Glorifying Cultural Scapes to Conflictual Tourismscapes: the Dynamics of Tourism Development in Rural Indonesia

E-Journal of Tourism Vol.9. No.1. (2022): 97-112

Glorifying Cultural Scapes to Conflictual Tourismscapes: The Dynamics of Tourism Development in Rural Indonesia

Rina Widiastuti, Wisma Nugraha Christianto Richardus*, Budiawan

Graduate School, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Indonesia

*Corresponding Author: [email protected]

DOI: https://doi.org/10.24922/eot.v9i1.83518

Article Info

Submitted:

February 10^th 2022

Accepted:

March 10^th 2022

Published:

March 31^st 2022

Abstract

This article discusses the cultural village transformation into a tourism village in Bejiharjo, a rural tourism destination in Indonesia. The Yogyakarta government has inaugurated Bejiharjo as a cultural village in 1995. Tourism induced Bejiharjo in 2011 with the idea of community empowerment and welfare promises. Unfortunately, transforming cultural scapes into a tourismscapes is very complicated, full of contradictions and controversy. Lately, Bejiharjo became a conflict arena. Based on the Actor-Network Theory, Bejiharjo is a space formed in a dynamic network of relationships between actors, both human and non-human actors. Using online media observation, semi-structured interviews, and direct observation, the complexity of the relations between actors in the transformation of rural development that causes aestheticisation, consumerism, translation, place-making, touristification, and cosmopolitanism in Beji-harjo is explored. The findings of this study reveal that, at first, the cultural scapes ordering of Bejiharjo should conserve local cultural values. Then, government regulations on tourism development emerged and encouraged the development of rural areas with the concept of a tourism village. This dynamic and interrelated process triggers competition between individual and group interests and causes chronic conflicts in Be-jiharjo. This study only describes the diversity of actors involved and the impact of tourism orderings on the transformation of Bejiharjo. Further exploration of the dynamics of power relations between actors is essential to reveal the possibility of resistance and unequal relations, which causes the problem of tourism development in Bejiharjo unresolved.

Keywords: Actor-Network Theory; Bejiharjo; cultural village; tourism village.

INTRODUCTION

Background

The tourism sector plays an important role in the Indonesian economy. This sector accounts for 5% of Indonesia's Gross National Product. Therefore, the increase in the amount of foreign exchange http://ojs.unud.ac.id/index.php/eot            97

is an important success indicator of tourism sector in the development process of this country. In 2015, the amount of foreign exchange from the tourism sector was IDR 175.71 trillion and became IDR 229.50 trillion in 2018 (Kementerian Pariwisata dan Ekonomi Kreatif, 2019). The increase in tourist visits is proof of the tourism e-ISSN 2407-392X. p-ISSN 2541-0857

sector's performance, at least before the Covid-19 pandemic. In 2010, the number of foreign visitors reached 7,002,944 people (Badan Pusat Statistik, 2011). Meanwhile, in 2019, foreign tourists increased to 16,106,954 people, or 130 percent (Badan Pusat Statistik, 2020). The increase in the number of visits is a manifestation of the government's success in developing the tourism sector in Indonesia by managing the four pillars of tourism, i.e., marketing, destinations, industry, and institutions. One of the Indonesian government's efforts to increase foreign tourist visits is to promote the development of new tourist destinations in rural areas, one of which is Bejiharjo.

Bejiharjo is a village in Yogyakarta, one of the special autonomous regions at the provincial level in Indonesia. The village has customs, traditional food, archeological sites, local wisdom, and performing arts diversity. There are dozens of groups of artists and performers in Bejiharjo village. It held regular traditional celebrations every year. In 1995, the provincial government of the Special Region of Yogyakarta granted Bejiharjo the status of a cultural village because of the preservation of traditional culture. Since then, Bejiharjo has always taken part in festivals and cultural competitions at the provincial level and has won several times (Bejiharjo Government, 2016).

In 2011, it increasingly recognized Bejiharjo for the existence of Goa Pindul, a tourist attraction managed by residents of this village. Goa Pindul is a karst cave with an underground river. Initially, the river that flows under Goa Pindul is a place for residents to wash clothes and bathe livestock. Motivated by the clean river program of the Indonesian Ministry of Environment, the residents of Bejiharjo clean up the watershed around Goa Pindul and promote it as a tourist attraction (Interview with the Director of Panca http://ojs.unud.ac.id/index.php/eot            98

Wisata, 2019). Goa Pindul’s popularity has made Bejiharjo chosen to be a participant in various tourism village competitions. In 2012, Bejiharjo won first place in the provincial and national tourism village competition, the PNPM Mandiri Tourism Village Award, and the top 10 winners of the Cipta Award for environmental conservation (Agung PW, 2018). However, since then, Bejiharjo's image as a tourism village displaces its status as a cultural village. Bejiharjo's success as a tourism village turned out to be full of conflict. An article about the dispute over the management rights of Goa Pindul was published, first, in online news media in early 2013. Different issues and actors emerged and involved in this conflict. Until the Covid-19 pandemic paralyzed the tourism industry all around the world, the tourism conflict in Bejiharjo was not completely over.

