies

construction period architectural styles mixed land uses and mixed-incomes is

not desirable in the areas where tourists are expected to meander as the

planners envisage homogeneous corridors created by the linkages between

downtown historical buildings the beach and the marina

Fig 44 No parking Source Ximena Gonzalez

Consequently the recommendations made by FONATUR are focused

towards the augmentation and modernization of San Blas ldquosecondary

assetsrdquo (FONATUR 2006) or tourism infrastructure such as highways harbours

lodging accommodations restaurants leisure facilities and public spaces of the

tourist zone (FONATUR 2006) The urban design guidelines created by

FONATUR (2005) urge for the beautification and gentrification of the urban area

92

of San Blas Town as a strategy to market the existing assets in a way that would attract more

visitors and investors to the region In that context FONATURs project intends to attract

tourists to not only already popular places such as the Centro historical buildings harbour

and the beach In order to widen the scope of San Blas target market FONATUR has also

suggested the creation of a number of corridors connecting these places with proposed new

attractions and leisure areas for visitors a pedestrian main square a theme park an

aquarium an ocean boulevard or malecon and two plazas along the El Pozo river

(FONATUR 2005) Such a scheme FONATUR states would provide a more effective and

efficient spatial organization of the town increasing its appeal to tourists (FONATUR 2005)

Furthermore in order to accomplish this goal FONATUR suggests the removal of street

vendors currently located in areas of tourist significance such as the main square and El

Borrego beach with the argument that their attractiveness would be impeded by the

presence of such establishments Given the current location of street vendors at the plaza

principal and surrounding areas as well as along the main roads they can be expected to be

relocated to an area off-limits for tourists (Fig 45) when the FONATUR planning begins

Ramadas previously located on the beach front would also be relocated as noted by

SECTUR in our interview unless they adapt to quality regulations not yet defined FONATUR

makes the observation that a traditional ldquoMexican lookrdquo is of great importance for visitors and

investors (FONATUR 2005 2006) Therefore in order to improve the ldquoauthentic Mexican

experiencerdquo provided to tourists (FONATUR 2005) FONATUR has created a set of urban

design guidelines to be applied in the proposed tourism corridors Such a ldquoMexican lookrdquo

would be created by the use of so-called traditional architectonic elements in all buildings

gabled tiled roofs wooden window sashes neo-classical columns cantera (carved stone)

NORTH

Pacific Ocean

El Pozo River

Fig 45 Streets with informal vendors Informal vendors

500 m 1 km Crafted by author from INEGI 2014 data

93

balconies and terraces with wrought-iron railings faroles (street lamps)

azulejos (tiles) and palapa thatched roofs In addition all buildings should be

equipped with features such as air conditioning and wireless internet as well as

accessible parking providing tourists with the comforts and amenities of a high-

class experience (FONATUR 2005)

All of this would be superimposed on the existing downtown space of

San Blas Town to be re-designed and re-tooled as a destination for tourists not

for locals

Fig 46 Current entryway to San Blas Town Source Google Street View

Fig 47 FONATURs entryway proposal Source FONATURs Urban Design Proposal (2005)

94

Nayarit State Government

Because of Nayarits natural cultural and historical features tourism is

regarded as a strategic opportunity for economic development (Nayarits

Development Plan 2011-2017) converting the Riviera Nayarit Tourism

Corridor (RNTC) into the trademark of the state San Blas regions own natural

and cultural features (see 311 and 312) have been recognized by the state

government since the 1970s as having potential to successfully develop tourism

activities However the current development plan for Nayarit state describes

San Blas as a region economically stagnant leading San Blas population to

emigrate to areas perceived as providing better work opportunities such as the

RNTC This situation is deemed by the decision-makers interviewed to the

inadequacy of past development plans as well as to the populations lack of

responsible participation in the planning process ndashndashas the locals have tended

to be difficult and stubborn opposing to the plans of the government and

create conflict (ALCOSTA 2006)ndashndash deterring private investment in San Blas in

spite of being a sun-and-sand destination being very close to the RNTC (PON

1999)

Recommended by the states Development Plan a Tourism Program is

in charge of the creation of the context-specific strategies for tourism

development For San Blas this plan (PON 2009) recommends the construction

and improvement of infrastructure for tourism a strategy that had already been

suggested in the previous development plan (PON 2006) as coordinated with

SECTUR FONATUR and SEMARNAT In fact improvement of the connectivity

95

infrastructure of San Blas Town began in 2006 with the construction of a new highway to

Tepic (see Appendix A) designed to facilitate the arrival of tourists from Tepics so-called

international airport to San Blas upon its inclusion to the RNTC in 2007 Besides the

completion of the Tepic-San Blas highway the government of Nayarit proposes the

construction of an ocean boulevard or malecon along El Borrego beach in San Blas Town

plus a bike path connecting El Borrego to Matanchen bay (Appendix B) as well as to

increase the provision of basic services However the primary strategy of the current

government of Nayarit for San Blas Municipality is two-pronged on the one hand to refurbish

the San Blas harbour in order to reactivate international commercial trade and on the other

hand to turn San Blas Town into a cruise ship destination (PON 2012)

Nayarit states government is also commissioned with the crafting of the municipal

urban development plans (UDP) that in charge of the Secretariat of Urban Development and

Public Works (SOP) are the quintessential planning instrument for the execution of the

development prescriptions dictated from above (Table 4 Fig 50)

Within such a regulatory framework the stated objective of San Blas UDP is ldquoto

manage the urban space in a manner that will promote competitiveness and economic

developmentrdquo (PON 2010) Thus this plan describes San Blas region as one primarily apt for

activities related to tourism followed by retail ranching agriculture aquaculture and fishing

The strategies proposed by this plan are to increase the amount of tourism amenities in the

region through a zoning by-law that facilitates the construction of lodging and leisure

amenities as well as the creation of urban design guidelines that would help improve and

preserve the existing areas of ldquolandscape valuerdquo The plan contemplates the ongoing

identification of strategic areas for tourism development (PON 2010)

NORTH

Fig 48 Riviera Nayarit Tourism Corridor

Source wwwrivieranayaritcom

96

Additionally this plan also foresees the necessity of increasing the

provision of housing institutional building and public services upon an increase

in the scale of touristic activities

URBAN PLANNERS

COMPLIES

Fig 49 Structure of governmental power Compiled by author based on policy analysis

In this context the zoning established by this UDP (PON 2010)

suggests three primary zoning categories housing mixed use and touristic

use Three different housing densities are determined for San Blas Town

minimum density low density and medium density (Fig 49) Minimum density is

defined by the UDP (2010) as single-dwelling land plots of between 600 and

1000 sq meters with building restrictions that only allow two-story single-

detached housing Low density housing permits single land plots of 300 to 526

sq meters with building restrictions that also allow only two-story single-

detached dwellings and finally medium density housing that prescribes single

land plots of 140 to 256 sq meters with building restrictions that allow row

houses two stories high

97

The by-law for the areas zoned as minimum and low density housing also allows

parks and recreation land uses whilst sparingly allowing mixed uses or uses related to

kindergartens and primary schools The location of minimum and low density housing in the

areas closest to the beach San Cristobal river and environmental conservation areas

clearly looks like housing zones targeting tourists and temporary residents not local workers

and their families

Mixed use area zoning is also of two different kinds one where the predominant land

uses are retail and tourism services and another one that is primarily housing combined with

institutional buildings such as elementary schools and high schools libraries churches and

dental and health services (Fig 51) Mixed use zoning is allocated along the main roads of

the town as well as around schools and recreation areas furthermore the predominantly

retail zone is located in the downtown core These areas are more likely to be occupied by

local people who permanently live in San Blas

In the case of the areas specified for touristic use in San Blas Town this plan

proposes three different densities (Fig 52) Minimum density is meant to accommodate

hotels motels lodges villas and RV parks and the number of rooms in this land use

designation cannot exceed 15 hotel rooms per hectare with a restricted building height of two

stories Furthermore the zoning by-law allows for this land use the existence of parks and

recreation areas retail establishments museums airports harbours and bus stations Low

density tourism land use accommodates the same building typology and institutional

buildings than minimum density but for this land use a greater density of up to 30 hotel

rooms per hectare is permitted and a building height restriction of 3 stories Finally medium

density tourism land use allows hotels mixed with parks and recreation areas retail schools

NORTH

El Pozo River

RESIDENTIAL ZONING

Low density residential

Medium density residential

Pacific Ocean

Fig 50 Proposed residential uses

Crafted by author from PON 2010 data 500 m 1 km

98

churches libraries museums and health services this land use allows up to 60 hotel rooms

per hectare with a building height restricted to four stories Low density tourism use is

allocated in the south west of the town close to the Marina and across El Pozo river whilst

medium density tourism zoning is spread all over town it is concentrated in the south east

end of the city right behind the medium density zoning allocated in El Borrego beach

1 2

MIXED-USE ZONING

1 Mixed -use corridors 2 Retail

NORTH

Pacific Ocean

El Pozo River

In conclusion Nayarit state intends to address the inadequate use of San Blas

environmental resources by increasing the volume of tourism development in the region

characterized as both under-using and over-exploiting some environmental resources (PON

2012) Supported by FONATUR the current UDP for San Blas purportedly sets the

foundations for the provision of competitive tourism services that the town has been

historically lacking (PON 2010)

TOURISTIC ZONING

Minimum density

Low density

Medium density

Marina

Malecon

Theme park

500 m 1 km

Fig 52 Proposed touristic use

Crafted by author from PON 2010 data

NORTH

Fig 51 Proposed mixed use corridors

500 m 1 km Crafted by author from PON 2010 data

99

San Blas Municipal Government

Municipalities in Mexico are in charge of the creation of a Municipal

Development Plan (MDP) that obeys the development strategies enunciated by

the federal and states government plans The Municipal Development Plan of

San Blas promotes tourism development as the ultimate strategy for the

improvement of the quality of life of its residents

Since federal and state planning documents have given an account of

the characteristics of San Blas Town ndashndashother than the environmental and

cultural featuresndashndash as lacking of the quality infrastructure and urban design

standards expected by the target market of the RNTC (PON 2008 2008a

Nayarit 1999) San Blas MDP emphasizes that private investment should be

facilitated by the government (PON 2012) as a strategy to improve the quality of

touristic infrastructure Supported by Nayarit states government San Blas

MDP promotes the implementation of FONATURs ldquoinnovative tourism modelrdquo

based on a mixture of sun-and-sand attractions with cultural and ecological

activities expected to boost employment in the region in a sustainable fashion

(PON 2012 FONATUR 2005 nd Appendix B) mitigating the emigration of

local educated young professionals

San Blas Municipal Development Plan considers 1) the promotion of

the natural landscape 2) native arts and crafts and 3) the local cuisine as part

of the Riviera Nayarit as three key components of a strategy to broaden the

current scope of visitors to San Blas and increase tourism revenues As a result

the tourism strategy proposed by the MDP would have a direct effect on San

100

Blas Town (along with the coastal towns of the municipality with tourism

potential) Since the plan maintains that in order to increase tourist

attractiveness and grow the capacity to competitively host a larger amount of

visitors San Blas Town should undergo the spatial transformations prescribed

by FONATUR The municipalitys plan thus can be seen as an uncritical

endorsement of the federal governments planned initiative

Given the low share of San Blas in Nayarits overall economic

performance the municipal government criticizes the small scale and

heterogeneity of the main economic activities of the municipality fishing

aquaculture commercial trade and tourism (PON 2012) Specifically San Blas

MDP criticizes the artisanal nature of agriculture and fishing activities since they

are based on low-impact traditional production methods as unable to compete

at larger scales A similar situation occurs with the hospitality sector described

as lacking of infrastructure and skilled labour hence unable to expand The

infrastructure of most tourism amenities is depicted as rustic or deteriorated

and businesses are run by locals who lack formal training (PON 2012) Unlike

the rest of the RNTC San Blas does not have the infrastructure necessary to

support the large-scale tourism activities that the government considers as

required to succeed at a regional scale An example of this situation is that most

of the hotels and restaurants are not considered as tourist-quality by the

Municipal Development Plan even though San Blas local cuisine is regarded

as a profitable asset

101

Furthermore the currently low rates of private investment in tertiary

sector activities are held responsible by the municipal government for the lack of

job opportunities for young professionals San Blas MDP links the small number

of post-secondary school graduates returning to San Blas Town after graduation

as the root cause of the low productivity and competitiveness rates as the

population that has tended to remain in town is primarily high-school drop outs

Thus the absence of an attractive urban setting and skilled labour the

municipal government asserts is the reason that a purportedly small number of

visitors and investors are attracted to San Blas Town decreasing the

commodification potential of the existing natural and cultural assets This

situation is therefore interpreted and described by the MDP as an economic

loss In the particular case of San Blas Town the current MDP states that ldquoas

other economic activities grow tourism is being inhibited by them more than any

other activitiesrdquo (PON 2012 21) In other words the municipal government

considers that the diminished competitiveness of agriculture fishing and

aquaculture activities are constraining a more homogeneous development of

tourism in San Blas since the MDP regards economic homogeneity as one of

the milestones for competitiveness in the tourism sector

Evidently at a municipal scale the focus of the government is also set

on planning for tourism As expressed by the decision-makers interviewed the

perceived misuse of the natural and cultural assets and precarious

infrastructure together with the current socio-spatial dynamics occurring in San

102

Blas are considered as an obstacle for development as these have prevented

San Blas Town from becoming the successful tourism destination it should be

34 Tourism Whose Silver Bullet

Contrary to the expectations implied by FONATURs TDP framework

the comparison of San Blas to Cancun and Los Cabos with the data provided by

the government is not conclusive However the reworking of the statistics

presented in sections 32 and 33 cast a shadow of doubt on the strength of the

governments argument that TDP is a silver bullet for regional economic

development Furthermore using their own indices and measures it has been

shown that San Blas Town already meets their target expectations in terms of

employment infrastructure provision access to health services and inequality

and marginality In other words if the expected benefits of increased economic

growth and FDI are already existing in San Blas Town what is be the purpose of

executing a TDP strategy in San Blas

Despite the questionable benefits of tourism the prescriptions made by

the government make it obvious that the primary goal of the plans affecting San

Blas Town is to attract private investment in order to become ldquocompetitiverdquo and

produce the wealth it is capable of that with the objective of improving quality

of life in the region remove it from its backward state and introduce

development a rhetoric that seems to be blinding the fact that living conditions

in San Blas are better than those at successful destinations

103

Upon the decline of tertiary sector activities the plans guiding

development in San Blas have been oriented towards tourism development As

a result considering the natural and cultural features as the towns most

valuable assets the urban strategies focus on the enhancement of these

specific ldquocharismaticrdquo features while discarding a range of features that from

an economic perspective are not attractions cannot be commercialized and

could constrain tourism development For instance the ecological functions of

the natural landscape are dismissed by these plans The natural wealth of San

Blas may attract visitors but it is much more than a potential tourist attraction

Wetlands ecosystem services are ldquocritical to the development and survival of

humanityrdquo as described by CONANP (2007) Coastal wetlands help to control

floods replenish groundwater stabilize the shoreline and protect it from storms

retain sediments and nutrients purify and filter water habitat of biodiversity and

regulate weather (CONANP 2007) For its part the tropical rainforest close to

the shores of San Blas serves as a buffer ecosystem between mangrove forests

at the coastline and human settlements or agricultural plots inland (Bojorquez

2005) However the importance of these physiographic characteristics is

simplified to its great potential for touristic exploitation (PON 2010 2012) as it

becomes evident in San Blas Urban Development Plan

Moreover livelihoods in San Blas are also being overlooked as the

economic and demographic profiles do not show a natural inclination of the local

residents towards tourism Being a regional hub the population of San Blas is

more likely to work in either commercial activities related to the distribution of

