Resumen
En el espacio de menos de dos décadas, los habitantes de Quintana Roo han tenido
que enfrentar cambios radicales ocasionados por el turismo de masas. El turismo se ha
convertido en la industria dominante y esto ha puesto en marcha un ciclo de desarrollo
turı́stico y de migración masiva de otras partes de México y del exterior. Una región
que no hace mucho tiempo se consideraba el territorio más marginal de la nación, hoy
atrae millones de turistas de todo el mundo, la mayorı́a de los Estados Unidos y Europa.
En un contexto de cambio acelerado y control empresarial, la vida de muchas personas,
incluso la población maya, es altamente imprevisible y estresante. La expansión del
turismo se ha desplazado recientemente a Tulum, una ciudad que está emergiendo
como una localidad de pequeños, pero bien cómodos, hoteles. [México, Quintana Roo,
turismo, globalización, maya, migración, impacto ecológico]
Abstract
In the space of less than four decades, the inhabitants of Quintana Roo have had
to manage radical changes brought about by mass tourism. Tourism has become the
dominant industry and this has set in motion a cycle of resort development and massive
migration from other parts of Mexico and beyond. In the context of accelerated change
and corporate control, life for many people, including long-established Maya, is often
unpredictable and stressful. Tourism expansion has recently shifted to Tulum, a town
currently emerging as an upscale tourist location. [Mexico, Quintana Roo, tourism,
globalization, Maya, migration, ecological impacts]
The Journal of Latin American and Caribbean Anthropology, Vol. 20, No. 1, pp. 87–109. ISSN 1935-4932, online ISSN
1935-4940.
C 2015 by the American Anthropological Association. All rights reserved. DOI: 10.1111/jlca.12110
Tourism and the Transformation of Daily Life Along the Riviera Maya 87
Introduction
This article covers ethnographic work conducted between 1990 and 2009,
focusing on the impacts and implications of the tourism boom along the 127-
kilometer-long strip of coast between Cancún and Tulum. It is both a longitudinal
study, summarizing findings over almost two decades of investigation, and a dis-
cussion of how changing circumstances influenced our research agenda.
After preliminary visits in 1989 and 1990, we followed changes through three
stages of summer fieldwork. Phase 1 (1993–94) examined the impact of differ-
ent forms of tourism on Maya villages and resort service communities. Phase 2
(2000–01) shifted attention to the town and tourist destination of Tulum. Here,
we sought out the principal groups influencing change and examined their role in
resource conflicts. Phase 3 (2008–09) took one of these conflict arenas, environ-
mental protection versus intensified development, and explored the seriousness of
environmental degradation. In essence, our research demonstrates how tourism
alters everyday life, contributes to the complexity of rapid change in an increas-
ingly diverse setting, and how these processes are influenced by national policy
and global economy. Methods included participant observation, interviews with
local and regional key informants, questionnaires, and focus groups.
Tourism and its offshoots have come to influence, even define, most spheres
of local life. It is a reality that cannot be avoided. When we initiated this research
(Daltabuit and Pi-Sunyer 1990), it was already evident that the Cancún model
of large-scale resort development was progressing south along what would later
be called the Riviera Maya. Other anthropologists working in the area reached
similar conclusions regarding the effects of tourism in a region that prior to these
changes had remained secluded for centuries (Anderson 2005; Balam Ramos 2010;
Hostettler 1996; Juárez 2002a,b; Kintz 1990; Sullivan 1989; Velázquez-Ramı́rez
2006). We approached this task with the clear recognition that economics and
politics do not constitute distinct phenomena and that we “cannot understand any
social system without knowing how both power and production are organized”
(Chase-Dunn 1989:107). We have also paid attention to the work of researchers
who approach globalization in a comparable manner, particularly in the context of
situated cultural practices (Krause 2009; Nazarea 2006; Scudder 1992; Pi-Sunyer
1998).
In the course of this research, we made use of a number of concepts and ap-
proaches and are fully in agreement with George Marcus’ observation that “The
conduct and outcome of fieldwork are less a matter of training in method, or
specific techniques of inquiry and reporting, than of participating in a culture of
craftsmanship that anthropologists embrace” (Marcus 2009:3). Similar method-
ology is offered by Unni Wikan who emphasizes the “increasing awareness of the
Tourism and the Transformation of Daily Life Along the Riviera Maya 89
goods: medicines, school books, TV sets, soft drinks, and other processed food.
Outside employment was regarded as a mixed blessing. For many households,
such strategies of coping carried a price measured in uncertainty and even fear
of culture loss. However, this was not a universal response and others welcomed
the opportunities offered by wage labor. Indeed, one could argue that the shape
of lived experience was being materially and imaginatively reconfigured through
tourism, not just for tourists but also for local residents (Bruner 2005; Clifford
1997).
The transformation that was underway took highly visual and material forms.