Bejiharjo becomes a conflictual arena after the tourism ordering process obscures the existence of its cultural scapes. On the one hand, tourism contributes to improving the welfare of Bejiharjo's people. Still, on the other hand, tourism may trigger economic interest struggles between individuals or community groups in this village. How can a village rich in cultural heritage become an arena of conflict when tourism induces the lives of local people? What kind of transformation process takes place there? Who is involved in this process? Is there an opportunity to resolve the conflict? The discussion in this article will answer these questions.

Research Objectives

Based on the brief description above, this paper discusses the transformation of cultural scape to a conflictual tourism scape in Bejiharjo. In addition, this article also explores the dynamics of the issue and the network of actors involved. Understanding the process, the issues, and the e-ISSN 2407-392X. p-ISSN 2541-0857

actors is important to unravel the complexities of the problems facing Bejiharjo and open up opportunities to solve them in more systematic and structured ways.

LITERATURE REVIEW

People visiting cultural and historical resources are one of the largest, most common and fastest growing tourism sectors today. In fact, heritage tourism appears to be growing faster than all other forms of tourism, especially in developing countries. Therefore, it is an important potential tool for poverty alleviation and community economic development (UNWTO, 2005). Heritage tourism depends on living cultural and architectural elements, which refer to the use of tangible and intangible pasts as tourism resources. Therefore, it contains the existing cultural heritage expressed through elements of intangible heritage, such as music, dance, language, religion, eating and cooking styles, artistic traditions and festivals; the tangible heritage of the built cultural environment, including monuments, historic public buildings, and residences, farms, castles and cathedrals, museums, and archaeological sites and relics (Timothy and Nyaupane, 2009). Cultural heritage includes the vibrant and valuable tangible objects and materials from the collection of cultural institutions, represented by landscapes and built environments, as well as living and intangible heritage, such as customs and traditions. It may mediate cultural heritage through institutional practices, or it may be essentially non-mediated, like traditional practices that are carried out every day. Cultural heritage has great potential to improve people's quality of life, understand the past, promote territorial cohesion, promote economic growth, create employment opportunities, and support broader development, such as improved education and artistic careers http://ojs.unud.ac.id/index.php/eot            99

(Borowiecki et al., 2016).

Understanding and promoting the common ethical values of humanity with a tolerant attitude and respect for the diversity of religious, philosophical and moral beliefs is the basis and the result of responsible tourism; tourism development stakeholders and tourists themselves must adhere to all ethnic groups, including the social and cultural traditions and customs of ethnic minorities and indigenous peoples, and recognize their value (UNWTO, 2020). Integrating tourism and culture, as well as tourists' growing interest in cultural experience, provide unique opportunities for the tourism industry, but it also faces complex challenges (Ho and McKercher, 2004; Rudwiarti et al., 2017; Syah and Hajarrahmah, 2019). In some developing countries, culture-based tourism enhancement and promotion can influence people’s livelihoods through the income generated from tourism activities and employment (Ahebwa et al., 2016; Ezenagu, 2020; Timothy, 2014; Valle, 2011). A similar situation occurs in Indonesia, where the collaboration of cultural heritage preservation programs and tourism has been successful in several areas, for example, culture-based tourism in Central Java, e.g., Borobudur Temple and Bali, e.g., Tanah Lot (Diarta, 2017). However, in certain areas, such as Bejiharjo, integrating cultural preservation and tourism development has encountered several obstacles and even led to conflicts.

RESEARCH METHODS

This study uses online media observation, direct observation, and semistructured interviews. Online media observation began in 2016 to October 2020 by tracing news in online media with several keywords, including “Bejiharjo”, “Desa Budaya Bejiharjo”, “Desa Wisata Bejiharjo”, “Goa Pindul”, “konflik Goa Pindul”, and “wisata Goa Pindul”. This data collection technique is important to e-ISSN 2407-392X. p-ISSN 2541-0857

determine the dynamics of space change, issues, and actors that arise and involved in the development of Bejiharjo based on online media coverage. We collected, grouped, and sorted news about Bejiharjo and Goa Pindul in cyberspace. The primary news sources are three national online media, i.e., Kompas.com., Antaranews.com., and Tribunnews.com. The online news media published articles about the development, management, and conflict of Bejiharjo intensively.