104

the locally produced produce fish and seafood or in the provision of services

unavailable at the surrounding villages Given its proximity to Tepic tourism-

related activities have been growing mostly in the realms of food and beverage

but these are not as representative of San Blas livelihoods to transform the

town into a tourism enclave

Given the normative structure in Mexico and the rational-

comprehensive framework guiding all sorts of planning strategies it becomes

evident that Municipal government of San Blas has no choice but to promote the

tourism development strategies dictated from above and neither do the local

people In an economically-laden planning framework where it seems

inadmissible to have a slow economic growth when the natural landscape is an

asset that can be commodified and exploited citizens and their livelihoods are

perceived by the economic doxa as the adversary of development substituting

the interests of the people with the interests of the market

In this context the support given to tourism development by the

governmental discourse creates the impression of being a rhetorical tool to gain

citizen consent as this discourse depicts tourism as an unquestionable strategy

for the improvement of quality of life dismissing a number of aspects embedded

in place that outlined and described in the following chapter are strong

contributors to the wellbeing of San Blas residents

105

CHAPTER 4 Discussion Socio-spatial Implications of TDP

As addressed in Chapter 1 place is the result of peoples interactions

(Gaffin 1996) a conjugation of numerous tangible and subjective factors By

commodifying tangible assets and reducing local populations (and tourists too)

to demographic and economic statistics and indicators the TDP paradigm leaves

some factors out of the equation deeming them unimportant to development and

wellbeing by default

Resulting from the synthesis of the comparison of San Blas to Cancun

and Los Cabos and from the identification of the disconnects between San Blas

demographic and economic profile and the governmental policies framing TDP in

Chapter 3 important quantitative contestations between the planning documents

from above and the livelihoods of San Blas people are identified In this chapter

with the purpose of acknowledging the subjective aspects of place contested by

the TDP framework the research questions addressed are a) what are the

aspects of place neglected when the quantitatively oriented TDP paradigm is

used in the redevelopment of a host community and b) why is it important for

planners to identify the causes of these contestations

To answer these questions the two goals of the first part of the chapter

are a) to define the qualitative aspects that as read in place are disregarded by

the TDP approach and b) to propose this process as a milestone for a planning

framework that effectively reinforces peoples wellbeing by acknowledging the

multiplicity of places existing at a location

106

This analysis is based on a synthesis of concepts adapted from Lynchs

theory of good city form (1984) and Fred Kents placemaking framework (PPS

2014) The second part of this chapter draws from Lefebvres spatial triad to

characterize the nature of the contestations of place between the locals and the

authorities That is Lefebvres theory of the production of space is used and

articulated to identify whose places are contested by a TDP approach These

concepts may help urban planners to look beyond economic growth arguments

and adopt more complex design strategies that will enhance peoples quality of

life in any host community Since urban planners are key participants in TDP this

is an important consideration

41 Wellbeing as Place

As shown in the preceding chapters the developmental discourse is a

primary means employed by elite groups to transgress the places ownedmade

by the locals San Blas Town is judged by the outside interests and depicted by

t h e i r d i s c o u r s e a s u n a t t r a c t i v e u n d e s i r a b l e a n d

underdeveloped (FONATUR 2005 nd PON 2012) As a result upon the

successful replacement of subjective qualities in the local sense of place (ie

meaning attachment identity belonging) with a doxa based on economic values

the production of spaces that undermine the place of non-privileged groups is

more likely to occur (Gieryn 2000) negatively affecting the main stated goal of

development quality of life (Chapter 2) Bailly (1986) argues that wellbeing can

be measured by the public preferences and attachment of people to their

107

physical and socio-economic environments (Bailly 1986) Gieryn suggests the

identification of the spatial representation of social relations and hierarchies as

frequently those who control space are the ones with power (Gieryn 2000)

As mentioned in Chapter 1 Lynch (1984) outlined the qualities of space

that support a good life vitality sense fit access efficiency and justice

Providing a scope of key qualities Project for Public Spaces (PPS) complements

Lynchs framework including uses and activities sociability access and linkages

and comfort and image In addition based on phenomenological approaches to

place two of the five dimensions Lalli (1991) comprising identity can be

incorporated into this analysis continuity and familiarity

Lynchs Performance Dimensions (1984)

Vitality Spatial form supports vital functions of people

Sense

Degree to which a settlement can be clearly perceived and mentally differentiated and structured in time and space by its residents The match between environment peoples sensory and mental capabilities and central constructs

Fit Form and capacity of spaces to match the pattern and quantity of actions that people customarily engage in including future actions

Access Ability to reach other persons activities resources services information or places including the quantity and diversity of the elements which can be reached

Control Degree to the use and access to spaces and activities ant their creation repair modification and management are controlled by those who use work or reside in them

Table 6 Lynchs Performance Dimensions Compiled by author from Theory of a Good City Form

(Lynch 1984)

108

Lallis Dimensions of Urban-Related Identity (1992)

Evaluation Comparison between the present town and others and the towns perceived uniqueness and special character by its residents

Continuity Significance of the built environment fo the sense of subjective temporal continuity Hypothesized connection between peoples own biography and the town the symbolization of personal experiences

Attachment General sense of being at home in the town It is the belongingness or rootedness to a place

Familiarity Effects of the daily experiences in the town Results of the actions undertaken in the urban environment It is an expression of a successful cognitive orientation

Commitment Perceived significance of the town for personal future the commitment to want to stay This is of central importance for the stability of self-concept

Table 7 Lallis Dimensions of Urban-related Identity Compiled by author from Urban-related identity theory

measurement and empirical findings (Lalli 1992)

Fig 53 Key qualities of place Source wwwppsorg

109

411 Spatial gaps Sociability

Sociability comprises characteristics related to spatial vitality fit and familiarity It is

identified by qualities related to the number of people and their age and gender street life

people walking and sitting and daytime and evening use

The area of application of the urban design project proposed by FONATUR is

conformed by four corridors entrance-downtown downtown-beach downtown-marina and

the riverbanks of El Pozo river (Fig 55 Appendix G) This strategy ignores the unattractive

activities taking place in these areas planning for the replacement and displacement of these

activities with [theme] parks and pedestrian malls

The fact that downtown is the hub for the main activities of the town is only

acknowledged by FONATURs planners in terms of being a constraint for tourism

development The policies prescribed for the tourist area by FONATUR and the municipal

government intend to reduce the unattractive traffic caused by the high population density

and commercial activities taking place downtown These strategies include new zoning

which would require the relocation of institutional buildings and mixed use areas currently

allowing a higher population density living and working in the area (Fig 54 and 55)

Another outstanding feature of the downtown core is the presence of informal food

vendors on the primary roads Informal food vendors tend to gravitate to areas where people

spontaneously gather as for example nearby schools recreational areas and governmental

buildings (Fig 41 Fig 54 Appendix D) Although food stalls (puestos) provide an important

service to the community and are arguably an identity feature of the Mexican culture they

are perceived by some as a symbol of backwardness (Dougherty and Escobar 2013)

However in order to ease the vehicular flow and improve attractiveness the planning Fig 54 Activities and single use areas Compiled by author from INEGI 2014 data

110

document indicates that informal vendors are meant to be relocated outside the tourist

attractive area as vehicular flows is highly regarded in successful destinations FONATUR

(2005) notes Such perceived disadvantages are of greatest importance for the authorities

than the vibrancy puestos add to the streets or their relevance to the local economy as

economic growth is supposed to generate vibrant public spaces through more suitable

establishments

Another concern of FONATUR is the large number of abandoned dwellings Due to

the high migration rates in the Municipality and the physical state of the constructions

FONATUR assumes most unoccupied dwellings are abandoned However due to their

location in the proximity to El Borrego beach and the coincidence of both the integration of

San Blas into the Mar de Corteacutes tourism project and an increment in the number of

abandoned dwellings in 2005 (Appendix E) it can be inferred that these seemingly

abandoned dwellings are in fact seasonal dwellings (INEGI 2014) Therefore upon the

possibility of tourism development it would be reasonable for urban development policies to

address an even larger occurrence of unoccupied dwellings but this is not considered in the

urban development policies

The inconsistencies found by this analysis suggest that FONATURs planners are

only concerned with the perception of tourists as they foresee that given the physical and

demographic characteristics of San Blas visitors would not feel comfortable in the areas

where the tourism-attractive assets are located In other words FONATUR anticipates that in

its current state high-class tourists would feel as outsiders in San Blas Town

Fig 55 Touristic land-uses proposed and existing population

Compiled by author from INEGI (2014) San Blas UDP (2010) and FONATURs Urban Design proposal

(2005) data

111

412 Spatial gaps Uses and activities

Uses and activities comprise characteristics primarily related to vitality fit access

continuity and familiarity These can be analysed by qualities related to the presence of local

businesses land-use patterns pedestrian and cyclist use and perceived distance to key

locations

In San Blas Town most of the existing land uses have occurred spontaneously

arranged in accordance with the towns livelihoods and the natural environment fishing

activities governmental offices retail food and beverage and lodging facilities (Fig 54

Appendix F) The oldest areas of San Blas Town are the ones with the highest population

density also where retail food and beverage and fishing enterprises thrive (Fig 56) But the

two main documents conceiving and planning San Blas future seem to overlook these

features (Map 12)

For instance perceived as a tourism asset San Blas oldest areas are expected to

accommodate tourist corridors providing seasonal housing lodging leisure and

entertainment amenities to visitors (Fig 57) The urban design project proposed by

FONATUR contemplates mainly the downtown core as this is the area considered to have

the most tourist attractive potential within the town But FONATUR ignores the fact that

downtown also is the area of the town already with the highest population density where

most of the local businesses and services are located where employment rates are the

highest and also where mobility rates are the lowest

FONATURs proposed corridors (Fig 55) are expected to allocate landmarks and

more adequate land-uses retail leisure and entertainment hospitality services and

500 m 1 km

NORTH

DATE OF SETTLEMENT

XVIII Century

XIX Century

1900-1970

1970-2005

2005

2011

Pacific Ocean

El Pozo River

Fig 56 Historical evolution of San Blas Town Compiled by author from FONATURs Urban Design proposal (2005) San Blas UDP 2005 and 2010 data

112

seasonal housing (Chapter 3) However although the Fund recognizes that there will be

problems with spontaneous urban development as a caveat to tourism (FONATUR 2005) it

leaves the task of planning of the local areas to the municipal government It has done this

in every other master-planned destination in Mexico (FONATUR 2006) Such urban

development is thus considered to be an externality and is not factored into the planning by

FONATUR nor their quality of life criteria

In response Nayarit states authorities have accommodated the suggestions of

FONATUR to San Blas UDP (Fig 57) In this reactive planning document the zoning

proposed is spatially disconnected from the social reality of the town

Fishing enterprises are one of the most representative economic activities of San

Blas (Chapter 3) but their present location is perceived to be a constraint for tourism

(FONATUR 2005) (Appendix F) Although this areas have evolved along with its inhabitants

over time the goal of the spatial strategies to increase tourist attractiveness will be

superimposed on this and the attractiveness of the riverbanks of El Pozo river a junction

point between the natural cultural and historical landscapes of San Blas Town will no longer

be seen as misused As a result the fishing venues used for storage and commercialization

of fish and seafood located along El Pozo riverbanks will be displaced by residential and

touristic land-uses (Fig 57) incompatible with fishing activities (UDP 2010)

Another negative effect relates to the relevance of existing traditional zoning and

land-use allocation schemes The local pattern of plot subdivision for inheritance amongst

family members through time resulted in spontaneous mixed-use and mixed-income areas

where the local families have traditionally lived and worked for at least a century TDP

disregards these traditional schemes opting for land-use changes meant to increase the Fig 57 Proposed land-uses

Compiled by author from San Blas UDP 2010 data

113

attractiveness and economic value of the areas privileged by tourism As mentioned this

becomes yet another factor in the displacement of the population towards less consolidated

areas of the city (Appendix H) These newer neighbourhoods are home to young mostly

uneducated families that also present the highest mobility and unemployment rates in town

(Appendices I J and K)

Finally the strategy conceived for the ultimate tourist attractive asset of San Blas

Town the beach front prescribes a land use incompatible with the activities already taking

place The urban development plan accommodates a touristic land use suitable for hotel and

lodging facilities as well as seasonal housing for tourists even though this area has been

occupied by ramadas for the last five decades (Fig 58) Although San Blas cuisine is

described by the development plan as a profitable asset the most popular food

establishments among visitors and locals located on El Borrego beach since the seventies

are dismissed by the UDP Ramadas (Fig 42) are described by the authorities as ldquonot

achieving a restaurant categoryrdquo because of their allegedly inadequate infrastructure and

amateur management characteristics not suitable to provide what FONATUR would regard

as a competitive food service to visitors (FONATUR nd 2005 Appendix B) In fact in terms

of zoning and land-use it is important to note that the ramadas are settled on federal lands

with concessions granted by the federal government consequently they are legally

constrained from building permanent structures and infrastructure (DOF 1991) As a result of

such policy it is in fact not possible for these businesses to improve their facilities At the

same time the zone immediately adjacent to the ramada settlement has been allocated by

the UDP to a use corresponding to lodging establishments

Fig 58 Density of hospitality businesses Compiled by author from San Blas UDP 2010 data

114

Since the location of ramadas is perceived by the decision makers interviewed as

a constraint for attracting investment the measure foreseen by Nayarits

government is thus the forced removal and relocation of ramadas to an area of

less relevance for high-end tourism Ramadas currently interfere with the direct

access to El Borrego beach from the proposed hotel zone a feature promoted by

the Mexican government in order to attract higher investments to beach

destinations (FONATUR 2006) Therein lies the justification to remove this

activity and those who earn their living from it

These recommendations that separate the tourists place from the

locals are the foundations of the design guidelines being prescribed by

FONATUR since the creation of Cancun Displacement and segregation of the

local people and their livelihoods have been the spatial strategies of the

government to ldquoimproverdquo the visitors experience in a destination (Chapter 2)

where the conception of space perceives the existing geographical cultural and

historical features of a place as economic assets dismissing the subjective

meaning of these elements for the locals by conceiving staged spaces meant to

be ephemerally owned by the visitors

115

413 Spatial gaps Comfort and image

Comfort and image comprise characteristics related to sense continuity

and familiarity They are evaluated by qualities mainly related to the number of

people walking and sitting greenery and historical elements

Fig 59 People sitting at the plaza Source Ximena Gonzalez

Since the main objective of FONATURs (2005) urban design proposal is

to increase revenue it rejects the stylistic features customary of the local

architecture as they are not deemed to match the potential visitors expectations

of authentic Mexican architecture The disconnect between the foreign

imaginary of Mexico and the vernacular architecture of San Blas Town is

regarded by FONATUR (2005) as one more cause of underdevelopment in San

Blas

116

Fig 60 Streets of San Blas today Source Google Street View

The existing mixture of old and new buildings spontaneous additions

and renovations is described by FONATUR (2005) as an ldquounattractiverdquo feature of

the town (Fig 60) Consequently FONATUR has proposed the refurbishment

and improvement of the faccedilades within the proposed tourism corridors (Fig 61

and Fig 62)

Fig 61 FONATURs urban design proposal SourceFONATUR s urban design proposal 2005

117

Fig 62 FONATURs pedestrian mall SourceFONATUR s urban design proposal 2005

The goal intended by the architectonical transformation of these

corridors is to provide visitors with the cultural symbols and branding markers

that meet their expectations of a more authentic character (Amerlinck 2008

Gonzalez 2010) In this vein FONATUR proposes Estilo Vallarta architecture

within the tourism corridors Also known as Estilo California or Estilo Hacienda

the recommended style is a re-make of the Mission architecture used by the

Spanish friars settled in the missions of Las Californias (today California state) in

the late XVIII century (Gonzalez 2010) This emerged in the 1960s when upon

the touristic success of Puerto Vallarta Mexican architect Guillermo Wulff re-took

elements of Mission architecture complemented them with Mexican highland

architecture features and created the Estilo Vallarta This style then became an

architectural symbol of Mexican culture in the foreign imaginary (Gonzalez 2010)

Neither Mission Architecture nor Estilo Vallarta style pertain to San Blas Town

118

given that the only building originally constructed during the Spanish

Renaissance period was the Marinera Church whereas the rest of the heritage

buildings (Chapter 3) belong to the Spanish Revival period of the late 19th and

20th centuries

Fig 63 Old Juarez street Source Laboratorio Herrera

Mission architecture cannot be regarded as being representative of San

Blas identity Vernacular architecture of western Mexico was instead the

predominant architectonic style of San Blas Town until the seventies (PON 1977)

But already in the 1970s most vernacular buildings were demolished or

renovated to prepare San Blas for a touristic boom that following the success of

Puerto Vallarta was being expected by Nayarits authorities (PON 1977 Luna

2004) Consequently the unattractive blend of architectonic styles existing in

San Blas shows clearly the social nature of the process that has been producing

119

and transforming space throughout time in response to local and outside

influences

The implementation of FONATURs architectonic recommendations

would create a landscape familiar to tourist imagination but foreign to the local

dwellers removing the traces belonging to Sanblasences from their

surroundings replacing their traces with staged spaces that would match with the

branding assigned to Riviera Nayarit and designed for outsiders

414 Spatial gaps Access and linkages

Access and linkages comprises characteristics related to access fit and

familiarity It is assessed by qualities related to modes of transportation

pedestrian and cyclist use parking usage patterns and distance to key locations

As a strategy supposed to increase the attractiveness of the streets

surrounding the plaza principal FONATUR suggests the transformation of these

streets into a pedestrian mall (Fig 62) as well as the construction of a new

boulevard that would direct visitors straight to the beach front (Fig 65) avoiding

the so-called chaos presently perceived by planners as occurring downtown

With this strategy FONATURs planners are also ignoring that today most of the

locals walk or use their bikes as the primary mode of transportation (Fig 64 and

66)