We were witnessing the expansion of the Cancún model and the small town
of Tulum was growing by leaps and bounds. In a 2002 interview, an American
businessman living and working in Tulum commented in awe that: “This fucking
town is not experiencing a boom, but something more like a goldrush. It’s a
cataclysm, what else? This is the fastest growing 50 kilometers of coast in the
world! They are going to develop this as fast as they can.” The changes underway
were bound to have consequences for everyone in the area. True, Maya people
had over the centuries proved themselves to be highly adaptable and resilient
and could count on a long history of migration and displacement.2 However, the
current nature and tempo of change is unparalleled for this part of the world.
Quintana Roo has a distinct and little known history. It has harbored Maya
communities for millennia, and during the centuries of Spanish colonial rule much
of the area was essentially left to its indigenous people, It was a “region of refuge”
where neither colonial rule nor later the Mexican state had much presence or
influence (Beltran 1979). Aside from the establishment of refugee communities
resulting from the War of the Castes, matters did not change significantly until the
late 19th century (Balam Ramos 2010:31–36; Goñi 1999:30, 81–86; Macı́as Zapata
2002:15–18). People from the outside world continued to be viewed with distrust,
and much of this territory remained Indian domain.
The ethnographer Alfonso Villa Rojas opens his pioneering study of central
Quintana Roo with the observation that “For three centuries of Spanish rule this
region was virtually unknown . . . Later, it served as a place of refuge for the Maya
Indians who, in 1847, rebelled against the domination of the whites” (Villa Rojas
1945:iii).
Since the 1950s, there have been a number of ethnographies on the Maya,
both in Mexico and further south. Central to the genre are the contributions of
Robert Redfield (Redfield 1941, 1950, 1960; Redfield and Villa Rojas 1934) who in
the course of more than thirty years laid the foundations of peasant community
studies, particularly with respect to economic and cultural change. In the adjacent
state of Yucatán, intensive research focused on the community of Chan Kom, first
visited by Redfield and Villa Rojas (1934) and followed in later years by a succession
of anthropologists. For our purposes, the most significant study is Alicia Re Cruz’s
In the late 1970s, Mexico launched what some economists term “the tourism
export push” (Clancy 2001:51–53) that brought about a multidimensional shift.
The Riviera Maya now generates about one-third of Mexico’s tourism income,
and tourism has become the country’s most important export industry.3 Hence,
what occurs on this coast is a matter of vital national interest. Understanding how
mass tourism has so profoundly changed lives, prospects, demography, landscape,
and environment requires that we briefly visit the past. As mentioned, a couple
of generations ago much of Quintana Roo was essentially off the map. In 1950,
the total population numbered but 26,967 inhabitants, and as recently as 1960 it
had grown to just over 50,000; of these, about half spoke an indigenous language.
Today, the total population of the state is well over one million, a statistic that
represents a 20-fold increase in the course of half a century (INEGI 2011).
The Cancún model was planned, which was the brainchild of Mexican bureau-
crats and international development agencies (Marti 1985) that owed a good deal
to earlier state-sponsored tourism enterprises in Mediterranean Europe (Sinclair
and Gómez 1996). Following the creation of a brand new resort city was an
Tourism and the Transformation of Daily Life Along the Riviera Maya 91
international airport and the key north–south coastal highway. What we remember
from those early years is the omnipresent atmosphere of “development,” both
in the sense of infrastructure and construction, and in the constant discourse of
“progress.” For planners and bureaucrats in Mexico City, the expansion southward
of tourist venues not only made economic sense and provided employment, but
also advanced Mexico’s image as a modernizing country.
At that juncture, the mid-1990s, we saw development primarily as a state-
sponsored process, a model generated by technicians and bureaucrats, as distinct
from change grounded in the history and experience of local society (Escobar
1995:51–53). Not much later, we would develop a more acute sense of global pro-
cesses, or as Escobar (2007) phrases it, “post-development.” This can be described
as a critique of the harm—economic, political, cultural—that mainstream devel-
opment paradigms have visited in countries and societies, and how this approach
may be countered (Rahmena and Bawtree 2005). Already in the 1990s, one of the
complaints voiced by Maya villagers was that it was becoming increasingly difficult
to collect wood and thatching material in neighboring forests. One explanation
offered was that these items were being diverted to tourism construction in order
to give beach bars and theme parks the proper tropical ambiance expected by
tourists. But such concerns seem almost frivolous compared to the loss of land and
resources that a community suffers when the government requisitions vast areas
for mega-complexes (Escobar 2008). Without doubt, the single largest govern-
mental appropriation was the establishment in 1986 of the Sian Ka’an Biosphere
Reserve, a 1.3 million acre expanse of forest, mangrove, and beach. Communities
now adjacent to the reserve had relied for centuries on the forest and its bounty
(Martı́nez-Reyes 2009).