We observed the situation in Bejiharjo directly two times. In the first observation, we became tourists who visited Goa Pindul in October 2019. Then, we went to Bejiharjo as researchers in November 2020. To complete the field data, we also observed issues and actors online. First, we observe the movement of actors on websites and social media without digital media analytic tools in October-November 2020. Second, we observe using digital media analytic tools SEMRush in January-March 2021. These dual observation techniques are important for understanding the complexity of issues and actors in Bejiharjo comprehensively. As the online media and direct observations progressed, we interviewed the actors involved in managing the cultural village and tourism village of Bejiharjo. They are the Bejiharjo Cultural Village administrator, the Gunungkidul Regency Tourism Office staffs, and the pioneering tour operators of Goa Pindul. The information from these actors helps uncover the transformation process of the Bejiharjo space, the issues, and the network of actors involved in it.

The research data analysis used the Actor-Network Theory. In this approach, tourism is a system built, reproduced, and strengthened through human and nonhuman actors (actants). Instead of revealing who or what imposes or determines something in tourism, ActorNetwork Theory actually bridges actors http://ojs.unud.ac.id/index.php/eot

and structures, i.e., material sources, objects, space, and technology, to interact, work and create each other (Ren, 2011). In Actor-Network Theory, actors do not exist without network relations. This network approach assumes that power and actors arise from performing heterogeneous network relations (Johannesson, 2005). The discussion in this article will map the actors involved in the transformation of cultural scapes and tourismscapes in Bejiharjo.

The actor network theory allows to redefine tourism through the tourismscapes. Analytically, these are networks of actors connecting different societies and regions, transportation systems, accommodation and facilities, resources, environment, technology, people, and organizations. A dynamic network of actors occurs in an ordering process of the tourism system called Tourismscapes. There are three elements of Tourismscapes. First element is the people who use tourism services or the people and organizations that provide these services. Second element is a hybrid environment formed by natural and cultural objects, as well as humans. Third element is the expanse of a network of objects, machines, technologies that extend the reach of space and time. These three elements create a complex, unstable, nonlinear, and open Tourismscapes (Van Der Duim, 2007). We describe Bejiharjo's cultural and tourism scapes transformation based on the impact of tourism ordering. The effects of tourism ordering are aes-theticisation, consumerism, translation, place-making, tourism, and cosmopolitanism (Franklin, 2008).

RESULT AND DISCUSSION

Bejiharjo as a cultural village

Bejiharjo's location is in Karangmojo District, Gunungkidul Regency, Special Region of Yogyakarta. Bejiharjo has an area of 18,25 km2. The residents used most of the land in Bejiharjo for farming, plantations, livestock, and public facilities (Bejiharjo Village Government, 2016a). The total population of Bejiharjo is 15,347 people. Most of the population works as farmers. The average population of this village has completed education up to the high school level. As much as 40% of Bejiharjo’s income comes from the tourism sector. The rapid development of the village over the last 5 years has made Bejiharjo included in the category of an independent village (Pemerintah Kalurahan Bejiharjo, 2020).

As a cultural village, the development policy in Bejiharjo is inseparable from the privileged status of Yogyakarta province. This province has a special status because of the contribution of its king during the war of independence of the Republic of Indonesia. The Ngayogyakarta Hadiningrat Sultanate was the first kingdom to recognize Indonesia's independence in 1945 and provided financial support for the country's formation. In 1946-1949, during the Dutch military aggression that threatened the sovereignty of this new state, the Ngayogyakarta Hadiningrat Sultanate became the capital city of the Republic of Indonesia. Based on these historical reasons, the government of the Republic of Indonesia gave special status to the Ngayogyakarta Hadiningrat Sultanate as the Special Region of Yogyakarta. The Indonesian government stipulates the privileges of Yogyakarta officially in 1950 and renewed in 2012, based on the Law of the Republic of Indonesia Number 13 of 2012. Since then, Yogyakarta may regulate and manage the internal authority of the region. It manifested this authority in the election of regional heads and the naming of regional government organizational

structures. Yogyakarta is the only province in Indonesia that a king rules. Therefore, there is no general election to elect a governor because the king automatically holds this position on the throne. Currently, Hamengku Buwono X is the Sultan of Yogyakarta who has served as governor for 23 years (Pemerintah Daerah Istimewa Yogyakarta, 2019).

As the only sultan in Indonesia, who officially holds local government power, Hamengku Buwono X strives to maintain the diversity of his local culture as the authentic identity of the Ngayogyakarta Hadiningrat Sultanate. Through various regional policies and regulations, he manages cultural heritage with the support of special funds from the government of the Republic of Indonesia. Regional policies and regulations relating to the management and preservation of cultural heritage in the province of the Special Region of Yogyakarta are Regional Regulation Number 4 of 2011 concerning Yogyakarta Cultural Values, Regional Regulation Number 6 of 2012 concerning Preservation of Cultural Heritage and Cultural     Conservation,     Governor

Regulation Number 36 of 2014 concerning Cultural Villages, and Governor's Decree Number 262 of 2016 concerning the Inauguration of 56 Cultural Villages in Yogyakarta.