120

Fig 64 Walking and cycling ratios in San Blas Town Compiled by author

121

The governmental spatial practice in Mexico is based on the conception of spaces as

they are perceived by elite groups guided by economic values and concealed by the

discourse employed by the authorities and policy documents (Chapter 2) However this top-

down conception of space does not correspond with the places of less regarded groups

already in the space As shown previously in San Blas Town the discursive rejection of the

local sense of place materializes through spatial transformations (eg modernization

development gentrification) as these have become the foundations of the spaces

conceived by the authorities The interests of the market are indicated as being tightly tied to

so-called quality of life and this is used as a justification for the displacement and

replacement of the meanings and interpretations embedded in the spaces lived by the locals

Due to the economistic TDP framework adopted by the Mexican state (Chapter 2)

the weight of the most subjective components of quality of life such as locality rootedness

and sense of place (Chapter 1) as evidenced through aspects of sociability sense fit and

access are overlooked This situation underpins the definition of quality of life in Mexico to

the commercialization of the abstract elements contained in space that are considered

profitable in this case the exploitation of ldquotourism attractive assetsrdquo (FONATUR 2005)

In a contradictory manner however the value of certain select qualitative

components is recognized by the spatial discourse when the goal is to appeal to the market

(Dredge and Jenkins 2003 FONATUR 2006) in other words they are perceived to have

commercial or market value Sense of place is thus regarded when it belongs to a more

lucrative imaginary Shown earlier the spatial preferences of the desired audience are then

Fig 65 FONATURs road proposal Compiled by author from FONATURs urban design proposal data

122

appealed to through the appropriation and enhancement of certain spatial

elements as for example those interpreted by the visitors as traits of identity and

authenticity (Dredge and Jenkins 2003) As already noted in Chapter 2 there is

no local voice in these decisions

Fig 66 Cyclists in San Blas Source Ximena Gonzalez

The aspects of place neglected by the quantitatively-oriented TDP

paradigm are the subjective values and meanings attached to San Blas Town by

its residents Evidence of these are the vibrancy of the streets the sociability of

the downtown core the high numbers of pedestrians and cyclists all over San

Blas Town and the prominence of local businesses Despite the fact that these

occur in circumstances that may not be ideal in terms of infrastructure they do

contribute to the residents wellbeing This argument is supported by the

observations made by Atkinson et al (2012) where the resistance of the locals to

the imposition of tourism and the radical transformation of their livelihoods

indicates the existence a strong sense of place

123

42 The Production of Space Lefebvres Spatial Triad

Lefebvres three-way analytical tool promises to elucidate the causes of

the gaps between place as conceptualized and commodified in the TDP process

and place as designed lived and reproduced locally Lefebvre introduced his

theory of the production of space to prove that

the producers of space have always acted in

accordance with a representation while the users

passively experienced whatever was imposed upon

them inasmuch as it was more or less thoroughly

inserted into or justified by their representational

space (Lefebvre 1991 43-44)

This theory can be compared to the Mexican case as the government

supported by a rational-comprehensive framework only identifies commodifiable

tangible assets as valuable while citizens (in this case the residents of San Blas

Town) are supposed to subordinate their sense of place to the preferences of the

market legitimizing the mandates of the state and the economic doxa The role

of urban planners according to this interpretation of Lefebvres triad becomes

the executors of the impositions of the government through TDP

By deconstructing space into its perceived lived and conceived

dimensions it becomes more evident how the TDP approach taken by the

Mexican government leads urban planners to neglect many qualitative aspects of

the local livelihoods especially those that are difficult to commodify for the

tourism market With the top-down approach of TDP it is to be expected that the

124

goals objectives priorities values aesthetics and prime movers of the project

would neither coincide with nor accommodate those of the pre-existing

population of the target site As mentioned previous master-planned sites have

been evacuated of pre-existing populations to clear the assets for

commercialization and consumption by tourists Public participation a tool for

reaching some degree of consensus has been described as tokenist at best

Therefore analysts of place would predict a conflict in conceptions of place

which given the relations of power at play may result in the erosion of local

identities through a disorienting readjustment of a local sense of place

Fig 67 Lefebvres spatial triad Compiled by author from Lefebvres The Production of Space (1991)

125

421 Perceived space

The tangible assets identified by the rational-comprehensive model as

tourism attractive (Chapters 2 and 3) belong to Lefebvres perceived space as

it is comprised of the particular locations and spatial sets characteristic of each

social formation (Lefebvre 1991 33) The perceived space of San Blas is thus

conformed by the features described in Chapter 3 its natural landscape (311)

and its demographic and economic profile (331) It is important to mention that

unlike environmental features demographic and economic data have not yet

been approached from a spatial perspective by the analyses and plans carried

out by the government This situation reinforces the idea sustained by Lefebvre

(1991) that space is taken as a background context where spatial importance

only accrues to the lands features as if the spatial distribution of people and

their activities in a space was reducible to the representation of data through

charts and graphics

422 Conceived space

The conceived space is the dimension in which decision makers and

experts (eg government authorities urban planners and architects) interpret the

perceived space through the lens of the lived space That is the perceived

economic value of the elements contained in space determining their best uses

is a result of the lived space In the case of San Blas FONATURs urban

planning proposal is based on the objectivity of the tangible elements of the

perceived space and their economic value as planners imagine how an

126

improved version of San Blas would look However disregarding the subjectivity

inherent to the lived space that bestowed such an economic interpretation on the

first place the urban policies crafted by planners in a top-down fashion are

focused on the re-creation of a space that would be more appealing to tourists

than to locals this justified by the rhetorical premise that economic growth will

restore any of the material inconveniences caused by their displacement (eg

housing infrastructure provision)

423 Lived space

Space as directly lived through its associated images

and symbols and hence the spaces of inhabitants

and users hellip This is the dominated ndashndash and hence

passively experienced ndashndash space which the imagination

seeks to change and appropriate It overlays physical

space making symbolic use of its objects [These

spaces] tend towards more or less cohesive systems

of non-verbal symbols and signs (Lefebvre 1991 39)

Lefebvres lived space can be defined as the realm of subjectivity and

experience that is of place In San Blas it is evident that the place of the local

residents is being neglected Instead it is the lived space of elite groups who

have been leading decision-makers and planners (Gieryn 2000) into the

conception of segregative plans for the future of San Blas Town

127

The lived space of FONATURs planners can be described as one

perceiving the natural features of San Blas as attractive but still regarding them

as underused Influenced by the economic discourse from above (Fig 49) the

lived space of the urban planners and local authorities is where the identification

of San Blas as backwards dirty and chaotic originates Finally it is the lived

space of the elite groups which benefited with tourism investment will get to

improve their standards of living (Appendix H) In such a multiplicity of lived

spaces Lefebvre asserts [they] interpenetrate one another andor superimpose

themselves upon one another (Lefebvre 1991 87) In other words for Lefebvre

there is not one true lived space and thus is the origin of the contestations over

the control of space (Gieryn 2000)

In sum the identification of the lived conceived and perceived

dimensions of space and their dynamics allows the articulation of the

experiential origin of both the links and disconnects occurring among the

governmental discourse of development tourism and urban planning As

described in Chapter 3 the natural landscape of San Blas and its population is

given neither by the authorities nor by urban planners any value beyond one of

an economic nature as it is evident in the federal state and municipal plans

Authorities and decision makers in the conceived dimension of space are

subject to a capitalist ideology imposed from above that can only accept

quantitative measurements or in other words that which is not commodifiable

seems irrelevant if seen at all In this context by dismissingconcealing all traces

128

of subjectivity urban planners and decision-makers have conceived a

supposedly abstract space Ideology however exists in the lived space

Overarching upon the conceived and the perceived dimensions the lived

space influences both the perception and conception of space that is the

experiencing of place Nevertheless given their multiplicity places that are

perceived as unattractive dirty and chaotic for one group of people are at

the same time vibrant active walkable convenient accessible and welcoming

for another

The confluence of several interpretations of space within a geographical

location is thus another subjective element overlooked by the prescriptions

created by decision makers The ways in which space is lived and perceived in

San Blas Town are interpreted by the dominant class as backward and

underdeveloped in spite of the existence of spaces that appear to be

accessible comfortable vibrant and sociable qualities that the competing

framework of placemaking regards as essential

The multiplicity of places and subjective meanings must be

acknowledged by urban planning practitioners for two primary reasons a) to

prevent the imposition of foreign values and interpretations on someone elses

place and b) to create inclusive places that promote the genuine attainment of

peoples wellbeing As noted by Gieryn (2000) urban planning practice is always

contested by the interests of powerful groups (eg political economic) and the

perceptions and attributions by ordinary people that experience place In the

middle of contestation the role of urban planners is to act as mediators but in

129

order to mediate effectively they must recognize the actors left behind by any

planning strategy

43 Socio-spatial Implications of TDP

It has become evident in this chapter that the Mexican states strategy

not only overlooks notable pre-existing social and spatial dynamics taking place

in San Blas Town as noted in Chapter 3 but also significant issues that will be

created such as displacement segregation and placelessness That is the

subjective value of place for the population already present in the areas that the

UDPs strategy intends to transform is not being considered The population

settled in the areas of San Blas Town that contain the so-called tourist attractive

assets outlined in Chapter 3 would be the most affected by the implementation of

a tourism strategy The sense of place in these areas revealed by the confluence

and number of activities of the people living working and playing at the Centro

Histoacuterico El Borrego beach and the zones linking them is being displaced by

the touristic land uses imposed by the government (FONATUR 2005 UDP 2010)

Furthermore confirming the lack of concern for the local population the strategy

to increase infrastructure provision at the areas where these people would be

relocated is to be carried out over the long term (6+ years) whilst the strategies

concerning tourism development are scheduled within an immediate timeframe

(UDP 2010) This situation represents a major policy gap

130

As a result it can be expected that irregular settlements would proliferate

in the proximity of better served areas as has already occurred in other

settlements within the Riviera Nayarit (Benavides 2010 Sifuentes et al 2010) as

well as in the so-called successful destinations Los Cabos and Cancun (Bringas

1999 Brenner and Aguilar 2002 Lopez-Lopez Cukier and Saacutenchez-Crispiacuten

2006) Over time this situation would compromise the conservation of the

remaining geographical features that are considered a tourism attractive asset

hindering quality of life of San Blas Towns residents

Neither are tourism development policies concerned with the decay of

local enterprises as a result of mass tourism development Decision makers have

underestimated the relevance of local businesses as these are perceived as

unable to satisfy the demands of elite tourists required to fulfill the yearning for

economic growth Instead rhetoric is focused on the increase of foreign

investment and formal employment top priorities of the National Development

Plan 2012-2018

Culture and identity are outlined by the governmental discourse as static

almost symbolic features whose only rational use is that of capital gain The

cultural heritage of the people living in San Blas Town is not dealt with by the

development policies as a dynamic process that is reflected in the everyday life

practices This situation becomes obvious when the strategies conceived by the

authorities (Chapter 3) suggest the commodification of only select traits

pertaining to the local culture and identity only of those that seem to be

appropiable and of economic value This situation results in the displacement of

131

the features less appealing to the market that support the locals wellbeing as

documented in section 41

Lefebvres theory helps to segregate and articulate the nature of these

contestations as it becomes obvious that the spatial reinvention of San Blas

Town is being conceived by a single interpretation of place (as seen in section

42) an interpretation ruled by the interests of those who will benefit the most of

tourism development For them a successful attainment of the economic

development strategies would imply then the transformation of the livelihoods of

the local people of their identities and their places through the displacement and

replacement of what discourse approaches as being undesirable features As a

result the lived spaces of the locals would shift towards the acceptance of a

landscape based on capitalist values that would deny the intrinsic value of

culture and identity would replace Sanblasences sense of belonging with

placelessness (Relph 1976) leaving them hoping for the quality of life they were

promised by tourism ignoring that they once had it

132

CHAPTER 5 Conclusions

Bound to placerdquo (Atkinson Painter and Fuller 2012) peoples wellbeing

is directly influenced by the subjective meanings attached to place safety social

proximity identity belonging (Norberg-Shultz 1976 Sen 1985 Bailly 1986

Atkinson Painter and Fuller 2012) These meanings are defined by the

assemblage of the material cultural emotional and social dimensions and

therefore subject to contestation (Gieryn 2000 Atkinson Painter and Fuller

2012) The discourse of TDP in Mexico appears to be silencing matters of

possible conflict whereas it emphasizes the benefits of economic growth By

supporting and executing the transformation of San Blas into a high-end tourism

destination urban planners are directly contributing to the displacement of the

local sense of place and the effect this will have on the quality of life of San Blas

residents

Despite the questionable benefits of tourism as a strategy for

development and the fact that life conditions existing in San Blas can be

comparable to those existing in successful destinations the federal state and

municipal governments have insisted in the implementation of tourism Limiting

citizen participation to a tokenist level FONATURs planners have disregarded

non-commodifiable features that represented in the built environment reveal the

satisfactory degree of quality of life enjoyed by Sanblasences

Economic growth is the silver bullet of capitalist approaches to

development As a result the subjective dimension of wellbeing is silenced by the

economic strategies Lefebvres theory of the production of space attributes this

133

omission to the capitalist hegemony since it neglects the value of intangible

assets as a strategy of self-perpetuation Thus given the neoliberal character of

the Mexican state it can be expected that the results of TDP are an attempt to

commercialize the tangible elements of the natural landscape and built

environment in San Blas ignoring the subjective value of these for the locals and

their relevance for peoples wellbeing

Given the key role of urban planners as the executors of the

governmental policies for development and their materialization this is an appeal

for urban planners to acknowledge the multiplicity of places coexisting at a

location enabling them to identify the existing contestations that might be

deliberately excluding certain groups or interests from the planning process

51 Framework to evaluate the potential of a TDP strategy to support

peoples quality of life

As discussed in Chapter 4 the multiplicity of meanings embedded in

place is not easily seen either by its authoritiesusers nor planners Meanings

are intangible and seem to have been neglected by the quantitative nature of

TDP in Mexico since commoditization is not supposed to be multidimensional In

other words by dismissing the lived spaces the complications inherent to the

subjective nature of place are avoided with a rational-comprehensive framework

In this context a methodological framework for urban planners to

anticipate the effects of TDP on the place of the host community can be a

practical resource Meant to facilitate the identification of key components of

134

place jeopardized by the proposed urban strategies this framework comprises

three primary steps

1) Spatial representation of census data as well as of the TDP

strategies As observed in Chapter 4 this analysis would provide planners with

a more accurate description of the demographic and economic profiles specific

to an area uncovering social patterns that may otherwise go unnoticed

2) Identification in space of key components of place Depending on the

data made available in the previous step different characteristics can be

observed in this stage A basic analysis would include features related to

sociability variety of uses and activities comfort and image and access and

connectivity In order to increase its accuracy the analysis of place can be

expanded theoretically and methodologically borrowing frameworks from

different planning approaches when possible

3) Comparison of place and policy The overlapping of the spatial

components of place and the TDP strategies is likely to highlight not only the

existing contradictions and gaps between them but also the core components

of place and consequently of peoples quality of life

To genuinely contribute to social development urban planners must pay

attention to the symbols and meanings embedded in a particular place As

evidenced in the analysis of San Blas FONATURs planners continue to be

unaware of the traces of wellbeing that are represented and enacted on the built

environment

135

52 Structural Weaknesses of TDP

Described in Chapter 2 and 3 in spite the strong support of the state to

TDP as a means to improve peoples quality of life the evidence provided by the

official data is inconclusive First using the parameters the government

recommends it has not been possible to rigourously evaluate if tourism has

delivered the claimed benefits in Cancun and Los Cabos And second some of

the data that is available is incomplete as plenty of things can be inferred from

such ambiguous data

Urban planners have the ethical duty to be critical of these strategies

given the magnitude of TDPs influence on peoples wellbeing However urban

planners in Mexico continue to be subject to structural constraints that on the

one hand have limited their role to that of executors of the states policy and on

the other hand the rhetoric of this structure has kept planners from

understanding space as something more than a context or an economic asset

Such a situation not only hinders the contribution of urban planners to the

genuine improvement of life conditions but also implies their collaboration in the

reinforcement of the status quo of the elite groups in control of space

53 The role of planners in place

Rather than just managing the landscape to increase profit as implied by

the Mexican regulatory framework of TDP urban planners play a seminal role in

the design of an environment able to support the wellbeing of its dwellers matter

that goes beyond the transformation of the landscape into a consumption good

136

Acknowledging the many places coexisting at a location it is the

planners role to act as an interpreter of the variety of meanings of a place across

social groups That is urban planners are not anymore solely the executor of the

states commands but planners are now obliged to critically analyse the urban

policies in place to identify the meanings of a place for its users and to use

these meanings in the proposal of integrated designs that more effectively

support peoples quality of life

54 Recommendations

The situations identified by this thesis lead towards recommendations not

only for planners but also for the government and the communities were TDP is

being implemented For the government in order to continue supporting tourism

as a feasible strategy for development it is critical to evaluate thoroughly the

outcomes of TDP at the successful destinations Also making available

complete and consistent data sets would provide researchers with the tools

necessary to carry out an accurate evaluation of TDP and confirm if Cancun and

Los Cabos are in fact ldquosuccessfulrdquo beyond economic terms

For the communities they need to acknowledge their power get

organized and transform bottom-up the so-called public participation process in

TDP

And finally one recommendation for TDP planners is to stimulate

grassroots organizations and raise community awareness This has the potential

to provide planners with more and better information about the place they are

137

planning for In addition taking a critical approach to the current planning

regulations would be helpful for planners to incorporate apparently disparate

approaches and methods to complement their proposal Acknowledging these

may in fact contribute to more effective planning approaches hopefully resulting

in improved wellbeing for the communities involved in TDP

55 Further Research

As an attempt to confirm that the qualities identified as the physical

representations of the subjective values supporting quality of life for the people of