Many residents in Tulum and elsewhere attribute this rapid transformation,
and all the consequences it can bring in its wake, to migration from other parts
of Mexico and sometimes from abroad. But the massive migratory movement,
whether internal or external, responds to something universal: the felt needs of
people in search of a livelihood. Of course, mass migration to an area has obvious
social consequences. Today indigenous people are a decreasing presence in their
ancestral land, and this trend is unlikely to change. Essentially, much of the state
has undergone a transformation into a tourist zone of hotels, resorts, theme parks,
beach clubs, and gated communities. In observations regarding what he terms
“liquid modernity” that addresses contemporary consumer society, the sociologist
Zigmunt Bauman depicts a world in flux characterized by changes in time and
space, where “power can move with the speed of the electronic signal” (Bauman
2000:10), “industry is geared increasingly to the production of attractions and
temptations” (Bauman 1998:78), “and the consumer is a person on the move”
(Bauman 1998:85). Here, he is discussing a world system of hypermigration of
people, capital, information, and commodities, and with this comes high levels
Tourism and the Transformation of Daily Life Along the Riviera Maya 93
We are not suggesting that such hostelries constitute the sole available lodgings
in Quintana Roo. Also, it is not accurate to assume that tourism employs only
relatively unskilled service workers. We interviewed several individuals and families
of quite modest backgrounds who had managed to make a good living working
in tourism-related services or as successful storeowners. Furthermore, as we will
later discuss, there are those who have become wealthy almost by chance.
Tourism, and particularly mass tourism, is a labor-intensive business, so it is
hardly surprising that at least from the early 1990s the macroeconomics of Mexico’s
southern border began to resemble conditions on the northern frontier. At both
geographic poles, most people lived by selling their low-skilled labor. However, the
full picture is more complex: within a context of generalized poverty, extreme and
growing economic inequality became the norm. In addition, indigenous people,
who generally lived in the interior, were increasingly both pulled and pushed into
this tourism-based labor market. At that juncture, the early and mid-nineties, we
were working mostly in interior Maya villages and also studying resort service
communities comprised mostly of Maya residents.4 Much of our work went into
understanding the social and economic consequences of tourism, still a relatively
novel phenomenon in central Quintana Roo, and on a range of related and signif-
icant issues including ongoing changes in diet and health. In the process, we were
able to talk to our neighbors, share food and stories, and discuss the telenovelas we
often watched together (Pi-Sunyer and Thomas 1997, 2001).
None of the above is fully comprehensible without reference to the enor-
mous power—economic, political, and ideological—of the tourist industry. If the
population of Quintana Roo has increased dramatically, it is because of tourism
demands, and that so many people desperately sought work. The figures, made
available to us by a municipal authority, indicated that in 2008, more than eight
million visitors (of whom 6 million were foreigners) came to Quintana Roo:
roughly eight tourists per local resident (Ayuntamiento de Solidaridad 2005). We
have every reason to believe that since the number of tourists, migrants, and for-
eign residents has grown, pressure on the environment and biodiversity has also
increased. Nationally, tourism now generates a fourth of Mexico’s foreign revenue
(Hernandez-Coss 2005).
In Quintana Roo, tourism has taken on all the characteristics of a mono-
crop and as is often the case in such situations, managed to reconfigure not only
employment practices but also spatial relations and the physical environment. If
Michel Foucault could pay a visit to the Riviera Maya, he would not be surprised
at this example of how power is deployed in the modern world, and is most clearly
manifested by “the distribution of bodies in space” (Foucault 1977:202).5
Even rapid change on this scale takes some time. Changes along what would
become the Riviera Maya were not so much incremental as the result of the
implementation of a specific hospitality model. Prior to these developments, many
This kind of tourism development is not only voracious in terms of labor, land,
and materials, but capable of drastically reworking cultural relations and socioe-
conomic structures (Pi-Sunyer 1992). Long before the advent of mass tourism,
Maya people in Quintana Roo had experienced the massive appropriation of land
and resources. In 1937, the inhabitants of Tulum, then a small Maya hamlet,
Tourism and the Transformation of Daily Life Along the Riviera Maya 95
were forced to cede the archaeological site to the National Anthropological and
Historical Institute (INAH), a government agency. This was not just displacement,
but the loss of a sacred site that attracted pilgrims from Maya communities far
and near (Balam Ramos 2010:76–77; Goñi 1999:163–168). Some decades later, the
people of Cobá lost a good deal of their productive land as INAH took control of
its archaeological site and environs.
If the Maya were the first in this area to experience the impact of a modernizing
state, the phenomenon is now general and involves many more players. It is a
complex, tense, and often contradictory situation, difficult to unravel. Change is
coming from many directions, and not just locally. For example, Maya migrants
today make up more than a third of Cancún’s population (Castellanos 2010).
Tulum and the Riviera Maya are still areas under active development with almost
every available beach built upon.