Bejiharjo’s cultural scapes orders formally began in 1995. Through Governor’s Decree No. 325 of 1995, the Yogyakarta government has inaugurated Bejiharjo as a cultural village. They based the stipulation on the diversity and the quality of the management of customs, traditional foods, architectural sites, local wisdom values, and performing arts assessment results. The inventory of Bejiharjo cultural heritage continued in 2011. This is a part of translation process of Regional Regulation Number 4 of 2011 concerning Yogyakarta Cultural Values. In the regulation, the government urges the e-ISSN 2407-392X. p-ISSN 2541-0857

competitions in Yogyakarta. This event is held annually by the Cultural Office of the Special Region of Yogyakarta and it is an obligation for the cultural village to take part. In the event, each cultural village competed to win the award as the best cultural village in Yogyakarta, through the live art performances (Humas Pemerintah Daerah Daerah Istimewa Yogyakarta, 2019).

Besides the aestheticisation process, cultural villages are also involved in a place-making process. For examples, in the management of archeological heritage, government built the Sokoliman Sites to store and display ancient archeological property. Previously, this archaeological heritage scattered in Bejiharjo’s area, then the residents collected and registered them to the Cultural Conservation and Preservation Center of Yogyakarta (Balai Pelestarian Cagar Budaya Provinsi Daerah Istimewa Yogyakarta, 2021). In 2019, the Gunungkidul Culture Office has budgeted IDR 600 million for the restoration of Sokoliman Sites. The government reorganized the area by building several gazebos to store small menhirs and rearranged the display of other artifacts (Sutarmi, 2019). In addition, the Gunungkidul Communication and Information Office provides free Wi-Fi service with a high-speed internet connection in Sokoliman Sites. This is another government effort to attract tourists to visit the cultural site. They expected that the free internet service to meet the need of the young generation who have a strong engagement with social media (Pangaribowo, 2019b). This is the evidence of the touristification, a process to adjust places to support the tourists’ needs.

We have mentioned previously, there was a touristification process of Bejiharjo Cultural Village. This is a part of the wider cultural scapes touristification in Yogyakarta. The performances of several 102     e-ISSN 2407-392X. p-ISSN 2541-0857

community to report and register the cultural heritage in each village. This data collection is important for distributing funds to preserve local culture in each region. In 2012, the Cultural Office of the Special Region of Yogyakarta conveyed managing cultural diversity to develop a tourism village. For this reason, cultural villages need to build infrastructure facilities that support tourist visits. This idea received support from the Yogyakarta Tourism Office and the community in cultural villages so that cultural-based tourism villages emerged in Yogyakarta.

In 2014, the Yogyakarta Government defined the duties and functions of a cultural village in more detailed through Governor’s Decree No. 36 of 2014. A cultural village is described as a village that actualizes, develops, and conserves the cultural potential resources, including customs and traditions, arts, traditional games, languages, literature, scripts, crafts, culinary arts, traditional medicine, spatial planning, and cultural heritage. Efforts to conserve cultural heritage and diversity in villages should strengthen Yogyakarta identity as an integral part of the national and international cultural diversity.

Based on Governor’s Decree No. 262 of 2016, the Yogyakarta Government has re-inaugurated Bejiharjo as a culturally independent village and supports the financial needs for managing the organization. The consequences of the stipulation of cultural villages in Yogyakarta is the culture aestheticisation, so that it looks more attractive for the tourist. Aesthetics refers to the idea that everything looks new and interesting to watch. It relates to the knowledge development of tourists because this is the area of surprise (Franklin, 2008). As a part of this process, Bejiharjo’s dancers practice regularly and prepare special costumes for performing dances at the Cultural Festivals or other arts and culture http://ojs.unud.ac.id/index.php/eot

dancers and musicians from the cultural villages in the Selasa Wagen was an effort by the Yogyakarta government to attract as many tourists as possible to this province. This event is a special event on Tuesday evening art performance held at strategic places in the center of Yogyakarta City. Subsequently, the process of translation, aesthetics,       place-making       into

touristification leads to cosmopolitanism and consumerism. The tourists from various backgrounds outside the province who enjoy the art performances in Yogyakarta are the example of cosmopolitanism process. The Yogyakarta cultural values, as outlined in these events, can bring together many people with different races, religions, tribes, and nationalities in one place. Those who gather in strategic places consume the show and its intrinsic values. They may also buy food, drink, or souvenirs during the show. This is an example of small-scale consumerism in the tourism ordering process of cultural scapes in Yogyakarta.