San Blas it would be necessary to conduct further research with an approach

looking for the input from the local level unveiling the possibility of finding

alternative representations of quality of life in places that may be misunderstood

by urban planners and decision makers unaware of the local symbols and their

meanings What does San Blas mean to Sanblasences How does the negative

depiction of the town affect the meaning of San Blas to the locals What is the

process involved in the changing of the meaning of San Blas to a tourist

destination even for locals Answers to these questions would complement the

findings of this thesis and provide clues to better planning strategies more

specific to San Blas

In recognition of the multiplicity and locality of place it can be deemed

necessary to suggest a shift in the methodological approach of TDP since

investigating place necessarily deals with the tacit and unconscious

understandings that perceptions of space invoke (OToole and Were 2008)

138

Within an experiential context OToole and Were (2008) suggest that space can

also be interpreted as part of the research methods and not the unit of analysis

that is understanding space as a language that tells the story of the socio-

cultural conditions in which it was created (De Certeau 1984)

As an attempt to illuminate the behavioural and experiential structures

residing in peoples lifeworlds (Seamon 1984) a place-based approach to TDP

(Aravot 2002) ndashsuch as the design frameworks suggested by Christopher

Alexander Steven Hall and Peter Zumthorndash has the potential to aid planners to

gain an understanding of the specific context before drawing conclusions based

on physical evidence (OToole and Were 2008) or distorted interpretations of

physical evidence as observed in the case of San Blas Town It would be best for

planners to feel confident that the TDP paradigm in which they are participating

does result as it promises in improved quality of life for the residents of

economically-disadvantaged towns and regions in Mexico and beyond

139

REFERENCE LIST

Aldape Guadalupe 2010 La configuracion del espacio turistico en Cancun

PhD diss Universidad Politecnica de Cataluntildea

Alianza para la Sustentabilidad del Noroeste Costero Mexicano (ALCOSTA)

2006 Informe Final report for the Packard Foundation and Fondo para

la Conservacion del Golfo de California Mexico

Aguilar Adrian G and Mariacutea Isabel Vaacutezquez (2000) Crecimiento urbano y

especializacioacuten econoacutemica en Meacutexico Una caracterizacioacuten de las

funciones dominantes Investigaciones Geograficas Boletin del Instituto

de Geografia UNAM 42 87-108

Altman Irwin and Setha M Low 1992 Place Attachment Springer

Ambrosie Linda 2013 Tourism sacred cow or silver-bullet PhD diss


Amerlinck Mari-Jose 2008 Arquitectura vernacula y turismo iquestidentidad para

quien Revista destiemposcom Meacutexico Distrito Federal Julio 3

Anderson Jon 2009 Understanding cultural geography places and traces

Routledge

Aravot Iris 2002 Back to phenomenological placemaking Journal of urban

design 7 no 2 201-212

Arefi Mahyar1999 Nonplace and placelessness as narratives of loss

Rethinking the notion of place Journal of urban design 4 no 2

179-193

140

Arnstein Sherry R 1969 A ladder of citizen participation Journal of the

American Institute of Planners 35 no 4 216-224

Atkinson Sarah Joe Painter and Sara Fuller2012 Wellbeing and place In

Wellbeing and place edited by Sarah Atkinson Joe Painter and Sara

Fuller 1-14 US Ashgate Publishing Company

Ayala Hana 1993 Mexican resorts A blueprint with an expiration date The

Cornell HRA quarterly nd 34-42

Bailly Antoine S1985 Quality of life or well-being a fundamental choice for

urban and regional planning The Planning Review 21 no 82 28-31

Banco de Mexico (Banxico) nd Proyecto de desarrollo turistico en Cancun

QR Fondo de promocion de infraestructura turistica

Barbosa Adriana M and Arturo Santamaria 2006 Estudio comparativo de

playas Mazatlan Acapulco Cancun y Los Cabos Mexico Universidad

Autonoma de Sinaloa

Baudrillard Jean 1968 Simulacra and simulations Jean

Bazant Jan 2010 Expansion urbana incontrolada y paradigmas de la

planeacion urbana Espacio abierto cuaderno venezolano de sociologiacutea

19 no 3 475-503

Benavides Maria M 2010 Paisaje restrictivo Mirada de los habitantes de

Jarretaderas Nayarit Topofilia 2 no 1

Benseny Graciela 2007 El turismo en Mexico apreciaciones sobre el turismo

en espacio litoral Aportes y transferencias 11 no 2 13-34

141

Bojorquez Jose I 2005 Estudio Previo Justificativo del sistema Singayta-La

Tovara-Los Negros Mexico SEMARNAT

Booth John A and Mitchell A Seligson 1984 The political culture of

authoritarianism in Mexico a reexamination Latin American Research

Review 19 no 1 106-124

Bourdieu Pierre 1972 Outline of a Theory of Practice Trans Richard Nice

Cambridge Cambridge University Press

Bringas Nora L 1999 Politicas de desarrollo turistico en dos zonas costeras

del Pacifico mexicano Region y sociedad 6 no 17 3-51

Brenner Ludger and Adrian G Aguilar 2002 Luxury tourism and regional

economic development in Mexico The Professional Geographer 54 no

4 500-520

Butler Richard W 1974 The social implications of tourist developments

Annals of Tourism Research 2 no 2 100-111

Calderoacuten Juan and Maria E Orozco 2009 Planeacion y modelo urbano el

caso de Cancun Quintana Roo Quivera 11 no 218-34

Campbell Donald T and Julian Stanley 1963 Experimental and quasi-

experimental designs for research Boston Houghton Mifflin

Carmona Matthew 2010 Public Spaces-Urban Spaces The dimensions of

Urban Design Routledge

Castro Consuelo 2005 La ley del fomento a las OSC en Mexico paso hacia la

transparencia Conference paper V Conferencia Regional de ISTR Lima

Peru

142

Clancy Michael J 1999 Tourism and development evidence from Mexico


_________ 2001 Mexican tourism Export growth and structural change since

1970 Latin American Research Review 36 no 1 128-150

Clarke Paul W 2005 The economic currency of architectural aesthetics in

Designing cities Critical readings in urban design edited by Alexander

R Cuthbert Blackwell Publishing

Cohen Erik 1972 Toward a Sociology of international tourism Social

Research 39 no 1 164-182

_________ The impact of tourism on the physical environment Annals of

Tourism Research April-June 215-237

_________ 1988 Authenticity and commoditization in tourism Annals of

Tourism Research 15 371-386

Consejo Nacional de Poblacion (CONAPO) 2000 Indices de desarrollo humano

Mexico DF CONAPO

_________ 2005 La desigualdad en la distribucion del ingreso monetario en

Mexico Mexico DF CONAPO

Consejo Nacional de Evaluacion de la Politica de Desarrollo Social (CONEVAL)

2000 Mapas de pobreza por ingresos Mexico DF CONEVAL

_________ 2005 Mapas de pobreza por ingresos y rezago social Mexico DF

CONEVAL

_________ 2010 Informe de pobreza en Mexico el pais los estados y sus

municipios Mexico DF CONEVAL

143

_________ 2012 Informe de pobreza en Mexico Mexico DF CONEVAL

Comision Nacional de Areas Naturales Protegidas (CONANP) 2007 Ficha

informativa de Humedales de Ramsar httpramsarconanpgobmx

docssitiosFIR_RAMSARNayaritLa20TovaraMexico20La

20Tovara20RIS20S202008pdf

Corteacutez Heacutector and Javier Delgadillo 2006 Alcances del ordenamiento territorial

en la planeacioacuten del desarrollo elementos conceptuales In Poliacutetica

territorial en Meacutexico Hacia un Modelo de desarrollo basado en el

territorio edited by Javier Delgadillo Maciacuteas Mexico SEDESOL-UNAM

Crick Malcolm 1989 Representations of international tourism in the Social

Sciences Sun Sex Sights Savings and Servility Annual Review of

Anthropology 18 307-344

Culler Jonathan 1990 The Semiotics of Tourism Framing the Sign Criticism

and its Institutions University of Oklahoma Press pp 1-10

Cuthbert Alexander R 2006 The form of cities Political economy and urban

design Malden MA-Oxford UK-Cartlon Aus

_________ 2011 Understanding cities method in urban design Routledge

De Certeau Michel 1984 The practice of everyday life Berkeley University of

California

Delgadillo Javier 2007 Planeacion regional y ordenamiento territorial en

Mexico Primer Foro de Desarrollo Regional working paper Camara de

Diputados Palacio legislativo de San Laacutezaro Mexico City

144

Delgadillo Javier and Felipe Torres 2006 Dimensiones multicausales del

ordenamiento territorial enfoques y aplicaciones In Poliacutetica territorial en

Meacutexico Hacia un Modelo de desarrollo basado en el territorio edited by

Javier Delgadillo Maciacuteas Mexico SEDESOL-UNAM

Delgadillo Javier Felipe Torres and Joseacute Gazca 2001 Distorsiones del

desarrollo regional de Mexico en la perspectiva de la globalizacioacuten

Momento econoacutemico 115 30-44

Diario Oficial de la Federacioacuten (DOF) 1983 Ley de Planeacioacuten Mexico DF H

Congreso de la Unioacuten

_________ 1988 Ley General de Equilibrio Ecologico y Proteccion al Ambiente

Mexico DF H Congreso de la Union

_________ 1993 Ley General de Asentamientos Humanos Mexico DF H


_________ 2004a Ley General de Bienes Nacionales Mexico DF H


_________ 2004b Ley de Desarrollo Social Mexico DF H Congreso de la

Unioacuten

_________ 2005 Ley de Participacioacuten Puacuteblica Mexico DF H Congreso de la

Unioacuten

_________ 2007 Ley General de Bienes Nacionales Mexico DF H Congreso

de la Union

_________ 2008 Programa Sectorial de Turismo 2007-2012 Mexico DF H

Congreso de la Union

145

_________ 2009 Ley General de Turismo Mexico DF H Congreso de la

Unioacuten

Donmoyer Robert 2009 Generalizability and the single-case study In Case

Study Method edited by Roger Gomm Martyn Hammersley and P

Foster 45-69 London SAGE Publications Ltd

Dredge Dianne1999 Destination Place Planning and Design Annals of

Tourism Research 26 no 4 772-791

_________ 2010 Place change and tourism development conflict evaluating

public interest Tourism Management 31104-112

Dredge Diane and John Jenkins 2003 Destination place identity and regional

tourism policy Tourism Geographies 5 no 4 383-407

Dougherty Sean and Octavio Escobar 201 The determinants of informality in

Mexicos states OECD Economics Department Working Papers No

1043 OECD Publishing

Eckstein Harry [1975] 1992 Case studies and theory in political science In

Regarding politics Essays on political theory stability and change

Berkeley University of California Press

Entrikin J Nicholas 1989 Place region and modernity In The Power of Place

bringing together Geographical and Sociological edited by John A

Agnew and James Duncan

Ewing Reid and Otto Clemente 2013 Measuring Urban Design Islandpress

Fainstein Susan S 2000 New directions in planning theory Urban Affairs

Review 35 no 4 451-478

146

Fondo Nacional de Fomento al Turismo (FONATUR)1998 Evolucioacuten del

Turismo Planificado en Mexico Mexico FONATUR

_________ 2005 Plan Maestro de Imagen Urbana de San Blas Nayarit

Resumen Ejecutivo FONATUR

_________ 2006 Planeacion de centros turisticos la experiencia y practica de

FONATUR Mexico FONATUR

_________ nd Propuesta de un plan de posicionamiento del municipio de San

Blas como destino turistico

Flick Uwe 2007 What is qualitative research in Designing Qualitative

Research edited by Uwe Flick 2-16 England SAGE Publications Ltd

Fox Jonathan 2006 How does civil society thicken The political construction

of civil social capital in rural Mexico World Development 24 no 6

1089-1103

Gaffin Dennis 1996 In Place Spatial and Social Order in a Faeroe Islands

Community Prospect Heights Illinois Waveland Press

Garciacutea Ana and Juan Coacuterdoba 2006 Desarrollo regional y organizacion

espacial diferenciada aportes al modelo de ordenamiento territorial

mexicano In Poliacutetica territorial en Meacutexico Hacia un Modelo de

desarrollo basado en el territorio edited by Javier Delgadillo Maciacuteas

Mexico SEDESOL-UNAM

Garciacutea Francisco 2010 La planeacion del desarrollo regional en Mexico

(1900-2006) Investigaciones geograficas boletin del Instituto de

Geografia UNAM 71 202-121

147

Garza Gustavo 1983 Desarrollo economico urbanizacion y politicas urbano

regionales en Mexico (1900-1982) Demografia y economiacutea 17 no 2

157-180

George Alexander L and Andrew Bennett 2003 Case Studies and theory

development Cambridge MA MIT Press

Gerring John 2004 What is a case study and what is it good for American

political science review 98 no 2 341-354

Gieryn Thomas F 2000 A space for place in Sociology Annu Rev Sociol 26

463-496

Gobierno del Estado de Nayarit 2006 Programa estatal de vivienda reservas

territoriales y ordenamiento del territorio Nayarit COPLADENAY

Gobierno de la Repuacuteblica 2007 Plan Nacional de Desarrollo 2007-2012

Mexico

_________ 2013 Plan Nacional de Desarrollo 2013-2018 Mexico

Gonzalez Daniel 2010 Ciudad virtual turismo imaginario y realidad social en

Puerto Vallarta Mexico Luces sombras abordajes motines y

naufragios ACE Architecture City and Environment 4 no12 101-113

Gotham KF 2000 Representations of space and urban planning in a post-

WWII US city In Constructions of urban space edited by Ray

Hutchison 155-180 Jai Press

Gottdiener Mark 2000 The consumption of space and the spaces of

consumption In New Forms of Consumption Consumers culture and

148

commodification edited by Mark Gottdiener 265- 285 Rowman and

Littlefield

_________ 1994 The Social Production of Urban Space University of Texas

Press

Gunder Michael 2010 Planning as the ideology of (neoliberal) space

Planning Theory 9 no 4 298-314

Gutierrez Juan J 2009 Planeacioacuten Urbana en Meacutexico Un anaacutelisis criacutetico sobre

su proceso de evolucioacuten Urbano 12 no 19 52-63

Halbwachs Maurice 1992 On collective memory University of Chicago Press

Hammersley Martyn and Roger Gomm 2009 Introduction In Case Study

Method edited by Roger Gomm Martyn Hammersley and P Foster 1-17

London SAGE Publications Ltd

Harvey David 1989 The condition of postmodernity vol 14 Oxford Blackwell

Hawkings Donald E and Shaunn Mann 2007 The World Banks Role in

Tourism Development Annals of Tourism Research 34 no 2348-363

Heidegger Martin 1971 On the way to language Trans John Stambaugh New

York Harper and Row

Hevia Felipe Samana Vergara-Lope and Homero Aacutevila Landa 2011

Participacion ciudadana en Mexico consejos consultivos e instancias

puacuteblicas de del iberacion en el gobierno federal Perfi les

Latinoamericanos 38 Julio-Diciembre 65-88

149

Hiernaux Daniel 1978 Notas para un analisis sociologico de la planeacion

urbana Desarrollo y planeacion de los asentamientos humanos working

paper Mexico Fideicomiso Lazaro Cardenas

_________ 1983 La teoriacutea del desarrollo polarizado y la planeacioacuten del

desarrollo regional Boletin informativo del Instituto para el fomento de

la Planeacioacuten AC Mexico

_________ 1985 10 antildeos de los polos de desarrollo turistico en Mexico

experiencias y perspectivas Paper presented at the Anahuac University

Mexico City

_________ 1999 Cancun bliss In The Tourist City edited by Dennis R Judd

and Susan Fainstein 124-139 Yale University Press

_________ 2003 Turismo y sustentabilidad crisis de paradigmas y nuevas

orientaciones In Desarrollo turistico y sustentabilidad edited by

Salvador Gomez Nieves 57-70 Universidad de Guadalajara

Hiernaux Daniel and Manuel Rodriguez 1990 Tourism and absorption of the

labour force in Mexico Working paper for the commission for the study

of international migration and cooperative economic development no

34 3-23 Government of the United States of America

Hiernaux Daniel and Rino E Torres 2006 Desarrollo territorial en Mexico un

balance general In Poliacutetica territorial en Meacutexico Hacia un Modelo de


Mexico SEDESOL-UNAM

150

Hoffman Lily M Susan S Fainstein and Dennis R Judd 2003 Cities and

visitors In Cities and Visitors regulating people markets and city

space edited by Lily M Hoffman Sustan S Fainstein and Dennis R

Judd 1-19 John Wiley and Sons

Hoffman Peter R 2009 Tourism and language in Mexicos Los Cabos Journal

of Cultural Geography 12 no 2 77-92

Hutchison Ray 2000 Constructions of urban space Jai Press

Instituto Nacional de Estadistica Geografia e Informatica (INEGI) 2014 Censos

y conteos de poblacion y vivienda wwwinegiorgmxestcontenidos

Proyectosccpvdefaultaspx

Inskeep Edward 1988 Tourism planning an emerging specialization Journal

of the American Planning Association 54 no 3 (360-372)