How do people manage, or attempt to manage, these drastic and powerful
shifts and changes? With respect to Maya residents, especially village dwellers,
there are established mechanisms that retain considerable efficacy. These include
norms of reciprocity and social solidarity observed by Diego de Landa, the 16th
century bishop of Yucatán and an early student of Maya culture. He noted that
Maya people had “the good habit of helping each other in all their labors” (Landa
1941:98). Nancy Farriss in discussing the colonial experience stresses that “The
need for a mutual support system remained as strong under colonial rule as ever,”
and that “the idea was also to spread the risk and burden among all the corporate
members” (Fariss 1984:256). Ellen Kintz, writing on Cobá (a nearby village to
Tulum), shortly before our initial fieldwork there, commented on the same spirit
of reciprocity but as a customary behavior on the wane.
Friction in Tulum
Tourism and the Transformation of Daily Life Along the Riviera Maya 97
But the story has another level of complexity. In his comprehensive ethnog-
raphy of present-day Tulum, Yuri Balam Ramos documents the extent to which
the Maya community has been influenced by the economic and demographic
transformation experienced by the town. Perhaps expectedly, one assumes
that indigenous people are “traditional,” however, Maya residents seized the
opportunity to benefit from a very significant change: private ownership of what
had been communal land (Balam Ramos 2010:288). He discusses in detail the
nature of this decision. Some lots that were distributed were substantial and close
enough to the town proper to constitute prime real estate. Many possibilities
presented themselves. For example, a portion might be sold and the proceeds
invested in stores and other small businesses. Balam Ramos makes two other
important observations: in some respects, the Tulum Maya may have been
successful because they were there from the beginning and as such were members
of the Tulum ejido. Second, he argues that for all the change that has ensued, this
population remains traditionally Maya in much the same way as such interior
communities as Chumpon and Tixcacal Guardia, all dating back to the mid–19th
century Maya uprising. This argument (see Balam Ramos 2006; Juárez 2002a) is
consistent with our interviews in the Maya barrio where we lived.
Friction is also reflected in different modes of being and belonging. The Tulum
Maya are an integral part of the social and civic fabric, and have considerable
political influence, but here the Maya comprise a decreasing percentage of the
population. It is true that the Tulum Maya manifest a clear attachment to place.
Countless times Maya friends have explained to us that Tulum is a Maya settlement,
a distinct place with a distinct history. But regardless of the fact that it holds special
meanings, and even sacred qualities (it shelters one of the five Maya churches
in Quintana Roo), deep human feelings are at times confronted by social and
demographic realities. This was most clearly, even brutally, expressed by a young
Maya neighbor. After explaining in some detail the significance of the yearly Maya
fiesta, and the number of Maya visitors that it attracts from other communities,
she looked at us and declared: “In twenty years there won’t be any Maya in
Tulum,” by which we understood that the Mayaness of the Maya barrio would be a
memory.
The Maya and their neighborhood have a role in tourism and a place in popular
imagination. More than anything else, their perceived function as conceptualized
by other residents is that of giving the town and the area a cachet of authenticity and
antiquity. In this respect, both the Maya community, its church, and the Tulum
archaeological site function as an imaginary. In much the same way as Quetzil
Tourism and the Transformation of Daily Life Along the Riviera Maya 99
Drawing from a combination of interviews, youth focus groups, and the
household survey, we can venture some general statements. Not surprisingly, the
most evident one is the significance of class and education in the environmental
perceptions of respondents. For example, while many town residents are some-
what aware of the exceptional natural environments of forest and coast, they are
for the most part disengaged from debates related to the politics of development
and environmental degradation. For them, issues such as trash pick-up, water
contamination, and sewage disposal, and crime taking place outside their doors
come up as the most significant environmental problems. The rejoinder is likely
to be that problems of this sort need to be solved by the authorities. On the other
hand, residents of the beach (geographically separated from the town), who are
more affluent, foreign, and associated with resorts, are keenly aware of natural
environmental degradation and most likely to be activists
In his ethnography of Tulum, Balam Ramos differentiates between four distinct
ethnicities (his term) in the composition of Tulum’s population: Mayas descended
from the original insurgent Maya settlement whom we have termed “Tulum Maya”;
Maya people who are relatively recent migrants from the state of Yucatán and else-
where; non-Maya Mexicans from other parts of the country; and finally a substan-
tial number of foreigners, predominantly Europeans and North Americans (Balam
Ramos 2010:129–130). This breakdown certainly reflects history and origins, but
here and elsewhere migration and self-making in a multiethnic space generally en-
tails changes and coping in relationships and affiliation. For all this variety, there
is a good deal of interaction between people of similar age and education but also
between ethnicities
Tulum has changed a great deal in a generation. A place that not long ago
lacked basic urban facilities now has a bank with international connections, two
substantial supermarkets, a new hospital, and a sewage disposal system in the
planning. The registry of the local Chamber of Commerce includes more than fifty
restaurants and around thirty small hotels concentrated along the Tulum beach.8
There are numerous small grocery and convenience stores that stock packaged
food items, soft drinks, and beer, typically industrial products with long shelf lives.