Along with the increasing popularity of Goa Pindul as a tourist icon in 2011, the image of Bejiharjo as a cultural village faded. Changes in village development priorities occurred in Bejiharjo. In the Gunungkidul Regency Regulation Number 6 of 2011 concerning the 2011-2020 Gunungkidul Spatial Plan, it shifted the development direction of Bejiharjo from culture-based development to tourismbased development. This regulation states that Bejiharjo is suitable to be developed into a tourism area. In a letter from the Gunungkidul Regional Spatial Planning Coordinating Board Number 591/518 of 2014 regarding the study of the Spatial Planning of the Tourism Area of Bejiharjo, Bejiharjo is a cultural-based tourism area and a special interest tourism area because of the existence of Goa Pindul as a tourist attraction (Dinas Kebudayaan dan Kepariwisataan Pemerintah Kabupaten Gunungkidul, 2015). The Gunungkidul

Government support for tourism development in Bejiharjo caused the popularity of the Bejiharjo Cultural Village to be shifted by the emergence of the Bejiharjo Tourism Village. The entire potential of Bejiharjo’s cultural diversity should relate to tourism purposes.

Tourism is a sector that can improve the welfare of the people of Bejiharjo. The principal tourist attraction called Goa Pindul, contributes as the largest source of the Village Revenue and Expenditure Budget in this village. However, tourism also has a negative impact, i.e., chronic conflicts that attract the attention of local and national media, and involve various internal and external actors of Bejiharjo. According to Bejiharjo Cultural Village Administrator, the conflict related to the management of Goa Pindul is not a conflict involving the people of Bejiharjo as a whole. In the conflict, only certain groups who has economic interest involved. So, this conflict does not have a significant effect on the Bejiharjo’s residents of Bejiharjo who are not take part in the management of Goa Pindul. The Bejiharjo Cultural Village Administrator agrees that the cause of the chronic conflict in Goa Pindul is the loss of local cultural values. Some managers of Goa Pindul tourism operator are young people who initially worked outside Bejiharjo, as laborers in big cities in Indonesia. The urban culture that they brought when they returned to the village caused the local culture of Bejiharjo to shift. In the management of Goa Pindul, money-oriented culture shifts the rural culture such as cooperation and tolerance. This has resulted in an increase of farm laborers, carpenter, and mason tariffs and a decrease of community volunteerism (Bejiharjo Cultural Village Administrator personal communication, May 11th, 2020).

In 2020, when the Covid-19 pandemic stopped the activities of the tourism sector around the world and e-ISSN 2407-392X. p-ISSN 2541-0857

panicked all levels of society. Cultural activities are held limitedly in Bejiharjo and become an economic asset that will survive the pandemic. Artists can still practice and perform virtually at the cultural event in 2020. Cultural figures have also created Bejiharjo batik patterns, which was launched in 2021. They said that the situation during the pandemic has emphasized the importance of returning to local cultural values. Many tourism workers return to the agricultural sector by working on their own land as farmers. There are also the ones asking for work as farm laborers from landowners with a minimum wage in order to survive (Bejiharjo Cultural Village Administrator, personal communication, May 11th, 2020).

Bejiharjo as a tourism village

Once famous for its cultural heritage, Bejiharjo is also famous as a village that has a unique geological landscape. There are 12 karst caves in Bejiharjo that have the potential to become tourist attractions. The cave that has become a popular tourist attraction is Goa Pindul. This is an underground cave with a river flowing for 350 meters, with various shapes and sizes of stalactites and stalagmites inside. Goa Pindul gained tremendous popularity in 2011 so that it became the center of tourismscapes in Bejiharjo. Its existence diverts the local government's attention to the management of the Bejiharjo cultural village.

There is no single information regarding when and who started the management of Goa Pindul as a tourist attraction. However, the majority opinion is that Goa Pindul’s promotion began in 2010 by Subagyo, The Director of Dewa Bejo Tourism Operators (Gunungkidul Tourism Office, personal communication, September 15th, 2020; Deputy Director of Wira Wisata, personal communication, November 21st, 2019; Director of Dewa Bejo, personal communication, September http://ojs.unud.ac.id/index.php/eot

22nd, 2019). A different opinion was

conveyed by the Director of BUMDes Maju Mandiri (Village Owned Enterprises), that the initiator of Goa Pindul’s marketing was the Village Head of Bejiharjo, the Head of the Village Consultative Organization, and the Regent of Gunungkidul (Director of BUMDes Maju Mandiri, personal communication, July 11th, 2019). The Director of Panca Wisata Tour Operators told another story. The idea of using the watershed under Goa Pindul was the continuation of the Clean River and Agropolitan Program from the Indonesian Ministry of Environment. After these two programs ended, there was a gathering for community aspirations regarding the watershed concept and Goa Pindul’s use. Inspired by the success story of cave management in other villages, the community agreed to develop Goa Pindul as a special interest tourist attraction. Therefore, Subagyo’s involvement was a mandate from the Bejiharjo Government (Director of Panca Wisata, personal communication, November 23rd, 2019). Just like the Director of Panca Wisata, the Director of Tunas Wisata did not mention the involvement of Subagyo as the initiator of Goa Pindul management. Instead, he mentioned that tourism development in Goa Pindul was the idea of the Gunungkidul Tourism Office (Director of Tunas Wisata, personal communication, September 24th, 2019).