Jacobs Jane 1961 The death and life of great American cities Random House

LLC

Jamal Tazim B and Donald Getz 1995 Collaboration theory and community

tourism planning Annals of Tourism Research 22 1186-204

Kaufman Susan and John FH Purcell 1980 State and society in Mexico must

a stable polity be institutionalized World Politics 32 no 2194-227

Lalli Marco 1992 Urban-related identity theory measurement and empirical

findings Journal of Environmental Psychology 12 285-313

Lefebvre Henri [1971] 1991 The production of space Oxford Blackwell

_________ 1976 The survival of capitalism reproduction of the relations of

production London Allison and Busby

151

Liu Abby and Geoffrey Wall 2006 Planning tourism employment a developing

country perspective Tourism Management 27159-170

Lopez-Lopez Alvaro and Alvaro Sanchez-Crispin 2002 Canales espaciales de

articulacion en el corredor turistico Los Cabos Baja California Sur

Mexico Cuadernos de Turismo 9 53-66

Lopez-Lopez Alvaro Judith Cukier and Alvaro Sanchez-Crispin 2006

Segregation of tourist space in Los Cabos Tourism Geographies 8 no

4 359-379

Luna Pedro 2004 Nayarit tres recorridos gastronomicos y algunos secretos del

fogon Universidad Autonoma de Nayarit

Lynch Kevin 1984 Good city form MIT press

MacCannell Dean 1973 Staged authenticity arrangements of social space in

tourist settings American Journal of Sociology 79 no 3589-603

_________ 2000 Symbolic capital Urban design for tourism Journeys 1 no

1 157-182

_________ 2002 The ego factor in tourism Journal of Consumer research 29

no 1 146-151

Madanipour Ali 2005 Design and development of public spaces In Designing

cities edited by Alexander R Cuthbert 139-151 Blackwell

Miles Steven 2010 Spaces for Consumption SAGE publications

Mojarro Octavio and German Beniacutetez 2010 El despoblamiento de los

municipios rurales de Mexico 2000-2005 Situacion Demografica de

Mexico CONAPO

152

Montemayor Rogeli 1983 El Sistema Nacional de Planeacioacuten Democraacutetica

Revista de Administracioacuten Puacuteblica 55 no 56 21-33

Norberg-Schulz Christian 2005 The phenomenon of place In Designing cities

edited by Alexander R Cuthbert 116-127

Olvera Alberto J 2010 The elusive democracy political parties democratic

institutions and civil society in Mexico Latin American Research Review

special issue 79-107

OToole P (2010) Locating space in qualitative research questioning culture

through the corporeal In New approaches to qualitative research

Wisdom and uncertainty edited by Maggi Savin-Baden and Claire

Howell Major 121-130 Routledge London and New York

OToole Paddy and Prisca Were 2008 Observing places using space and

material culture in qualitative research Qualitative research 8 no 5

616-634

Periodico Oficial del Estado de Nayarit (PON) 1999 Ley de Asentamientos

Humanos y Desarrollo Urbano para el Estado de Nayarit Nayarit H

Congreso del Estado

_________ 2005 Ley de fomento al turismo del estado de Nayarit Nayarit H

Congreso del Estado

_________ 2006 Plan Estatal de Desarrollo 2006-2011 Nayarit H Congreso

del Estado

_________ 2007 Declaratoria del corredor turistico Riviera Nayarit Nayarit H

Congreso del Estado

153

_________ 2008 Programa Estatal de Desarrollo Urbano Nayarit H Congreso

del Estado

_________ 2008a Programa de desarrollo regional costa norte Nayarit H

Congreso del Estado

_________ 2009 Programa Estatal de Desarrollo Turistico Nayarit H

Congreso del Estado

_________ 2010 Plan de Desarrollo Urbano de San Blas Nayarit Nayarit H

Congreso del Estado

_________ 2011 Plan de Desarrollo Municipal de San Blas Nayarit 2011-2014

Nayarit H Congreso del Estado


del Estado

Pradilla Emilio 1995 Los territorios latinoamericanos en la nueva fase de

internacionalizacion neoliberal Eure 21 no 63 57-68

_________ 1998 Fragmentacioacuten y exclusioacuten en la megalopolis mexicana

Nueva Sociedad 156 180-193

_________ 2009 Las politicas y la planeacion urbana el neoliberalismo In La

ciudad latinoamericana en el siglo XXI globalizacion neoliberalismo

planeacion edited by Peter C Brand 287-307 Medellin Universidad

Nacional de Colombia

Project for Public Spaces (PPS) 2001 How to turn a place around A handbook

for creating successful public spaces New York Project for Public

Spaces Inc

154

_________ 2013 What makes a successful place httpswwwppsorg

referencegrplacefeat

Relph Edward 1976 Place and Placelessness London Pion

Reyna Jose L 1977 Redefining the established authoritarian regime In

Authoritarianism in Mexico edited by Jose Luis Reyna and Richard S

Weinert Philadelphia Institute for the study of human issues

Rodman Margaret 1993 Beyond built form and culture in the anthropological

study of residential community spaces In The cultural meaning of urban

space edited by Robert L Rotenberg and Gary W McDonogh 123-138

ABC-CLIO

Rotenberg RL and Gary W McDonogh 1993The cultural meaning of urban

space ABC-CLIO

Ruiz Clemente 2006 Mexico redisentildeo estrategico nuevas regiones de

competitividad In Poliacutetica territorial en Meacutexico Hacia un Modelo de


Mexico SEDESOL-UNAM

Sanchez Cristina 2010 La participacion ciudadana In Los Grandes

Problemas de Mexico II Desarrollo Urbano y Regional edited by

Gustavo Garza and Martha Schteingart 617- 657 El Colegio de Mexico

Schultheisr Bob 1979 The quiet coast of Mexico Tropical paradise San Blas

Swim Surf or New York Times Jan 14

155

Scott Karen E 2012 A 21st century sustainable community discourses of local

wellbeing In Wellbeing and Place edited by Sarah Atkinson Joe

Painter and Sara Fuller 185-200 Ashgate publishing group

Seamon David 1984 Phenomenologies of environment and place

Phenomenology + Pedagogy 2 no2 130-135

Secretaria de Desarrollo Social (SEDESOL) 2001 Programa Nacional de

Desarrollo Urbano 2001-2006 Resumen Ejecutivo Mexico SEDESOL

Secretaria de Economia (SE) 2014 Inversion extranjera directa 1999-2013

httpwwweconomiagobmxfilescomunidad_negocios

estadistica_oficial_iedconteo_de_sociedades_1999-2013_240214xls

Secretaria del Medio Ambiente y Recursos Naturales (SEMARNAT) 2006

Politica Ambiental Nacional para el Desarrollo Sustentable de Oceanos y

Costas de Mexico Estrategias para su conservacion y uso sustentable

Mexico DF SEMARNAT

_________ 2012 Programa de Ordenamiento General del Territorio Mexico

DF SEMARNAT

Secretaria de Turismo (SECTUR) 1961 Plan Nacional de Desarrollo Turistico

Mexico SECTUR

_________ 1982 Plan Nacional de Turismo 1982-1988 Bases de formulacion

Mexico SECTUR

_________ 2013 Mision and vision statement accessed on January 6th 2013

httpsecturgobmxessectursect_9_vision_y_mision

Sen Amartya 1985 Commodities and Capabilities Amsterdam North-Holland

156

Shaw and Williams 2004 Tourism and tourism spaces Sage

Sifuentes E and Rosalva Arteaga 2010 Turismo migracion y cambio en los

mercados de trabajo agricolas Estudio de caso Costa sur de Nayarit

Revista Fuente 1 3 7-14

Smith Valene 1977 Hosts and Guests the Anthropology of Tourism University

of Pennsylvania Press Philadelphia

Sorkin Michael1992 Introduction Variations on a theme park In Variations on

a theme park the new american city and the end of public space edited

by Michael Sorkin New York Hill and Wang

Torres Rebecca and Janet Momsen 2005 Planned tourism development in

Quintana Roo Mexico Engine for regional development or prescription

for inequitable growth Current Issues in Tourism 8 no 4 259-285

Tuan Yi-Fu 1977 Space and place the perspective of experience U of

Minnesota Press

Unikel Luis 1975 Politicas de desarrollo regional en Mexico Demografia y

economia 9 no 2 143-181

United Nations 2012 Accessed February 5 http

sustainabledevelopmentunorg

United Nations World Tourism Organization (UNWTO) 2012 Accessed February

1st httpdtxtq4w60xqpwcloudfrontnetsitesallfilesdocpdf

fichaaboutunwtoenmarcpdf

Universidad Autonoma de Nayarit (UAN) 2009 Propuesta de programa de

ordenamiento ecologico regional de los municipios de Bahia de Bandera

157

Compostela y San Blas Nayarit Nayarit Secretaria del Medio Ambiente-

UAN

Urry John 1990 The consumption of tourism Sociology 24 no 1 23-35

Whyte William H 1980 The social life of small urban spaces Washington

Conservation foundation

Yin Robert K 2003 Case study research Design and methods Thousand

Oaks CA Sage

Young Ruth C 1977 The structural concept of the Caribbean tourist industry A

comparative study Econ Dev Cult Change 25657-671

Ziccardi Alicia 2006 La participacion ciudadana en los procesos de planeacion

y gestion del territorio In Poliacutetica territorial en Meacutexico Hacia un Modelo

de desarrollo basado en el territorio edited by Javier Delgadillo Maciacuteas

Mexico SEDESOL-UNAM

Zukin Sharon 2005 The urban landscape In Designing cities critical readings

on urban design edited by Alexander R Cuthbert 177-188 Blackwell

publishing

158

APPENDICES

Appendix A San Blas Municipalityhelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip160

Appendix B Sample questions for interview

to governmental officershelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip161

Appendix C Main roads in San Blas Townhelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip162

Appendix DSymbiosis of informal food

stalls and current land useshelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip163

Appendix E Seasonal dwellingshelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip164

Appendix F Location of fishing related enterpriseshelliphelliphelliphelliphellip165

Appendix G Tourist corridorhelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip166

Appendix H Tourist land-uses and inaccessible roads location167

Appendix I Migration Emigration and immigrationhelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip168

Appendix J Educational attainmenthelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphelliphellip169

Appendix K Population younger than 14 years oldhelliphelliphelliphelliphellip170

159

Appendix A


160

Appendix B

Sample Questions for Interview to Governmental Officers

1How would you describe San Blas

2What are the assets existing in San Blas

3What do you think San Blas is missing Why

4From your Secretariat perspective what kind of future development do you foresee in

San Blas area

5What kind of activities are feasible for San Blas

6How do you think tourism will affect such development

7How do you envision a more developed San Blas Why

8What are the measures being taken in order to accomplish a more developed San

Blas

9How long will it take

10How are tourism related policies addressing development in San Blas

11What kind of tourism

12What are the obstacles you see for the successful implementation of such policies

13Why are these obstacles

14How to overcome them

15What is your opinion about ramada businesses on the beach what is their role in the

development process

16What are the adverse effects that tourism development might bring to the local

population

17 Any mitigation measures

161

Appendix C

Main Roads in San Blas Town

Compiled by author with INEGI 2014 data

162

Appendix D

Symbiosis of Informal food stalls and Existing Land-uses


163

Appendix E

Seasonal Dwellings


164

Appendix F

Location of Fishing-related Establishments


165

Appendix G

Tourist Corridor

Compiled by author with FONATUR 2005 data

166

Appendix H

Touristic Land-uses and Inaccessible Road Location

Compiled by author with FONATUR 2005 and INEGI 2014 data

167

Appendix I

Migration Emigration and Immigration

Lower Immigration rates Higher

NORTH

Compiled by author with INEGI 2014 data1 km 2 km


1 km 2 km

NORTH


168

Appendix J

Educational Attainment

NORTH

EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT

Primary education

Compulsory education

Secondary education

Post-secondary education


500 m 1 km

169

Appendix K

Population younger than 14 years old

NORTH

500 m 1 km Compiled by author with INEGI 2014 data

170

Title Page

Abstract

Acknowledgements

Table of Contents

Chapter 1 Introduction Planning and Place

11 Positionality



131 Defining Tourism-Development-Planning

132 Place

14 Methods




144 Spatial visualization of census data and mapping techniques



15 Limitations


Chapter 2 Emergence of the TDP Paradigm in Mexico



23 Peoples role in the TDP Process




242 Urban model of tourism enclaves The examples of Cancun and Los Cabos

25 Conclusion

Chapter 3 A Critical Look at TDP Case Study of San Blas Nayarit Mexico



312 Cultural features



331 Demographic and Economic realities



Chapter 4 Discussion Socio-spatial Implications of TDP




413 Spatial gaps Comfort and Image



421 Perceived space

422 Conceived space

423 Lived space


Chapter 5 Conclusions

51 Framework to evaluate the potential of a TDP strategy to support peoples quality of life



54 Recommendations

55 Further Research

List of Tables

List of Figures

List of Abbreviations

Reference List

Appendices

Appendix A

Appendix B

Appendix C

Appendix D

Appendix F

Appendix E

Appendix G

Appendix H

Appendix I

Appendix J

Appendix K

UNIVERSITY OF CALGARY

The Place of Planners in Tourism-Development-Planning

A Case Study of San Blas Mexico

by

Ximena M Gonzalez De Aguinaga

A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES IN

PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE

OF MASTER OF ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGN

FACULTY OF ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGN

CALGARY ALBERTA

APRIL 2014

copy Ximena M Gonzalez De Aguinaga

ABSTRACT











ii

I

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS











iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS







Chapter 1















iv



Chapter 2













Chapter 3








v




Chapter 4












Chapter 5








vi



vii

LIST OF TABLES








viii

LIST OF FIGURES






















ix
























x
























xi























xii








xiii
























1











Planning (TDP)

11 Positionality











2























3

















Mexico


research questions





4




community



















5




















6
























7
























8
























9





Schulz 2005)







132 Place











10










political practices













1976 Tuan 1977)

11
























12
























13



in tourism








14 Methods






observation




14























15


of others





















16
























17























18







Chapter 3















19








(federal)





(state)


(state)








20









lead is referenced















21












15 Limitations










22












with them




attitudes







23












chapter










Blas

24





25


Paradigm in Mexico







local scale













26



NORTH

Loreto

















27
























28







70

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Po

pula

tio

n P

erc

enta

ge

1970 1980 1990 2000 2010












29























30


2006)






















31























32
























33






2013)













119120)





34













1982 FONATUR 2006)











35
















36























37








1983) as
















38
























39












40




















Purcell 1980)




41























42






















43












2004b)












44























45


















FEDDERAL

Office Document


Management


Development


STATE

Office Document


Plan


46






2001 FONATUR 2006)
















47
























48














Cabos






expected results



49




1980 1990 2000 2010


Quintana Roo 9784 9865 9907 9678







1990-2000 2000-2010 1995-2000 2000-2005 2005-2010


Quintana Roo




0

100

200

300

400

0

250

500

750

1000

1250

1500

50

0

25

50

75

100

Perc

enta

ge o

f D

welli

ng

s









1990 2000 2005 1990 2000 2005 1990 2000 2010


Cancun












51























52
























53







Tourist Zone

Urban Zone









54
















Aldape 2010)








