Tourism has been identified both as a way of losing cultural integrity as well as gaining cultural rejuvenation. Several authors have made attempts to discuss the possible outcomes of tourism in indigenous or other ethnic communities and give suggestions for future implications. Grünewald (2002) refers to a process of "cultural revival" where minorities have generated an arena of social space for expressing their traditions commercially. Cultural change does not necessarily mean host populations acculturation to mainstrean society but creating new cultural elements of a traditonal character to create new spaces from which to address the world (Grünewald 2002). Bunten (2010) introduces the concept of "indigenous capitalism" as a strategy for indigenous people to successfully participate in the global economy, considering Indigenous people as active parties in their chosen profession in tourism. Attanapola and Lund (2013) examine the change of indigenous identities by a more abrupt division between indigenization and integration, reflecting the juxtaposition between
cultural preservation and modernity. They identify two different survival strategies: re-indigenization through tourism development and integration into mainstream society.
Whatever strategies indigenous people think of to respond tourism, all pose both challenges and opportunities related to the broader socio-economic and geopolitical situation.
It is evident that development has changed identities of indigenous people and indigenous people are forced to redefine and re-negociate their identity within new socio-economic and geopolitical contexts (Attanapola and Lund 2013). Indigenous and white peoples are related with each other and ethnic identity is more and more characterized by alterity and hybridity (Nygren 1998). Studies tend to point towards a need for change, because for the indigenous people remaining as they are tends to be impossible in the changing world. Still, the most common desire for future among the interviewees was that Yorkín would stay as it is at the moment. Several thaught that they had reached the suitable mix of traditional and modern and if further changes occurred, there would no loger be any chance of going back, no possibilities for "re-indigenization". The right question to pose would therefore be how to be able to remain the way we are or is it impossible? In Yorkín, the division between people willing to embrace their traditional lifestyle and those wanting to pursue a more modern way of life is steadily present. Part of the people claim that they have already lost everything that could be called traditional while others hold on to the view that they still maintain many traditions. From the tourism perspective, maintaining the difference between the exotic and modern culture is a fundamental aspect attracting tourists to indigenous tourism ventures. The challenge for the indigenous people is therefore, how to maintain a big enough the difference between "us" and "them" to maintain the interest of tourists.
As suggested in the social identity theory, a person can belong to several groups at the same time adpoting their identity according to different situations. Identity is changeable over time and space and voluntaristic enabling adaptation to new forms of identity depending on the situation (Attanapola and Lund 2013). According to Grünewald (2002), indigenous people are not Indians only for tourism but mold and remold themselves according to the expectations they impose on themselves. Already now, it is noticeable that people adapt different identities depending on the situation. The image of "indigenous" is easily polished when acting with tourists to respond the needs of tourism. Distinction is thereby made between the acted identity and the ‘real’ identity not presented to tourists (Stronza 2008).
In Yorkín people define their collective identity strongly related to their geographical location. This kind of place-bound identity occurs when the surrounding environment influences the behaviour and self-identification of a group belonging to a specific place (Pratt 1998). The future vision of the continuing poplulation growth in the community addresses the issue to be able to maintain strong communality. At the moment community spirit is still strong. "Indigenous people in rural zones we still maintain the habits of supporting each other, that´s what I see in the indigenous people." (Woman 29, 21N29NYIT)xxxiv. Individuality is probable to increase complicating common decision-making and control over future development of the community. Already now one person had the desire of starting an own tourism company instead of working for the group to be able to have more liberty in decision-making.
The division between indigenization and integration is twofold and not very fruitful in predicting the continuation of tourism in Yorkín. Instead of seeing only two possible ways for the future development in the community, most suitable would be a model of combination between traditional and modern, a creative form of adaptation defined by the host community itself. Changes occurred during the last few years in the community spoke more for slow integration to mainstream culture, while the possibilities for re-indigenization seemed to become more and more challenging. I got the feeling that some people had already given up since the first visit and were just expecting what future would bring to the community. The division between those addressing the righ to modernize and those stating importance of preserving culture and identity had increased. In opposition to the number of literature addressing cultural change in indigenous communities, cultural change can be viewed as an abstract made-up construct as expressed by one participant: "The culture does not change, what changes are us, the ignorant. The culture maintains. The only thing that changes are the ignorant, who don´t believe in the culture. That´s the only thing." (Man 23, 12M23YIT)xxxv.
8 Discussion