As with Bejiharjo’s cultural scapes ordering system, the processes of aesthetics, place-making, translation, touristification, cosmopolitanism, and consumerism occur in the management of Goa Pindul. This process led to the establishment of Bejiharjo Tourism Village in 2012. However, Subagyo said that there was no definitive government decree about the establishment of tourism village in Bejiharjo. According to his explanation, when the Gunungkidul Government asked him to apply for status

as a tourist village, he objected because he felt that the Gunungkidul Government only wanted to claim the group’s efforts to develop Goa Pindul (personal communication, May 11th,   2020).

However, the results of tracing the Bejiharjo’s Environmental Impact Analysis Document for Village Tourism Area Arrangement and Development Plan 2015 provide different information. There is a copy of the Decree of the Head of the Gunungkidul Culture and Tourism Office Number 013 of 2012 concerning the Establishment of the Gunungkidul Tourism Village Group in the document (Dinas Kebudayaan dan Kepariwisataan Pemerintah Kabupaten Gunungkidul, 2015). The different stories about the beginning ordering process of Goa Pindul tourismscapes make it difficult to explain its concept and impact comprehensively. Therefore, an explanation of the process of aesthetics, place-making, translation, touristification, cosmopolitanism, and consumerism in Goa Pindul is a representation of the various stories that exist. The most detailed explanation of Goa Pindul’s aesthetic process comes from Subagyo’s information.

Subagyo explained the aesthetic process of Goa Pindul in a video on Omarif GK’s YouTube channel (2019a), entitled Mistis!!! Beginilah Kisah Bayi yang Dibuang Hingga Penamaan Goa Pindul or Mistic!!! This is the abandoned baby’s story and the name of Goa Pindul. This YouTube channel is owned by Subagyo’s son, who works as a marketer in Goa Pindul under the management of Dewa Bejo Tourism Operator. Subagyo said that, at the beginning of the management of Goa Pindul, his group members cleaned and removed supernatural things that could interfere with tourism activities. According to Tukijo’s story, the spiritual caretaker of Goa Pindul, this cave is the burial place of Ki Mangku Suryo, a supernatural figure. He believes this figure is the grandson of

the King of Mataram, Panembahan Senopati. This belief made Subagyo, Tukijo, and other group members carry out spiritual activities to honor the supernatural figure so that the tourism activities could start safely (Omarif Gk Channel, 2019b). A different opinion is explained by the Director of BUMDes Maju Mandiri. Efforts to organize Goa Pindul have nothing to do with supernatural things. He said that Goa Pindul was only cleaned physically. There are no special rituals for supernatural figure there. Initially, there was a lot of garbage in Goa Pindul. The residents also used the river under the cave to wash the clothes or bathe livestock. Regarding the beliefs about supernatural things, as long as the spiritual caretaker allows, Goa Pindul is safe for any activities, including tourism (Director of BUMDes Maju Mandiri, personal communication, July 11th, 2019).

The process after the aesthetics of Goa Pindul is place-makings. It involved tour operator groups in Bejiharjo. Unfortunately, place-making occurs sporadically, based on the group’s locations and the residents’ support. The first place-making took place in 2010. Dewa Bejo was the first tour operator organization to establish a tourism service secretariat in mid-2010. In 2011, Dewa Bejo received funds from the National Program for Community Empowerment in Tourism (PNPM Mandiri Wisata), a national poverty alleviation program based on community empowerment by the Indonesian government in 2007. This program is a translation of Presidential Regulation Number 54 of 2005 concerning the Poverty Reduction Coordination Team (Tim Pengendali PNPM Mandiri, 2007). In addition to building a secretariat office, Dewa Bejo used the funds to build toilet facilities, tires for river tubing, and life jackets. In the same year, students from Universitas Gadjah Mada in Students e-ISSN 2407-392X. p-ISSN 2541-0857

Community Services Program also assisted the effort to do place-making in Goa Pindul. They installed Goa Pindul signboard blocks on the outer wall of Goa Pindul and near the Dewa Bejo secretariat office. The students also helped Dewa Bejo to manage the administrative documents and create organizational profiles.

In the late of 2011, the dispute occurred in Dewa Bejo. This organization split into several new tour operator groups. The tour operator groups are Wira Wisata, Panca Wisata and Tunas Wisata. In the following years, the number of tour operator groups increased. In 2019, there were 11 tour operators in Bejiharjo. Each group set up their own secretariat offices around Goa Pindul. In 2020, tour operator groups in Bejiharjo are having a hard time surviving the Covid-19 pandemic because of the decline in the number of visits to only 2%. This condition causes a decrease in the number of operator groups. If before the pandemic there were 11 groups of tour operators, currently there are only 10 groups that are still surviving. Placemaking Goa Pindul occurs not only physically in the real world. This process also occurs in the internet world by using the Google Maps service. On Google Maps, operators mark their existence with a place icon, a camera image on a red or green background. The emergence of these various icons makes Goa Pindul geographically difficult to find in cyberspace. If we type in the keyword “Goa Pindul”, the location point shown by Google Maps actually shows the location of the secretariat offices of the Goa Pindul tour operator.