55























56










25 Conclusion













57








58


Mexico






















59




















60























NORTH

Mexico

Nayarit

Nayarit


San Blas Town




San Blas Town

Tepic

O

O

O

O


500 km 1000 km

61










events














NORTH

El Pozo River

3 2 1

5 4 6

7




62









63




64

















65








Fig 20 Gross GDP

$200000000

$180000000

$160000000

$140000000

$120000000

$100000000

$80000000

$60000000

$40000000

$20000000

$0








MX

P

1995 2000 2005 2010

66


10

20

30

40

50

60

70 1998 2003 2008









100

80

60

40

20


2000 2005 2010 2013


67








90

92

94

96

98

100

20

40

60

80

Po

pula

tio

n P

erc

enta

ge


1990 2000 2010 2000 2010


7000

7750

8500

9250

10000




68









0393

0436

0479

0521

0564

0607

0650

GN

I In

dex

040

045

050

055

060

GN

I In

dex

035 1990 2000 2010

0350 1990 2000 2010

Mexico San Blas



Sur








69










61 258 85 91 104


86 340 34 20 37


512 442 214 122 33













70














success








community

71























quality of life

72















500

0

167

333

-167 1920-1930 1930-1940 1940-1950 1950-1960 1960-1970 1970-1980 1980-1990 1990-2000 2000-2010



73







1990

2000

2010

0 20 40 60 80 100

lt19 20-39 40-59 gt60











74









2000

2010



0 20 40 60 80 100








75


0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

2000 2010


30

25

20

15

10

5









76

Economic profile












0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

1970 1990 2000







77
















Nayarit

100

200

300

400


0 1990 2000 2010


78














2014)










79


















80


90

75

60

45

30

15



Hospitality Sector





20

15

10

5

0 1996 2001 2005 2009





81


0

20000

40000

60000

80000

100000

1995 2010

Gro

ss N

um

ber

of

Vis

ito

rs


















82






SEDESOL SOP







SEMARNAT







83








4

2 1







(SEMARNAT 2006)

84























85

FONATUR








In order to






34)








(FONATUR 2005 2006)

86




Cultural Assets

El Borrego Beach

Marina

El Pozo River

San Basilio Hill

El Vigia Hill

La Marinera Church


Aduana Building

Garita Building

Plaza Principal

Lighthouse

Charming people

Cuisine

History















87














88






nd Nayarit 2009)






89









food service


90













91

















92
























NORTH

Pacific Ocean

El Pozo River



93








for locals



94

















1999)







95
























NORTH



96




URBAN PLANNERS

COMPLIES













97






and their families


















NORTH

El Pozo River

RESIDENTIAL ZONING



Pacific Ocean



98






1 2

MIXED-USE ZONING


NORTH

Pacific Ocean

El Pozo River







TOURISTIC ZONING

Minimum density

Low density

Medium density

Marina

Malecon

Theme park

500 m 1 km



NORTH



99
























100























101























102






















103
























104





















105























106























107













Sense






(Lynch 1984)

108










109
























110






establishments


















(2005) data

111





locations







features (Map 12)











500 m 1 km

NORTH

DATE OF SETTLEMENT

XVIII Century

XIX Century

1900-1970

1970-2005

2005

2011

Pacific Ocean

El Pozo River


112

























113
























114


















115












Blas

116






and Fig 62)


117















118




20th centuries










119


influences

















66)

120


121























122
















123
























124











125

421 Perceived space













charts and graphics

422 Conceived space








126








423 Lived space














127























128








for another
















129


planning strategy



















130















Plan 2012-2018









131
















132













residents











133























134


three primary steps




















environment

135








such ambiguous data















136








54 Recommendations











TDP




137






55 Further Research

















138















139

REFERENCE LIST
















Routledge


design 7 no 2 201-212



179-193

140














Autonoma de Sinaloa




19 no 3 475-503





141





Review 19 no 1 106-124







4 500-520











Peru

142















Mexico DF CONAPO






CONEVAL



143



















California




144

















Unioacuten


Unioacuten


de la Union



145


Unioacuten





















Review 35 no 4 451-478

146













1089-1103







Mexico SEDESOL-UNAM




147



157-180






463-496




Mexico










148


Littlefield


Press













York Harper and Row





149









Mexico City













Mexico SEDESOL-UNAM

150














LLC










151








4 359-379







1 157-182


no 1 146-151






Mexico CONAPO

152














616-634



Congreso del Estado


Congreso del Estado


del Estado


Congreso del Estado

153


del Estado


Congreso del Estado


Congreso del Estado


Congreso del Estado




del Estado











Spaces Inc

154










ABC-CLIO


space ABC-CLIO




Mexico SEDESOL-UNAM






155














Mexico DF SEMARNAT


DF SEMARNAT


Mexico SECTUR


Mexico SECTUR




156














Minnesota Press










157


UAN





Oaks CA Sage






Mexico SEDESOL-UNAM



publishing

158

APPENDICES














159

Appendix A


160

Appendix B






San Blas area





Blas








development process


population


161

Appendix C



162

Appendix D



163

Appendix E

Seasonal Dwellings


164

Appendix F



165

Appendix G

Tourist Corridor


166

Appendix H



167

Appendix I



NORTH



1 km 2 km

NORTH


168

Appendix J


NORTH


Primary education


Secondary education



500 m 1 km

169

Appendix K


NORTH


170

Title Page

Abstract

Acknowledgements

Table of Contents


11 Positionality




132 Place

14 Methods







15 Limitations










25 Conclusion

















421 Perceived space

422 Conceived space

423 Lived space






54 Recommendations

55 Further Research

List of Tables

List of Figures


Reference List

Appendices

Appendix A

Appendix B

Appendix C

Appendix D

Appendix F

Appendix E

Appendix G

Appendix H

Appendix I

Appendix J

Appendix K

ABSTRACT











ii

I

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS











iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS







Chapter 1















iv



Chapter 2













Chapter 3








v




Chapter 4












Chapter 5








vi



vii

LIST OF TABLES








viii

LIST OF FIGURES






















ix
























x
























xi























xii








xiii
























1











Planning (TDP)

11 Positionality











2























3

















Mexico


research questions





4




community



















5




















6
























7
























8
























9





Schulz 2005)







132 Place











10










political practices













1976 Tuan 1977)

11
























12
























13



in tourism








14 Methods






observation




14























15


of others





















16
























17























18







Chapter 3















19








(federal)





(state)


(state)








20









lead is referenced















21












15 Limitations










22












with them




attitudes







23












chapter










Blas

24





25


Paradigm in Mexico







local scale













26



NORTH

Loreto

















27
























28







70

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Po

pula

tio

n P

erc

enta

ge

1970 1980 1990 2000 2010












29























30


2006)






















31























32
























33






2013)













119120)





34













1982 FONATUR 2006)











35
















36























37








1983) as
















38
























39












40




















Purcell 1980)




41























42






















43












2004b)












44























45


















FEDDERAL

Office Document


Management


Development


STATE

Office Document


Plan


46






2001 FONATUR 2006)
















47
























48














Cabos






expected results



49




1980 1990 2000 2010


Quintana Roo 9784 9865 9907 9678







1990-2000 2000-2010 1995-2000 2000-2005 2005-2010


Quintana Roo




0

100

200

300

400

0

250

500

750

1000

1250

1500

50

0

25

50

75

100

Perc

enta

ge o

f D

welli

ng

s









1990 2000 2005 1990 2000 2005 1990 2000 2010


Cancun












51























52
























53







Tourist Zone

Urban Zone









54
















Aldape 2010)








55























56










25 Conclusion













57








58


Mexico






















59




















60























NORTH

Mexico

Nayarit

Nayarit


San Blas Town




San Blas Town

Tepic

O

O

O

O


500 km 1000 km

61










events














NORTH

El Pozo River

3 2 1

5 4 6

7




62









63




64

















65








Fig 20 Gross GDP

$200000000

$180000000

$160000000

$140000000

$120000000

$100000000

$80000000

$60000000

$40000000

$20000000

$0








MX

P

1995 2000 2005 2010

66


10

20

30

40

50

60

70 1998 2003 2008









100

80

60

40

20


2000 2005 2010 2013


67








90

92

94

96

98

100

20

40

60

80

Po

pula

tio

n P

erc

enta

ge


1990 2000 2010 2000 2010


7000

7750

8500

9250

10000




68









0393

0436

0479

0521

0564

0607

0650

GN

I In

dex

040

045

050

055

060

GN

I In

dex

035 1990 2000 2010

0350 1990 2000 2010

Mexico San Blas



Sur








69










61 258 85 91 104


86 340 34 20 37


512 442 214 122 33













70














success








community

71























quality of life

72















500

0

167

333

-167 1920-1930 1930-1940 1940-1950 1950-1960 1960-1970 1970-1980 1980-1990 1990-2000 2000-2010



73







1990

2000

2010

0 20 40 60 80 100

lt19 20-39 40-59 gt60











74









2000

2010



0 20 40 60 80 100








75


0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

2000 2010


30

25

20

15

10

5









76

Economic profile












0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

1970 1990 2000







77
















Nayarit

100

200

300

400


0 1990 2000 2010


78














2014)










79


















80


90

75

60

45

30

15



Hospitality Sector





20

15

10

5

0 1996 2001 2005 2009





81


0

20000

40000

60000

80000

100000

1995 2010

Gro

ss N

um

ber

of

Vis

ito

rs


















82






SEDESOL SOP







SEMARNAT







83








4

2 1







(SEMARNAT 2006)

84























85

FONATUR








In order to






34)








(FONATUR 2005 2006)

86




Cultural Assets

El Borrego Beach

Marina

El Pozo River

San Basilio Hill

El Vigia Hill

La Marinera Church


Aduana Building

Garita Building

Plaza Principal

Lighthouse

Charming people

Cuisine

History















87














88






nd Nayarit 2009)






89









food service


90













91

















92
























NORTH

Pacific Ocean

El Pozo River



93








for locals



94

















1999)







95
























NORTH



96




URBAN PLANNERS

COMPLIES













97






and their families


















NORTH

El Pozo River

RESIDENTIAL ZONING



Pacific Ocean



98






1 2

MIXED-USE ZONING


NORTH

Pacific Ocean

El Pozo River







TOURISTIC ZONING

Minimum density

Low density

Medium density

Marina

Malecon

Theme park

500 m 1 km



NORTH



99
























100























101























102






















103
























104





















105























106























107













Sense






(Lynch 1984)

108










109
























110






establishments


















(2005) data

111





locations







features (Map 12)











500 m 1 km

NORTH

DATE OF SETTLEMENT

XVIII Century

XIX Century

1900-1970

1970-2005

2005

2011

Pacific Ocean

El Pozo River


112

























113
























114


















115












Blas

116






and Fig 62)


117















118




20th centuries










119


influences

















66)

120


121























122
















123
























124











125

421 Perceived space













charts and graphics

422 Conceived space








126








423 Lived space














127























128








for another
















129


planning strategy



















130















Plan 2012-2018









131
















132













residents











133























134


three primary steps




















environment

135








such ambiguous data















136








54 Recommendations











TDP




137






55 Further Research

















138















139

REFERENCE LIST
















Routledge


design 7 no 2 201-212



179-193

140














Autonoma de Sinaloa




19 no 3 475-503





141





Review 19 no 1 106-124







4 500-520











Peru

142















Mexico DF CONAPO






CONEVAL



143



















California




144

















Unioacuten


Unioacuten


de la Union



145


Unioacuten





















Review 35 no 4 451-478

146













1089-1103







Mexico SEDESOL-UNAM




147



157-180






463-496




Mexico










148


Littlefield


Press













York Harper and Row





149









Mexico City













Mexico SEDESOL-UNAM

150














LLC










151








4 359-379







1 157-182


no 1 146-151






Mexico CONAPO

152














616-634



Congreso del Estado


Congreso del Estado


del Estado


Congreso del Estado

153


del Estado


Congreso del Estado


Congreso del Estado


Congreso del Estado




del Estado











Spaces Inc

154










ABC-CLIO


space ABC-CLIO




Mexico SEDESOL-UNAM






155














Mexico DF SEMARNAT


DF SEMARNAT


Mexico SECTUR


Mexico SECTUR




156














Minnesota Press










157


UAN





Oaks CA Sage






Mexico SEDESOL-UNAM



publishing

158

APPENDICES














159

Appendix A


160

Appendix B






San Blas area





Blas








development process


population


161

Appendix C



162

Appendix D



163

Appendix E

Seasonal Dwellings


164

Appendix F



165

Appendix G

Tourist Corridor


166

Appendix H



167

Appendix I



NORTH



1 km 2 km

NORTH


168

Appendix J


NORTH


Primary education


Secondary education



500 m 1 km

169

Appendix K


NORTH


170

Title Page

Abstract

Acknowledgements

Table of Contents


11 Positionality




132 Place

14 Methods







15 Limitations










25 Conclusion

















421 Perceived space

422 Conceived space

423 Lived space






54 Recommendations

55 Further Research

List of Tables

List of Figures


Reference List

Appendices

Appendix A

Appendix B

Appendix C

Appendix D

Appendix F

Appendix E

Appendix G

Appendix H

Appendix I

Appendix J

Appendix K

I

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS











iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS







Chapter 1















iv



Chapter 2













Chapter 3








v




Chapter 4












Chapter 5








vi



vii

LIST OF TABLES








viii

LIST OF FIGURES






















ix
























x
























xi























xii








xiii
























1











Planning (TDP)

11 Positionality











2























3

















Mexico


research questions





4




community



















5




















6
























7
























8
























9





Schulz 2005)







132 Place











10










political practices













1976 Tuan 1977)

11
























12
























13



in tourism








14 Methods






observation




14























15


of others





















16
























17























18







Chapter 3















19








(federal)





(state)


(state)








20









lead is referenced















21












15 Limitations










22












with them




attitudes







23












chapter










Blas

24





25


Paradigm in Mexico







local scale













26



NORTH

Loreto

















27
























28







70

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Po

pula

tio

n P

erc

enta

ge

1970 1980 1990 2000 2010












29























30


2006)






















31























32
























33






2013)













119120)





34













1982 FONATUR 2006)











35
















36























37








1983) as
















38
























39












40




















Purcell 1980)




41























42






















43












2004b)












44























45


















FEDDERAL

Office Document


Management


Development


STATE

Office Document


Plan


46






2001 FONATUR 2006)
















47
























48














Cabos






expected results



49




1980 1990 2000 2010


Quintana Roo 9784 9865 9907 9678







1990-2000 2000-2010 1995-2000 2000-2005 2005-2010


Quintana Roo




0

100

200

300

400

0

250

500

750

1000

1250

1500

50

0

25

50

75

100

Perc

enta

ge o

f D

welli

ng

s









1990 2000 2005 1990 2000 2005 1990 2000 2010


Cancun












51























52
























53







Tourist Zone

Urban Zone









54
















Aldape 2010)








55























56










25 Conclusion













57








58


Mexico






















59




















60























NORTH

Mexico

Nayarit

Nayarit


San Blas Town




San Blas Town

Tepic

O

O

O

O


500 km 1000 km

61










events














NORTH

El Pozo River

3 2 1

5 4 6

7




62









63




64

















65








Fig 20 Gross GDP

$200000000

$180000000

$160000000

$140000000

$120000000

$100000000

$80000000

$60000000

$40000000

$20000000

$0








MX

P

1995 2000 2005 2010

66


10

20

30

40

50

60

70 1998 2003 2008









100

80

60

40

20


2000 2005 2010 2013


67








90

92

94

96

98

100

20

40

60

80

Po

pula

tio

n P

erc

enta

ge


1990 2000 2010 2000 2010


7000

7750

8500

9250

10000




68









0393

0436

0479

0521

0564

0607

0650

GN

I In

dex

040

045

050

055

060

GN

I In

dex

035 1990 2000 2010

0350 1990 2000 2010

Mexico San Blas



Sur








69










61 258 85 91 104


86 340 34 20 37


512 442 214 122 33













70














success








community

71























quality of life

72















500

0

167

333

-167 1920-1930 1930-1940 1940-1950 1950-1960 1960-1970 1970-1980 1980-1990 1990-2000 2000-2010



73







1990

2000

2010

0 20 40 60 80 100

lt19 20-39 40-59 gt60











74









2000

2010



0 20 40 60 80 100








75


0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

2000 2010


30

25

20

15

10

5









76

Economic profile












0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

1970 1990 2000







77
















Nayarit

100

200

300

400


0 1990 2000 2010


78














2014)