However, there are but seven outlets for fresh fruits and vegetables and this is
attributed to a deterioration in diet, particularly that of school children who were
in many cases significantly overweight. We mention this because a good deal of
our initial research focused on diet and health in villages that had recently become
accessible to commercial traffic.
In our last two years of research, we made a special effort to interview town
women on a variety of matters, but mostly about their quality of life. On the issue
of food and diet, many complained of the lack of fresh and affordable fruits and
vegetables, and how difficult it was for a working family to provide their children
with a healthy diet. They also stressed the high price of meat. Some claimed that the
There is no question that Tulum and Quintana Roo, in general, are thoroughly
embedded in a socioeconomic system that is both exploitative in many senses of
the word and based on a single product: the hospitality business. This in turn
is dependent on an already impacted natural environment. A decade ago, the
economist Michael Clancy noted with respect to official development plans that
“Equally necessary is to consider which factors are ignored by policymakers when
they set their goals. At the top of the list were environmental and social concerns”
(Clancy 2001:68–69).
In their recent study of the environmental movement in Quintana Roo,
Magalı́ Daltabuit and Carlos Meade (2012) approach this and related issues from
the perspective of engaged political ecology. They point out that it was not until
1988 that Mexico passed broad-based environmental legislation; it remains the
Tourism and the Transformation of Daily Life Along the Riviera Maya 101
basis of Federal environmental policy. The law itself, and its amendments, should
offer ample protection to linked and hence vulnerable habitats such as the forests,
mangroves, beaches, and a coastline girded by the 600-mile-long Mesoamerican
Reef.
The whole area has a distinct geology. Since there are few lakes or streams,
rainwater sinks rapidly through the porous limestone rock to form a network of
underground channels, ultimately leading to the sea. Since the earliest human
settlements, cenotes, sinkholes that result from the caving in of the surface rock,
have provided access to this indispensable resource (West 1964:72–73). The system
constitutes an extensive subterranean network forming one of the world’s largest
aquifers that provides potable water to inland and coastal communities. Given
its porosity, it is also easily contaminated by dense habitation, dumps, and golf
courses, and in due course these waters join the ocean at juncture points such as
lagoons and mangroves, vital spawning grounds for aquatic life (Daltabuit et al.
2006; Daltabuit et al. 2007; Daltabuit and Meade 2012).
Environmentally important or fragile areas often lack adequate protection, and
Daltabuit and Meade examine three contemporary environmental disputes, one
involving the actions of a raw materials company that dug into the limestone to
the degree that machinery damaged a network of ancient Maya caves with wall
paintings as well as the reef. At that juncture, the government began to take notice.
Much the same was the case with the long fight to protect a beach that is a major
turtle nesting ground, and finally, the urban development plan for the expansion
of Tulum to 125,000 inhabitants, more than a sixfold increase (Ayuntamiento
de Solidaridad 2005; Consejo Municipal de Tulum 2009). Odd as it may seem,
this important proposal had not considered that Tulum sat above the endangered
aquifer. Already the area below the town is severely contaminated and this water
flows to the nearby mangrove and ultimately into the turquoise Caribbean that
attracts so many tourists. In referring to killing the goose that laid the golden egg,
the goose here is the linked yet fragile environment.
Part of the problem is administrative–governmental, but we can add corrupt
practices and close links between developers and politicians. The main issue is
the control and oversight of a voracious tourist industry, but there are plenty of
other matters that require attention. An important one for an emergent activist
civil society is the role of asymmetrical relations “where decisions remain in the
hands of a small elite composed of high federal and state officials and a con-
sortium of directors from major national and foreign corporations” (Daltabuit
and Meade 2012:128, our translation). Two examples stand out: one the taking
of a public beach by a large Spanish hotel firm, and the second the sale of the
University of Quintana Roo’s research area to a high-end development complex.
Neither of these could have could have been executed without state government
intervention.
Tourism and the Transformation of Daily Life Along the Riviera Maya 103
Present–Future
Our initial interest in a context of apprehension was related to the behavior of some
of our closest Tulum friends. We were not naı̈ve, but initially found it surprising
that so many intelligent and knowledgeable people shunned active politics, even at
the local level, when so many problems needed addressing. When we asked them
about this, they generally explained that if they ran for office, people would believe
they were involved in corrupt practices. This was such a common response that,
when asked by the municipality to write a report on our work, we drew attention
to the phenomena (Geddes et al. 2005).
We were considering the links between tourism and politics, particularly as
a potential source of corruption and enrichment. As explained by John Gledhill,
“Mexican politicians appear to have become increasingly tied into the world of
drug trafficking and money laundering” (Gledhill 2000:116). Under these circum-
stances, it is understandable that our friends avoided participation in anything
related to politics.