Apart from being a manifestation of

place-making, the construction arrangement of various facilities in Pindul is a touristification process. operators provide toilets, parking

and Goa The lots,

restaurants, a free internet network, photographers, non-cash payment services, and lodging to attract tourists. Here, the : http://ojs.unud.ac.id/index.php/eot            106

tour operators compete to promote various facilities and services. They also often provide over 50% discounts for ticket purchases with special conditions determined by each operator. As a result, uncontrolled ticket prices have led to price wars between operators for years. This situation is further complicated by freelance marketers competing to sell Goa Pindul tickets at the lowest price. Besides the tour operators, the Gunungkidul Department of Culture and Tourism Office also creates place-making and touristification concepts for developing integrated tourism areas in Bejiharjo. After the conflict culminated in 2014, Gunungkidul Government prepares an Environmental Impact Analysis Document for re-ordering Bejiharjo’s Tourismscapes in 2015. Based on the document, tourism development in Bejiharjo should prioritize the sustainable environment and local culture (Dinas Kebudayaan dan Kepariwisataan Pemerintah Kabupaten Gunungkidul, 2015). Bejiharjo tourism area development plan includes three concepts. The first concept is developing two Integrated Tourism Secretariats, and an integrated tour packages system centered in Goa Pindul and includes the caves around Goa Pindul. The second concept in the Bejiharjo tourism area development plan is the construction of tourism support facilities. Parking areas, toilet facilities and changing rooms, tires and life jackets, food and beverage shops, souvenir shops, public transport shelters, and tourism information center offices are facilities to be built in two integrated tourism secretariat locations. Meanwhile, the third concept is the development of Mriwis Lake. They will develop the only lake in Bejiharjo as a culinary tourism area (Dinas Kebudayaan dan Kepariwisataan Pemerintah Kabupaten Gunungkidul, 2015).

Overall, the environmental impact study of the Bejiharjo Village Tourism e-ISSN 2407-392X. p-ISSN 2541-0857

Area Arrangement and Development Plan describes several environmental components’ effects, likes the conservation of natural resources as landscapes, flora, and fauna and the social processes for implementing the seven tourism environmental principles, i.e., Security, order, cleanliness, coolness, beauty, friendliness, and memories (Dinas Kebudayaan dan Kepariwisataan Pemerintah Kabupaten Gunungkidul, 2015). The environmental impact study also defines positive results that strengthen the government’s plan to develop integrated tourism in Bejiharjo. Unfortunately, the Gunungkidul Government canceled the plan because the operators limited the government administrative access to Goa Pindul and rejected the government’s involvement in Bejiharjo’s tourism management.

The process of aesthetics, placemaking, and touristification in Goa Pindul affects increasing domestic and foreign tourist visits to Bejiharjo. The highest number of tourist visits occurred in 2014. There were 426,413 domestic tourists and 3,533 foreign tourists in a year (Yogyakarta Special Region Tourism Office, 2014). The presence of tourists from various regions and countries in Goa Pindul, with various cultural backgrounds, creates cosmopolitanism in Bejiharjo. Not only cosmopolitanism but consumerism also occurs in the ordering system of Goa Pindul’s tourismscapes. The popularity of Goa Pindul causes thousands of tourists to cram and queued for hours to consume the beauty of the cave and the challenging experience during the tour. In early 2016, the Gunungkidul Government admitted it was difficult to limit the number of tourists in Goa Pindul (Sutarmi, 2016). Despite efforts to limit the number of tourists by reducing visiting hours and quotas every year, the density of visitors occurred again at the end of 2019 (Ewi, 2019).

In March 2020, the Goa Pindul tour http://ojs.unud.ac.id/index.php/eot

operator stopped tourism service activities temporarily due to the impact of the Covid-19 outbreak. Before the closure of the Goa Pindul tourism service, tourist visits had decreased by 75% because of the outbreak that attacked areas outside Gunungkidul (Yuwono, 2020). During the pandemic, direct observations in Goa Pindul revealed that there were few activities carried out by workers at the tour operator secretariat office. According to Rudi Wira Wisata, the operators were doing a lot of activities in cyberspace. Eighteen websites actively promote and sell Goa Pindul tickets. This website comprises 12 Goa Pindul tourist operator official websites and 6 Goa Pindul freelance marketer websites. Both parties compete fiercely to control website traffic. In mid-2020, operators are having a hard time beating freelance marketers because they don’t have a lot of money to pay for traffic. The freelance marketers repeatedly blocked the traffic of visitors to the Goa Pindul Operator's official website. To overcome this, Goa Pindul operators usually have over one website domain and sub-domain. For Goa Pindul tourism operators, visitor traffic in cyberspace will affect the number of tourist visits to Goa Pin-dul directly (interview with Rudi Wira Wisata, 2020).