79


















80


90

75

60

45

30

15



Hospitality Sector





20

15

10

5

0 1996 2001 2005 2009





81


0

20000

40000

60000

80000

100000

1995 2010

Gro

ss N

um

ber

of

Vis

ito

rs


















82






SEDESOL SOP







SEMARNAT







83








4

2 1







(SEMARNAT 2006)

84























85

FONATUR








In order to






34)








(FONATUR 2005 2006)

86




Cultural Assets

El Borrego Beach

Marina

El Pozo River

San Basilio Hill

El Vigia Hill

La Marinera Church


Aduana Building

Garita Building

Plaza Principal

Lighthouse

Charming people

Cuisine

History















87














88






nd Nayarit 2009)






89









food service


90













91

















92
























NORTH

Pacific Ocean

El Pozo River



93








for locals



94

















1999)







95
























NORTH



96




URBAN PLANNERS

COMPLIES













97






and their families


















NORTH

El Pozo River

RESIDENTIAL ZONING



Pacific Ocean



98






1 2

MIXED-USE ZONING


NORTH

Pacific Ocean

El Pozo River







TOURISTIC ZONING

Minimum density

Low density

Medium density

Marina

Malecon

Theme park

500 m 1 km



NORTH



99
























100























101























102






















103
























104





















105























106























107













Sense






(Lynch 1984)

108










109
























110






establishments


















(2005) data

111





locations







features (Map 12)











500 m 1 km

NORTH

DATE OF SETTLEMENT

XVIII Century

XIX Century

1900-1970

1970-2005

2005

2011

Pacific Ocean

El Pozo River


112

























113
























114


















115












Blas

116






and Fig 62)


117















118




20th centuries










119


influences

















66)

120


121























122
















123
























124











125

421 Perceived space













charts and graphics

422 Conceived space








126








423 Lived space














127























128








for another
















129


planning strategy



















130















Plan 2012-2018









131
















132













residents











133























134


three primary steps




















environment

135








such ambiguous data















136








54 Recommendations











TDP




137






55 Further Research

















138















139

REFERENCE LIST
















Routledge


design 7 no 2 201-212



179-193

140














Autonoma de Sinaloa




19 no 3 475-503





141





Review 19 no 1 106-124







4 500-520











Peru

142















Mexico DF CONAPO






CONEVAL



143



















California




144

















Unioacuten


Unioacuten


de la Union



145


Unioacuten





















Review 35 no 4 451-478

146













1089-1103







Mexico SEDESOL-UNAM




147



157-180






463-496




Mexico










148


Littlefield


Press













York Harper and Row





149









Mexico City













Mexico SEDESOL-UNAM

150














LLC










151








4 359-379







1 157-182


no 1 146-151






Mexico CONAPO

152














616-634



Congreso del Estado


Congreso del Estado


del Estado


Congreso del Estado

153


del Estado


Congreso del Estado


Congreso del Estado


Congreso del Estado




del Estado











Spaces Inc

154










ABC-CLIO


space ABC-CLIO




Mexico SEDESOL-UNAM






155














Mexico DF SEMARNAT


DF SEMARNAT


Mexico SECTUR


Mexico SECTUR




156














Minnesota Press










157


UAN





Oaks CA Sage






Mexico SEDESOL-UNAM



publishing

158

APPENDICES














159

Appendix A


160

Appendix B






San Blas area





Blas








development process


population


161

Appendix C



162

Appendix D



163

Appendix E

Seasonal Dwellings


164

Appendix F



165

Appendix G

Tourist Corridor


166

Appendix H



167

Appendix I



NORTH



1 km 2 km

NORTH


168

Appendix J


NORTH


Primary education


Secondary education



500 m 1 km

169

Appendix K


NORTH


170

Title Page

Abstract

Acknowledgements

Table of Contents


11 Positionality




132 Place

14 Methods







15 Limitations










25 Conclusion

















421 Perceived space

422 Conceived space

423 Lived space






54 Recommendations

55 Further Research

List of Tables

List of Figures


Reference List

Appendices

Appendix A

Appendix B

Appendix C

Appendix D

Appendix F

Appendix E

Appendix G

Appendix H

Appendix I

Appendix J

Appendix K

TABLE OF CONTENTS







Chapter 1















iv



Chapter 2













Chapter 3








v




Chapter 4












Chapter 5








vi



vii

LIST OF TABLES








viii

LIST OF FIGURES






















ix
























x
























xi























xii








xiii
























1











Planning (TDP)

11 Positionality











2























3

















Mexico


research questions





4




community



















5




















6
























7
























8
























9





Schulz 2005)







132 Place











10










political practices













1976 Tuan 1977)

11
























12
























13



in tourism








14 Methods






observation




14























15


of others





















16
























17























18







Chapter 3















19








(federal)





(state)


(state)








20









lead is referenced















21












15 Limitations










22












with them




attitudes







23












chapter










Blas

24





25


Paradigm in Mexico







local scale













26



NORTH

Loreto

















27
























28







70

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Po

pula

tio

n P

erc

enta

ge

1970 1980 1990 2000 2010












29























30


2006)






















31























32
























33






2013)













119120)





34













1982 FONATUR 2006)











35
















36























37








1983) as
















38
























39












40




















Purcell 1980)




41























42






















43












2004b)












44























45


















FEDDERAL

Office Document


Management


Development


STATE

Office Document


Plan


46






2001 FONATUR 2006)
















47
























48














Cabos






expected results



49




1980 1990 2000 2010


Quintana Roo 9784 9865 9907 9678







1990-2000 2000-2010 1995-2000 2000-2005 2005-2010


Quintana Roo




0

100

200

300

400

0

250

500

750

1000

1250

1500

50

0

25

50

75

100

Perc

enta

ge o

f D

welli

ng

s









1990 2000 2005 1990 2000 2005 1990 2000 2010


Cancun












51























52
























53







Tourist Zone

Urban Zone









54
















Aldape 2010)








55























56










25 Conclusion













57








58


Mexico






















59




















60























NORTH

Mexico

Nayarit

Nayarit


San Blas Town




San Blas Town

Tepic

O

O

O

O


500 km 1000 km

61










events














NORTH

El Pozo River

3 2 1

5 4 6

7




62









63




64

















65








Fig 20 Gross GDP

$200000000

$180000000

$160000000

$140000000

$120000000

$100000000

$80000000

$60000000

$40000000

$20000000

$0








MX

P

1995 2000 2005 2010

66


10

20

30

40

50

60

70 1998 2003 2008









100

80

60

40

20


2000 2005 2010 2013


67








90

92

94

96

98

100

20

40

60

80

Po

pula

tio

n P

erc

enta

ge


1990 2000 2010 2000 2010


7000

7750

8500

9250

10000




68









0393

0436

0479

0521

0564

0607

0650

GN

I In

dex

040

045

050

055

060

GN

I In

dex

035 1990 2000 2010

0350 1990 2000 2010

Mexico San Blas



Sur








69










61 258 85 91 104


86 340 34 20 37


512 442 214 122 33













70














success








community

71























quality of life

72















500

0

167

333

-167 1920-1930 1930-1940 1940-1950 1950-1960 1960-1970 1970-1980 1980-1990 1990-2000 2000-2010



73







1990

2000

2010

0 20 40 60 80 100

lt19 20-39 40-59 gt60











74









2000

2010



0 20 40 60 80 100








75


0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

2000 2010


30

25

20

15

10

5









76

Economic profile












0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

1970 1990 2000







77
















Nayarit

100

200

300

400


0 1990 2000 2010


78














2014)










79


















80


90

75

60

45

30

15



Hospitality Sector





20

15

10

5

0 1996 2001 2005 2009





81


0

20000

40000

60000

80000

100000

1995 2010

Gro

ss N

um

ber

of

Vis

ito

rs


















82






SEDESOL SOP







SEMARNAT







83








4

2 1







(SEMARNAT 2006)

84























85

FONATUR








In order to






34)








(FONATUR 2005 2006)

86




Cultural Assets

El Borrego Beach

Marina

El Pozo River

San Basilio Hill

El Vigia Hill

La Marinera Church


Aduana Building

Garita Building

Plaza Principal

Lighthouse

Charming people

Cuisine

History















87














88






nd Nayarit 2009)






89









food service


90













91

















92
























NORTH

Pacific Ocean

El Pozo River



93








for locals



94

















1999)







95
























NORTH



96




URBAN PLANNERS

COMPLIES













97






and their families


















NORTH

El Pozo River

RESIDENTIAL ZONING



Pacific Ocean



98






1 2

MIXED-USE ZONING


NORTH

Pacific Ocean

El Pozo River







TOURISTIC ZONING

Minimum density

Low density

Medium density

Marina

Malecon

Theme park

500 m 1 km



NORTH



99
























100























101























102






















103
























104





















105























106























107













Sense






(Lynch 1984)

108










109
























110






establishments


















(2005) data

111





locations







features (Map 12)











500 m 1 km

NORTH

DATE OF SETTLEMENT

XVIII Century

XIX Century

1900-1970

1970-2005

2005

2011

Pacific Ocean

El Pozo River


112

























113
























114


















115












Blas

116






and Fig 62)


117















118




20th centuries










119


influences

















66)

120


121























122
















123
























124











125

421 Perceived space













charts and graphics

422 Conceived space








126








423 Lived space














127























128








for another
















129


planning strategy



















130















Plan 2012-2018









131
















132













residents











133























134


three primary steps




















environment

135








such ambiguous data















136








54 Recommendations











TDP




137






55 Further Research

















138















139

REFERENCE LIST
















Routledge


design 7 no 2 201-212



179-193

140














Autonoma de Sinaloa




19 no 3 475-503





141





Review 19 no 1 106-124







4 500-520











Peru

142















Mexico DF CONAPO






CONEVAL



143



















California




144

















Unioacuten


Unioacuten


de la Union



145


Unioacuten





















Review 35 no 4 451-478

146













1089-1103







Mexico SEDESOL-UNAM




147



157-180






463-496




Mexico










148


Littlefield


Press













York Harper and Row





149









Mexico City













Mexico SEDESOL-UNAM

150














LLC










151








4 359-379







1 157-182


no 1 146-151






Mexico CONAPO

152














616-634



Congreso del Estado


Congreso del Estado


del Estado


Congreso del Estado

153


del Estado


Congreso del Estado


Congreso del Estado


Congreso del Estado




del Estado











Spaces Inc

154










ABC-CLIO


space ABC-CLIO




Mexico SEDESOL-UNAM






155














Mexico DF SEMARNAT


DF SEMARNAT


Mexico SECTUR


Mexico SECTUR




156














Minnesota Press










157


UAN





Oaks CA Sage






Mexico SEDESOL-UNAM



publishing

158

APPENDICES














159

Appendix A


160

Appendix B






San Blas area





Blas








development process


population


161

Appendix C



162

Appendix D



163

Appendix E

Seasonal Dwellings


164

Appendix F



165

Appendix G

Tourist Corridor


166

Appendix H



167

Appendix I



NORTH



1 km 2 km

NORTH


168

Appendix J


NORTH


Primary education


Secondary education



500 m 1 km

169

Appendix K


NORTH


170

Title Page

Abstract

Acknowledgements

Table of Contents


11 Positionality




132 Place

14 Methods







15 Limitations










25 Conclusion

















421 Perceived space

422 Conceived space

423 Lived space






54 Recommendations

55 Further Research

List of Tables

List of Figures


Reference List

Appendices

Appendix A

Appendix B

Appendix C

Appendix D

Appendix F

Appendix E

Appendix G

Appendix H

Appendix I

Appendix J

Appendix K



Chapter 2













Chapter 3








v




Chapter 4












Chapter 5








vi



vii

LIST OF TABLES








viii

LIST OF FIGURES






















ix
























x
























xi























xii








xiii
























1











Planning (TDP)

11 Positionality











2























3

















Mexico


research questions





4




community



















5




















6
























7
























8
























9





Schulz 2005)







132 Place











10










political practices













1976 Tuan 1977)

11
























12
























13



in tourism








14 Methods






observation




14























15


of others





















16
























17























18







Chapter 3















19








(federal)





(state)


(state)








20









lead is referenced















21












15 Limitations










22












with them




attitudes







23












chapter










Blas

24





25


Paradigm in Mexico







local scale













26



NORTH

Loreto

















27
























28







70

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Po

pula

tio

n P

erc

enta

ge

1970 1980 1990 2000 2010












29























30


2006)






















31























32
























33






2013)













119120)





34













1982 FONATUR 2006)











35
















36























37








1983) as
















38
























39












40




















Purcell 1980)




41























42






















43












2004b)












44























45


















FEDDERAL

Office Document


Management


Development


STATE

Office Document


Plan


46






2001 FONATUR 2006)
















47
























48














Cabos






expected results



49




1980 1990 2000 2010


Quintana Roo 9784 9865 9907 9678







1990-2000 2000-2010 1995-2000 2000-2005 2005-2010


Quintana Roo




0

100

200

300

400

0

250

500

750

1000

1250

1500

50

0

25

50

75

100

Perc

enta

ge o

f D

welli

ng

s









1990 2000 2005 1990 2000 2005 1990 2000 2010


Cancun












51























52
























53







Tourist Zone

Urban Zone









54
















Aldape 2010)








55























56










25 Conclusion













57








58


Mexico






















59




















60























NORTH

Mexico

Nayarit

Nayarit


San Blas Town




San Blas Town

Tepic

O

O

O

O


500 km 1000 km

61










events














NORTH

El Pozo River

3 2 1

5 4 6

7




62









63




64

















65








Fig 20 Gross GDP

$200000000

$180000000

$160000000

$140000000

$120000000

$100000000

$80000000

$60000000

$40000000

$20000000

$0








MX

P

1995 2000 2005 2010

66


10

20

30

40

50

60

70 1998 2003 2008









100

80

60

40

20


2000 2005 2010 2013


67








90

92

94

96

98

100

20

40

60

80

Po

pula

tio

n P

erc

enta

ge


1990 2000 2010 2000 2010


7000

7750

8500

9250

10000




68









0393

0436

0479

0521

0564

0607

0650

GN

I In

dex

040

045

050

055

060

GN

I In

dex

035 1990 2000 2010

0350 1990 2000 2010

Mexico San Blas



Sur








69










61 258 85 91 104


86 340 34 20 37


512 442 214 122 33













70














success








community

71























quality of life

72















500

0

167

333

-167 1920-1930 1930-1940 1940-1950 1950-1960 1960-1970 1970-1980 1980-1990 1990-2000 2000-2010



73







1990

2000

2010

0 20 40 60 80 100

lt19 20-39 40-59 gt60











74









2000

2010



0 20 40 60 80 100








75


0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

2000 2010


30

25

20

15

10

5









76

Economic profile












0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

1970 1990 2000







77
















Nayarit

100

200

300

400


0 1990 2000 2010


78














2014)










79


















80


90

75

60

45

30

15



Hospitality Sector





20

15

10

5

0 1996 2001 2005 2009





81


0

20000

40000

60000

80000

100000

1995 2010

Gro

ss N

um

ber

of

Vis

ito

rs


















82






SEDESOL SOP







SEMARNAT







83








4

2 1







(SEMARNAT 2006)

84























85

FONATUR








In order to






34)








(FONATUR 2005 2006)

86




Cultural Assets

El Borrego Beach

Marina

El Pozo River

San Basilio Hill

El Vigia Hill

La Marinera Church


Aduana Building

Garita Building

Plaza Principal

Lighthouse

Charming people

Cuisine

History















87














88






nd Nayarit 2009)






89









food service


90













91

















92
























NORTH

Pacific Ocean

El Pozo River



93








for locals



94

















1999)







95
























NORTH



96




URBAN PLANNERS

COMPLIES













97






and their families


















NORTH

El Pozo River

RESIDENTIAL ZONING



Pacific Ocean



98






1 2

MIXED-USE ZONING


NORTH

Pacific Ocean

El Pozo River







TOURISTIC ZONING

Minimum density

Low density

Medium density

Marina

Malecon

Theme park

500 m 1 km



NORTH



99
























100























101























102






















103
























104





















105























106























107













Sense






(Lynch 1984)

108










109
























110






establishments


















(2005) data

111





locations







features (Map 12)











500 m 1 km

NORTH

DATE OF SETTLEMENT

XVIII Century

XIX Century

1900-1970

1970-2005

2005

2011

Pacific Ocean

El Pozo River


112

























113
























114


















115












Blas

116






and Fig 62)


117















118




20th centuries










119


influences

















66)