Also, we should not underestimate the profound social trauma that Mexico has
undergone during the last decade, and particularly since 2006 when then-President
Felipe Calderón declared war on drugs and drug cartels. The Caribbean coast of
the peninsula has long been a receiving point for drug shipments, but in the last
decade gangs, crime, and brutal drug-related killings have been spreading south
from Cancún. The human and psychological costs have been enormous, and in
the interval the conflict has taken some 150,000 lives in the country (Executive
Secretary of National Public Security System 2013). Living close to such events can
be disturbing at many levels. Stephen Lubkemann, an anthropologist who studies
war and violence, likens the experience of living through frightening and confusing
times as “analogous to the experience of being slowly overtaken by a patchy fog in
which banks of mist, varying in their inscrutability, are punctuated by patches of
clarity” (Lubkemann 2008:157).
The future may be more promising. There was a change of administrations
when, in July 2012, Enrique Peña Nieto won an overwhelming victory for the
presidency. In the opinion of two well-positioned Mexicans, one a former foreign
minister, and the other a publisher and editor, Mexico is ready for major political
and social change. With respect to the increasingly unpopular drug war, in all
likelihood there will be a strategic shift designed at “concentrating scarce resources
on combating violence – preventing kidnapping, extortion, and murder – rather
than on capturing kingpins or interdicting U.S.-bound drug shipments” (Aguilar
Camı́n and Castañeda 2012:28). Perhaps what matters most is that Mexico is
poised to enter an “age of agreement” that would end “the culture of impunity”
that for long has been part of the political system. This would entail focusing on
Tourism and the Transformation of Daily Life Along the Riviera Maya 105
Acknowledgments
Research for this article was supported by grants from the Wenner-Gren Founda-
tion for Anthropological Research (Grants #5618, #6627, and GR. ICRG-74) and
several Faculty Research Grants from the University of Massachusetts at Amherst.
We thank our colleagues and collaborators, Magalı́ Daltabuit, Henry Geddes Gon-
zales, Yuri Balam Ramos, Carlos and Ekab Meade, Valeria Cuevas, and especially
Claudia Avendaño for their assistance and contributions to this article. We also
thank the students from the University of Massachusetts, Universidad de Yucatán,
and the Universidad de Quintana Roo who were involved in different phases of
this project. Finally, we thank the people of Tulum and surrounding communities
for generously sharing their opinions and concerns regarding the ongoing changes
in their world.
Notes
1 Ecological concerns included the prospects for the extensive and fragile Mesoamerican Reef, sec-
ond only to Australia’s Great Barrier Reef, especially in the advent of a growing population, continuing
resort development and plans for much expanded cruise ship visitations.
2 This now includes several hundred thousand Maya living north of the U.S.-Mexico border (Burns,
in Mexico.
6 While tourism is “international” in the sense that tourists come from around the globe, they do
so very unevenly. In Mexico, nine of ten foreign tourists originate in the United States, a population
with a rather low tolerance for the genuinely foreign and culturally distinct.
7 Castañeda’s argument is that the large, and carefully restored, Maya site of Chichén Itza in
Yucatán can best be understood as a “museum” of Maya culture, a construct of archaeologists and
other specialists. While it is touted as “authentic,” it has much in common with a reenactment and, of
course, satisfies the needs of the many tourists it attracts.
8 These small hotels are strung along the Tulum beach (not the Riviera Maya) or across the beach
road. They cater mostly to fairly affluent visitors, Mexican and foreign. In many respects, they are the
antibig resort.
9 Our figures are taken from the chart “Per Capita Consumption of Company Beverage Products”
published by The Coca-Cola Company in 2011. The products include soft drinks other than Coca-Cola,
but Coca-Cola is king.
10 It is a hopeful sign that such an important environmental area as Sian Ka’an has received official
protection and been granted UNESCO World Heritage Site status. We have visited it several times and
continue to be surprised at the limited number of tourists it actually attracts. Our impression is that
most of the effort goes into protection and management. Much more could be done, and not at great
cost, to make this huge natural area a must-see location for eco-tourism visitors. If this is a crown jewel,
it should be treated as such.
Agrawal, Arun. (2005) Environmentality: Technologies of Government and the Making of Subjects. Durham: Duke
University Press.
Aguilar Camı́n, Héctor, and Jorge J. Castañeda. (2012) Mexico’s Age of Agreement. Foreign Affairs 91(6): 23–30.
Anderson, Eugene N. (N.d.) Rural Development and Maya Ethnobiology: A View from Central Quintana Roo, Mexico.
http://www.krazykioti.com/articles, June 15th, 2013.
———. (2005) Political Ecology in a Yucatec Maya Community. Tucson: University of Arizona Press.
Ayuntamiento de Solidaridad. (2005) Programa de Desarrollo Urbano de Tulum 2006–2030.s/l. Cuevas Albarrán,
Valeria y Dzul Caamal, Romualda: Solidaridad, Quintana Roo, Mexico.
