This week the focus of our module is on the Insight dimension of the Connected SELF framework and strengthening our ability to recognize and understand complex ethical dilemmas by seeking to better understand the perspectives of those who have a "stake" in decisions made related to those situations (i.e. stakeholders). One of the challenges we face when conducting a stakeholder analysis is determining how to categorize/describe the perspectives of key stakeholders in a way that is both manageable and meaningful when it comes to seeking effective solutions. 

When situations are complex and multifaceted, our brains automatically begin putting things into categories in an effort to make sense of the information. This is a very useful and necessary way of organizing the vast amount of information bombarding us every day, however categorization can also lead us to oversimplify situations and make broad judgments about people that aren't helpful when attempting to resolve controversial ethical issues.  In some cases, the labels we use to describe various stakeholders deepens the divide and creates an "us vs them" mentality that makes it even more difficult to find meaningful solutions. Through our language, we create artificial narratives around "heroes" and "villains" that is not overly helpful when it comes to solving the challenges facing our local communities and the larger world today. For example, terms like "right and left" or "conservative and liberal" are often used to refer to large groups of people with a particular worldview when it comes to politics and government policies on things such as the economy, immigration, health care, education, taxation, crime and law enforcement, etc.  However these terms are insufficient to accurately represent the diversity of values and views within these broad categories and the true complexity of individual worldviews. When this happens, these labels can begin to create confusion rather than alleviate it. Individuals struggle to figure out where they "fit" in society because they find themselves aligning with some viewpoints from each broad category, but not fully "belonging" anywhere. Acknowledging this complexity is key and learning to be aware of the strengths and limitations of the categorization process is critical. To train ourselves to become more aware of these categories and labels and to consciously challenge them is extremely valuable when it comes to controversial strategic and ethical issues.

In our discussion forum this week, we are going to review an opinion piece by Vijay Kolinjivadi who is a post-doctoral fellow at the Institute of Development Policy at the University of Antwerp. Kolinjivadi has some strong views on capitalism, privilege, freedom, and the environment as these concepts relate to tourism. Consider how he categorizes and labels stakeholders by roles (tourists, locals, multinational corporations) and makes broad generalizations (capitalists, elites). It is natural to read the article and take these broad categorizations and stereotypes for granted without giving them a second thought. However is it an effective way to truly understand and represent the complexity of perspectives when it comes to this issue? His language is meant to challenge and provoke debate. The confidence with which he makes a number of bold statements implies "truth" when you read them initially, however when you stop to think about them they are, in fact, broad generalizations that should raise questions in our mind and cause us to want to learn more about the facts or data that he is basing those statements upon. At the same time, he also makes some really valid and interesting points that should cause us to step back and reflect on our own values, views, and choices when it comes to tourism. 

In your discussion post this week, I would like you to highlight one or two stakeholder groups that Kolinjivadi identifies in the article and consider what characteristics he is attributing to members of that group. Is this a helpful or a harmful way of understanding the perspectives of these stakeholders and the issues he identifies when it comes to tourism?If you were conducting a stakeholder analysis with the goal of "seeking to understand," what might be a more effective way to categorize these stakeholders? Explain the rationale for your opinion.  

https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2021/2/18/it-is-time-to-end-extractive-tourism