120


121























122
















123
























124











125

421 Perceived space













charts and graphics

422 Conceived space








126








423 Lived space














127























128








for another
















129


planning strategy



















130















Plan 2012-2018









131
















132













residents











133























134


three primary steps




















environment

135








such ambiguous data















136








54 Recommendations











TDP




137






55 Further Research

















138















139

REFERENCE LIST
















Routledge


design 7 no 2 201-212



179-193

140














Autonoma de Sinaloa




19 no 3 475-503





141





Review 19 no 1 106-124







4 500-520











Peru

142















Mexico DF CONAPO






CONEVAL



143



















California




144

















Unioacuten


Unioacuten


de la Union



145


Unioacuten





















Review 35 no 4 451-478

146













1089-1103







Mexico SEDESOL-UNAM




147



157-180






463-496




Mexico










148


Littlefield


Press













York Harper and Row





149









Mexico City













Mexico SEDESOL-UNAM

150














LLC










151








4 359-379







1 157-182


no 1 146-151






Mexico CONAPO

152














616-634



Congreso del Estado


Congreso del Estado


del Estado


Congreso del Estado

153


del Estado


Congreso del Estado


Congreso del Estado


Congreso del Estado




del Estado











Spaces Inc

154










ABC-CLIO


space ABC-CLIO




Mexico SEDESOL-UNAM






155














Mexico DF SEMARNAT


DF SEMARNAT


Mexico SECTUR


Mexico SECTUR




156














Minnesota Press










157


UAN





Oaks CA Sage






Mexico SEDESOL-UNAM



publishing

158

APPENDICES














159

Appendix A


160

Appendix B






San Blas area





Blas








development process


population


161

Appendix C



162

Appendix D



163

Appendix E

Seasonal Dwellings


164

Appendix F



165

Appendix G

Tourist Corridor


166

Appendix H



167

Appendix I



NORTH



1 km 2 km

NORTH


168

Appendix J


NORTH


Primary education


Secondary education



500 m 1 km

169

Appendix K


NORTH


170

Title Page

Abstract

Acknowledgements

Table of Contents


11 Positionality




132 Place

14 Methods







15 Limitations










25 Conclusion

















421 Perceived space

422 Conceived space

423 Lived space






54 Recommendations

55 Further Research

List of Tables

List of Figures


Reference List

Appendices

Appendix A

Appendix B

Appendix C

Appendix D

Appendix F

Appendix E

Appendix G

Appendix H

Appendix I

Appendix J

Appendix K




Chapter 4












Chapter 5








vi



vii

LIST OF TABLES








viii

LIST OF FIGURES






















ix
























x
























xi























xii








xiii
























1











Planning (TDP)

11 Positionality











2























3

















Mexico


research questions





4




community



















5




















6
























7
























8
























9





Schulz 2005)







132 Place











10










political practices













1976 Tuan 1977)

11
























12
























13



in tourism








14 Methods






observation




14























15


of others





















16
























17























18







Chapter 3















19








(federal)





(state)


(state)








20









lead is referenced















21












15 Limitations










22












with them




attitudes







23












chapter










Blas

24





25


Paradigm in Mexico







local scale













26



NORTH

Loreto

















27
























28







70

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Po

pula

tio

n P

erc

enta

ge

1970 1980 1990 2000 2010












29























30


2006)






















31























32
























33






2013)













119120)





34













1982 FONATUR 2006)











35
















36























37








1983) as
















38
























39












40




















Purcell 1980)




41























42






















43












2004b)












44























45


















FEDDERAL

Office Document


Management


Development


STATE

Office Document


Plan


46






2001 FONATUR 2006)
















47
























48














Cabos






expected results



49




1980 1990 2000 2010


Quintana Roo 9784 9865 9907 9678







1990-2000 2000-2010 1995-2000 2000-2005 2005-2010


Quintana Roo




0

100

200

300

400

0

250

500

750

1000

1250

1500

50

0

25

50

75

100

Perc

enta

ge o

f D

welli

ng

s









1990 2000 2005 1990 2000 2005 1990 2000 2010


Cancun












51























52
























53







Tourist Zone

Urban Zone









54
















Aldape 2010)








55























56










25 Conclusion













57








58


Mexico






















59




















60























NORTH

Mexico

Nayarit

Nayarit


San Blas Town




San Blas Town

Tepic

O

O

O

O


500 km 1000 km

61










events














NORTH

El Pozo River

3 2 1

5 4 6

7




62









63




64

















65








Fig 20 Gross GDP

$200000000

$180000000

$160000000

$140000000

$120000000

$100000000

$80000000

$60000000

$40000000

$20000000

$0








MX

P

1995 2000 2005 2010

66


10

20

30

40

50

60

70 1998 2003 2008









100

80

60

40

20


2000 2005 2010 2013


67








90

92

94

96

98

100

20

40

60

80

Po

pula

tio

n P

erc

enta

ge


1990 2000 2010 2000 2010


7000

7750

8500

9250

10000




68









0393

0436

0479

0521

0564

0607

0650

GN

I In

dex

040

045

050

055

060

GN

I In

dex

035 1990 2000 2010

0350 1990 2000 2010

Mexico San Blas



Sur








69










61 258 85 91 104


86 340 34 20 37


512 442 214 122 33













70














success








community

71























quality of life

72















500

0

167

333

-167 1920-1930 1930-1940 1940-1950 1950-1960 1960-1970 1970-1980 1980-1990 1990-2000 2000-2010



73







1990

2000

2010

0 20 40 60 80 100

lt19 20-39 40-59 gt60











74









2000

2010



0 20 40 60 80 100








75


0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

2000 2010


30

25

20

15

10

5









76

Economic profile












0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

1970 1990 2000







77
















Nayarit

100

200

300

400


0 1990 2000 2010


78














2014)










79


















80


90

75

60

45

30

15



Hospitality Sector





20

15

10

5

0 1996 2001 2005 2009





81


0

20000

40000

60000

80000

100000

1995 2010

Gro

ss N

um

ber

of

Vis

ito

rs


















82






SEDESOL SOP







SEMARNAT







83








4

2 1







(SEMARNAT 2006)

84























85

FONATUR








In order to






34)








(FONATUR 2005 2006)

86




Cultural Assets

El Borrego Beach

Marina

El Pozo River

San Basilio Hill

El Vigia Hill

La Marinera Church


Aduana Building

Garita Building

Plaza Principal

Lighthouse

Charming people

Cuisine

History















87














88






nd Nayarit 2009)






89









food service


90













91

















92
























NORTH

Pacific Ocean

El Pozo River



93








for locals



94

















1999)







95
























NORTH



96




URBAN PLANNERS

COMPLIES













97






and their families


















NORTH

El Pozo River

RESIDENTIAL ZONING



Pacific Ocean



98






1 2

MIXED-USE ZONING


NORTH

Pacific Ocean

El Pozo River







TOURISTIC ZONING

Minimum density

Low density

Medium density

Marina

Malecon

Theme park

500 m 1 km



NORTH



99
























100























101























102






















103
























104





















105























106























107













Sense






(Lynch 1984)

108










109
























110






establishments


















(2005) data

111





locations







features (Map 12)











500 m 1 km

NORTH

DATE OF SETTLEMENT

XVIII Century

XIX Century

1900-1970

1970-2005

2005

2011

Pacific Ocean

El Pozo River


112

























113
























114


















115












Blas

116






and Fig 62)


117















118




20th centuries










119


influences

















66)

120


121























122
















123
























124











125

421 Perceived space













charts and graphics

422 Conceived space








126








423 Lived space














127























128








for another
















129


planning strategy



















130















Plan 2012-2018









131
















132













residents











133























134


three primary steps




















environment

135








such ambiguous data















136








54 Recommendations











TDP




137






55 Further Research

















138















139

REFERENCE LIST
















Routledge


design 7 no 2 201-212



179-193

140














Autonoma de Sinaloa




19 no 3 475-503





141





Review 19 no 1 106-124







4 500-520











Peru

142















Mexico DF CONAPO






CONEVAL



143



















California




144

















Unioacuten


Unioacuten


de la Union



145


Unioacuten





















Review 35 no 4 451-478

146













1089-1103







Mexico SEDESOL-UNAM




147



157-180






463-496




Mexico










148


Littlefield


Press













York Harper and Row





149









Mexico City













Mexico SEDESOL-UNAM

150














LLC










151








4 359-379







1 157-182


no 1 146-151






Mexico CONAPO

152














616-634



Congreso del Estado


Congreso del Estado


del Estado


Congreso del Estado

153


del Estado


Congreso del Estado


Congreso del Estado


Congreso del Estado




del Estado











Spaces Inc

154










ABC-CLIO


space ABC-CLIO




Mexico SEDESOL-UNAM






155














Mexico DF SEMARNAT


DF SEMARNAT


Mexico SECTUR


Mexico SECTUR




156














Minnesota Press










157


UAN





Oaks CA Sage






Mexico SEDESOL-UNAM



publishing

158

APPENDICES














159

Appendix A


160

Appendix B






San Blas area





Blas








development process


population


161

Appendix C



162

Appendix D



163

Appendix E

Seasonal Dwellings


164

Appendix F



165

Appendix G

Tourist Corridor


166

Appendix H



167

Appendix I



NORTH



1 km 2 km

NORTH


168

Appendix J


NORTH


Primary education


Secondary education



500 m 1 km

169

Appendix K


NORTH


170

Title Page

Abstract

Acknowledgements

Table of Contents


11 Positionality




132 Place

14 Methods







15 Limitations










25 Conclusion

















421 Perceived space

422 Conceived space

423 Lived space






54 Recommendations

55 Further Research

List of Tables

List of Figures


Reference List

Appendices

Appendix A

Appendix B

Appendix C

Appendix D

Appendix F

Appendix E

Appendix G

Appendix H

Appendix I

Appendix J

Appendix K



vii

LIST OF TABLES








viii

LIST OF FIGURES






















ix
























x
























xi























xii








xiii
























1











Planning (TDP)

11 Positionality











2























3

















Mexico


research questions





4




community



















5




















6
























7
























8
























9





Schulz 2005)







132 Place











10










political practices













1976 Tuan 1977)

11
























12
























13



in tourism








14 Methods






observation




14























15


of others





















16
























17























18







Chapter 3















19








(federal)





(state)


(state)








20









lead is referenced















21












15 Limitations










22












with them




attitudes







23












chapter










Blas

24





25


Paradigm in Mexico







local scale













26



NORTH

Loreto

















27
























28







70

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Po

pula

tio

n P

erc

enta

ge

1970 1980 1990 2000 2010












29























30


2006)






















31























32
























33






2013)













119120)





34













1982 FONATUR 2006)











35
















36























37








1983) as
















38
























39












40




















Purcell 1980)




41























42






















43












2004b)












44























45


















FEDDERAL

Office Document


Management


Development


STATE

Office Document


Plan


46






2001 FONATUR 2006)
















47
























48














Cabos






expected results



49




1980 1990 2000 2010


Quintana Roo 9784 9865 9907 9678







1990-2000 2000-2010 1995-2000 2000-2005 2005-2010


Quintana Roo




0

100

200

300

400

0

250

500

750

1000

1250

1500

50

0

25

50

75

100

Perc

enta

ge o

f D

welli

ng

s









1990 2000 2005 1990 2000 2005 1990 2000 2010


Cancun












51























52
























53







Tourist Zone

Urban Zone









54
















Aldape 2010)








55























56










25 Conclusion













57








58


Mexico






















59




















60























NORTH

Mexico

Nayarit

Nayarit


San Blas Town




San Blas Town

Tepic

O

O

O

O


500 km 1000 km

61










events














NORTH

El Pozo River

3 2 1

5 4 6

7




62









63




64

















65








Fig 20 Gross GDP

$200000000

$180000000

$160000000

$140000000

$120000000

$100000000

$80000000

$60000000

$40000000

$20000000

$0








MX

P

1995 2000 2005 2010

66


10

20

30

40

50

60

70 1998 2003 2008









100

80

60

40

20


2000 2005 2010 2013


67








90

92

94

96

98

100

20

40

60

80

Po

pula

tio

n P

erc

enta

ge


1990 2000 2010 2000 2010


7000

7750

8500

9250

10000




68









0393

0436

0479

0521

0564

0607

0650

GN

I In

dex

040

045

050

055

060

GN

I In

dex

035 1990 2000 2010

0350 1990 2000 2010

Mexico San Blas



Sur








69










61 258 85 91 104


86 340 34 20 37


512 442 214 122 33













70














success








community

71























quality of life

72















500

0

167

333

-167 1920-1930 1930-1940 1940-1950 1950-1960 1960-1970 1970-1980 1980-1990 1990-2000 2000-2010



73







1990

2000

2010

0 20 40 60 80 100

lt19 20-39 40-59 gt60











74









2000

2010



0 20 40 60 80 100








75


0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

2000 2010


30

25

20

15

10

5









76

Economic profile












0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

1970 1990 2000







77
















Nayarit

100

200

300

400


0 1990 2000 2010


78














2014)










79


















80


90

75

60

45

30

15



Hospitality Sector





20

15

10

5

0 1996 2001 2005 2009





81


0

20000

40000

60000

80000

100000

1995 2010

Gro

ss N

um

ber

of

Vis

ito

rs


















82






SEDESOL SOP







SEMARNAT







83








4

2 1







(SEMARNAT 2006)

84























85

FONATUR








In order to






34)








(FONATUR 2005 2006)

86




Cultural Assets

El Borrego Beach

Marina

El Pozo River

San Basilio Hill

El Vigia Hill

La Marinera Church


Aduana Building

Garita Building

Plaza Principal

Lighthouse

Charming people

Cuisine

History















87














88






nd Nayarit 2009)






89









food service


90













91

















92
























NORTH

Pacific Ocean

El Pozo River



93








for locals



94

















1999)







95
























NORTH



96




URBAN PLANNERS

COMPLIES













97






and their families


















NORTH

El Pozo River

RESIDENTIAL ZONING



Pacific Ocean



98






1 2

MIXED-USE ZONING


NORTH

Pacific Ocean

El Pozo River







TOURISTIC ZONING

Minimum density

Low density

Medium density

Marina

Malecon

Theme park

500 m 1 km



NORTH



99
























100























101























102






















103
























104





















105























106























107













Sense






(Lynch 1984)

108










109
























110






establishments


















(2005) data

111





locations







features (Map 12)











500 m 1 km

NORTH

DATE OF SETTLEMENT

XVIII Century

XIX Century

1900-1970

1970-2005

2005

2011

Pacific Ocean

El Pozo River


112

























113
























114


















115












Blas

116






and Fig 62)


117















118




20th centuries










119


influences

















66)

120


121























122
















123
























124











125

421 Perceived space













charts and graphics

422 Conceived space








126








423 Lived space














127























128








for another
















129


planning strategy



















130















Plan 2012-2018









131
















132













residents











133























134


three primary steps




















environment

135








such ambiguous data















136








54 Recommendations











TDP




137






55 Further Research

















138















139

REFERENCE LIST
















Routledge


design 7 no 2 201-212



179-193

140














Autonoma de Sinaloa




19 no 3 475-503





141





Review 19 no 1 106-124







4 500-520











Peru

142















Mexico DF CONAPO






CONEVAL



143



















California




144

















Unioacuten


Unioacuten


de la Union



145


Unioacuten





















Review 35 no 4 451-478

146













1089-1103







Mexico SEDESOL-UNAM




147



157-180






463-496




Mexico










148


Littlefield


Press













York Harper and Row





149









Mexico City













Mexico SEDESOL-UNAM

150














LLC










151








4 359-379







1 157-182


no 1 146-151






Mexico CONAPO

152














616-634



Congreso del Estado


Congreso del Estado


del Estado


Congreso del Estado

153


del Estado


Congreso del Estado


Congreso del Estado


Congreso del Estado




del Estado











Spaces Inc

154










ABC-CLIO


space ABC-CLIO




Mexico SEDESOL-UNAM






155














Mexico DF SEMARNAT


DF SEMARNAT


Mexico SECTUR


Mexico SECTUR




156














Minnesota Press










157


UAN





Oaks CA Sage






Mexico SEDESOL-UNAM



publishing

158

APPENDICES














159

Appendix A


160

Appendix B






San Blas area





Blas








development process


population


161

Appendix C



162

Appendix D



163

Appendix E

Seasonal Dwellings


164

Appendix F



165

Appendix G

Tourist Corridor


166

Appendix H



167

Appendix I



NORTH



1 km 2 km

NORTH


168

Appendix J


NORTH


Primary education


Secondary education



500 m 1 km

169

Appendix K


NORTH


170

Title Page

Abstract

Acknowledgements

Table of Contents


11 Positionality




132 Place

14 Methods







15 Limitations










25 Conclusion

















421 Perceived space

422 Conceived space

423 Lived space






54 Recommendations

55 Further Research

List of Tables

List of Figures


Reference List

Appendices

Appendix A

Appendix B

Appendix C

Appendix D

Appendix F

Appendix E

Appendix G

Appendix H

Appendix I

Appendix J

Appendix K

The place of planners in Tourism-Development-Planning: A ...

Documents

Transcript of The place of planners in Tourism-Development-Planning: A ...