Babb, Florence E. (2011) The Tourist Encounter: Fashioning Latin American Nations and Histories. Stanford: Stanford
University Press.
Balam Ramos, Yuri. (2006) Identidad y turismo en Tulum, Quintana Roo. In Trabajo de Campo. Antonio Higuera,
ed. Pp. 17–26. Chetumal: Universidad de Quintana Roo.
———. (2010) Tulum: Mayas y Turismo. Chetumal: Universidad de Quintana Roo.
Barrett, Stanley R. (1999) Forecasting Theory: Problems and Exemplars in the Twenty-First Century. In Anthropo-
logical Theory in North America. E. L. Cerroni-Long, ed. Pp. 258. Westport, CT: Praeger.
Bauman, Zygmunt. (1998) Globalization: The Human Consequences. Cambridge: Polity Press.
———. (2000) Liquid Modernity. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Beltran, Gonzalo Aguirre. (1979) Regions of Refuge. Society for Applied Anthropology Monograph Series, 12.
Washington: Society for Applied Anthropology.
Berger, Dina. (2006) The Development of Mexico’s Tourism Industry: Pyramids by Day, Martinis by Night. New
York: Palgrave.
Bruner, Edward M. (2005) Culture on Tour: Ethnographies of Travel. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Burns, Alan F. (1993) Maya in Exile: Guatemalans in Florida. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
Castañeda, Quetzil E. (1996) In the Museum of Maya Culture. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Castellanos, Marı́a Bianet. (2010) A Return to Servitude. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Caton, Kellee. (2012) Thinking Inside the Box: Understanding Discursive Production and Consumption in Tourism.
In The Critical Turn in Tourism Studies. Irena Ateljevic, Nigel Morgan, and Annette Pritchard, eds. Pp. 121–134.
London: Routledge.
Chase-Dunn, Christopher. (1989) Global Formation. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
Clancy, Michael. (2001) Exporting Paradise. Oxford: Pergamon.
Clifford, James. (1997) Routes:Travel and Translation in the Late Twentieth Century. Cambridge, MA: Harvard
University Press.
Coe, Michael D. (2011) The Maya. New York: Thames and Hudson.
Consejo Municipal de Tulum, Quintana Roo. (2009) Génesis, Realidad y Visión de Futuro, 2008–2009, Municipio de
Tulum, Quintana Roo.
Crick, Malcolm. (1989) Representations of International Tourism in the Social Sciences: Sun, Sex, Sights, Savings and
Servility. Annual Review of Anthropology 18:307–344.
Daltabuit, Magalı́, and Carlos A. Meade. (2012) El Movimiento Ambientalista de Quintana Roo. Cuernavaca: Centro
Regional de Investigaciones Multidisciplinarias.
Daltabuit, Magalı́, Hector B. Cisneros, and Ernesto Valenzuela. (2007) Globalización y Sustenabilidad: El Turismo en
el Sur de Quintana Roo. Cuernavaca: Centro Regional de Investigaciones Multidisciplinarias.
Daltabuit, Magalı́, Luz Marı́a Vázquez, Hector Cisneros, and Gregorio Rui. (2006) El Turismo Costero del Systema
Arrecifal Mesoamericano. Cuernavaca: Centro Regional de Investigaciones Multidisciplinarias.
Daltabuit, Magali, and Oriol Pi-Sunyer. (1990) Tourism Development in Quintana Roo, Mexico. Cultural Survival
Quarterly 14:9–13
Errington, Frederick, Tatsuro Fujikura, and Deborah Gewertz. (2012) Instant Noodles as an Antifriction Device.
American Anthropologist 144(1):19–31.
Escobar, Arturo. (1995) Encountering Development. Princeton: Princeton University. Press.
———. (2007) “Post-development” as Concept and Social Practice. In Exploring Post-development. A. Ziai, ed. Pp.
18–21. London: Routledge.
———. (2008) Territories of Difference: Place, Movements, Life, Redes. Durham: Duke University Press.
Executive Secretary of National Public Security System (SESNSPP), Mexico. (2013) Report by Edwin Mora, 29
December 2013. 66 Breibart.com.
Farriss, Nancy M. (1984) Maya Society Under Colonial Rule. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
———. (1987) Remembering the Future, Anticipating the Past: History, Time, and Cosmology among the Maya of
Yucatan. Comparative Studies in Society and History 29(3):566–593.
Tourism and the Transformation of Daily Life Along the Riviera Maya 107
Foucault, Michel. (1977) Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. New York: Pantheon.
Geddes, Henry, Oriol Pi-Sunyer, and R. Brooke Thomas. (2005) Reporte Tulum. Printed and bound by
authors.
Gledhill, John. (2000) Power and its Disguises: Anthropological Perspectives on Politics. Sidmouth: Pluto Press.
Goñi, Guillermo. (1999) De cómo los mayas perdieron Tulum. México, DF: Instituto Nacional de Antropologı́a e
Historia.
Green, Penelope. (2009) Tulum, Mexico. New York Times, August 9: TR 8.
Hernandez-Coss, Raúl. (2005) Lessons from the U.S.-Mexico Remittance Corridor on Shifting from Informal to
Formal Transfer Systems. World Bank Working Papers. New York.
Hostettler, Ueli, ed. (1996) Los Mayas de Quintana Roo: Investigaciones Antropológicas Recientes. Arbeitsblätter Nr.
14 des Instituts für Ethnologie Universität Bern, Switzerland.
INEGI (Instituto Nacional de Estadı́stica y Geografı́a). (2011) Censo de Poplación y Vivienda 2010: Datos de Quintana
Roo:. Mexico.
Juárez, Ana M. (2002a) Ongoing Struggles: Mayas and Immigrants in Tourist Era Tulum. Journal of Latin American
Anthropology 7(1):34–67.
———. (2002b) Ecological Degradation, Global Tourism, and Inequality: Maya Interpretations of the Changing
Environment in Quintana Roo, Mexico. Human Organization 61(2):113–124.
Kintz, Ellen R. (1990) Life Under the Tropical Canopy. Fort Worth: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Krause, Elizabeth L. (2009) Unraveled: A Weaver’s Tale of a Life Gone Modern. Berkeley: University of California
Press.
Landa, Diego de. (1941) Relación de las Cosas de Yucatán (MS 1566). In A. Tozer, ed. and trans. Papers of the Peabody
Museum 18. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Leatherman, Thomas, and Alan Goodman. (2005) Coca Colonization of Diets in the Yucatan. Social Science and
Medicine 61:833–846.
Loucky, James, and Mary M. Moors. (2000) The Maya Diaspora: Guatemalan Roots, New American Lives. Philadel-
phia: Temple University Press.
Lubkemann, Stephen C. (2008) Culture in Chaos. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Macı́as Zapata, Gabriel A. (2002) La Penı́nsula Fracturada. Chetumal: Universidad de Quintna Roo.
Macip, Ricardo F. (2012) For the Turtles’ Sake: Miracles, the Third Sector and Hegemony on the Coast of Oaxaca
(México). Critique of Anthropology 32(3):241–260).
Marcus, George E. (2009) Introduction. In Fieldwork is Not What it Used to Be. James D. Faubion and George E.
Marcus, eds. Pp. 3. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
Marti, Fernando. (1985) Can Cun, Fantasia de Banqueros: la Construcción de una Ciudad Túristica a Partir de Cero.
Cancún: Editorial Uno.
Martı́nez-Reyes, José. (2009) Comunidad, estado y naturaleza: La ecologı́a politica del manejo colaborativo de bosques.
Revista de Ciencias Sociales 20:128–155.
———. (2014) Beyond Nature Appropriation: Towards a Post-Development Conservation in the Maya Forest.
Conservation and Society 12(2):162–174.
McCannell, Dean. (1992) Empty Meeting Grounds. London: Routledge.
Megged, Amos. (1996) Exporting the Catholic Reformation: Local Religion in Early-Colonial Mexico. New York: E.
J. Brill.
Mignolo, Walter. (2012) Local Histories/Global Designs: Coloniality, Subaltern Knowledge and Border Thinking.
Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Mintz, Sidney W. (1985) Sweetness and Power: The Place of Sugar in Modern History. New York: Viking.
Moore, Mik. (2005) Coalition Building Between Native American and Environmental Organizations in Opposition
to Development. In Environmetal Sociology. King, Leslie and Deborah McCarthy, eds. Pp. 371–339. Lanham,
MD: Rowman and Littlefield.
Morris, Bob. (2012) The Quiet End of the Runway. New York Times, January 22: ST 1.
Nazarea, Virginia D. (2006) Local Knowledge and Memory in Biodiversity Conservation. In Annual Review of
Anthropology, Vol. 35. William H. Durham and Jane Hill, eds. Pp. 317–335. Palo Alto: Annual Reviews.
O’Neil, Shannon K. (2013) Mexico Makes It. Foreign Affairs 92(2):52–63.
Picard, David. (2011) Tropical Island Gardens and Formations of Modernity. In Thinking Through Tourism. Julie
Scott and Tom Selwyn, eds. Pp. 139–160. Oxford: Berg.
Pi-Sunyer, Oriol. (1992) The Cultural Costs of Tourism. Cultural Survival Quarterly 6(3):7–12.
———. (1998) Ethical Issues for North American Anthropologists Conducting Research in Mexico. Human Organi-
zation 57(3):326–327.
———. (2002) Space, Power, and Representation in Yuctán. In The Spaces of Neoliberalism: Land, Place and Family
in Latin America. Jacquelyn Chase, ed. Pp. 212–240. Bloomfield: Kumarian.
Tourism and the Transformation of Daily Life Along the Riviera Maya 109