CONCLUSION

The description of the cultural scapes and the tourismscapes transformation in Bejiharjo revealed that its forms are from the network of actors and actants. Goa Pindul tour operators, Bejiharjo Government, Gunungkidul Government, Yogyakarta Government, and freelance marketers are interconnected and involved in the network as the principal actors. In this network, laws and regulations, government decrees, scientific study documents, and social programs are actants that serve as references for actors and legitimize their movements. Thus, in

the     Bejiharjo     cultural     scapes

transformation, the relationship between actors and actants is very dynamic. The impact of tourism ordering in cultural scapes is aestheticisation, place-making, touristification, consumerism, translation, and cosmopolitanism of Bejiharjo's cultural heritage. However, these transformations are not sequential but intersecting processes. This is because of changes in the vision and mission of village development, which simultaneously respond to the popularity of Goa Pindul.

The transformation of the Bejiharjo cultural scapes is problematic because the basic concept of village development is unclear. In the beginning, culture was the basic concept of Bejiharjo’s development. But suddenly, the development of the village has left its cultural base, only because of the popularity of Goa Pindul, the additional tourist attraction in Bejiharjo. Glorifying cultural diversity and historical backgrounds is not enough to strengthen the basic concept of cultural village development. As a result, the importance of cultural preservation is only limited to collecting cultural heritage data and holding cultural performances. In fact, culture is not only about appearance or spectacle. More than that, culture comprises intrinsic values that embodied in thought, speech, and behavior. Unfortunately, this transformation process shows that tourism ordering systems can quickly replace culture-based systems. Therefore, tourism-based development is the right term to refer to the current concept of Bejiharjo development.

Contribution/Practical Implications

Based on the conclusion, there are several practical implications for improving the quality of village development in the Special Region of Yogyakarta, especially in Bejiharjo. First, even though Yogyakarta is an autonomous province based on a sultanate, development should prioritize democratic values. The formulation of development policies should involve the target community so that the concept is http://ojs.unud.ac.id/index.php/eot            108

acceptable and understandable at the lowest level of society. So far, development participation is not optimal because development policies, both culture-based development policies and tourism-based development, are top down. Second, the village government should make a systematic and comprehensive development plan with a clear vision, according to the village’s needs. During our research in Bejiharjo, we did not find any development plans that are concerned with the local character. All development plans are direct translations of policies from the central level and follow trends. It is time for the village to form its own identity to plan a clear and targeted development roadmap. Third, this research still has limitations in terms of the depth of exploring the causes of conflict in transforming space in Bejiharjo. This study only describes the diversity of actors involved and the impact of tourism orderings on the transformation of Bejiharjo. Further exploration of the dynamics of power relations between actors is essential to reveal the possibility of resistance and unequal relations between actors, which causes the problem of tourism development in Beji-harjo unresolved.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

We would like to thank the Bejiharjo Cultural Village administrator, the Gunungkidul Tourism Office staffs, and the pioneering tour operators of Goa Pin-dul: Dewa Bejo, Wira Wisata, Tunas Wisata, and Panca Wisata for the information provided in the interview and the supporting documents.

REFERENCES

Ahebwa, W.M., John P Aporu, Jockey B Nyakaana.     (2016).     Bridging

community livelihoods and cultural conservation through tourism: Case study of Kabaka heritage trail in Uganda. Tourism and Hospitality e-ISSN 2407-392X. p-ISSN 2541-0857

Research. Vol. 16(2) 103–115. DOI: 10.1177/1467358415589659.

Badan Pusat Statistik. (2012). Statistik Kunjungan Wisatawan Mancanegara 2011 (Statistics of International Tourist Visits 2011).

_____.   (2020). Statistik Kunjungan Wisatawan Mancanegara 2019 (Statistics of International Tourist Visits 2019).

Borowiecki, K.J., Neil Forbes, Antonella Fresa. (2016). Cultural Heritage in a Changing World. Springer Open.

Diarta, I K.S. (2017). Between Cultural Preservation and Tourism Industry: Dialectic Relations in Cultural Heritage Tourism Management in Tanah Lot and Borobudur Indonesia. E-Journal of Tourism. Vol. 4. No. 2. (2017):        100-109.        DOI:

https://doi.org/10.24922/eot.v4i2.364 03

Dinas Kebudayaan dan Kepariwisataan Pemerintah Kabupaten Gunungkidul. (2015). Analisis Dampak Lingkungan Hidup (AMDAL) Rencana Penataan dan Pengembangan Kawasan Wisata Desa     Bejiharjo     Kecamatan

Karangmojo Kabupaten Gunungkidul (Environmental Impact Analysis (AMDAL) Planning and Development of Tourism Areas in Bejiharjo Village, Karangmojo District, Gunungkidul Regency). Gunungkidul: Pemerintah Kabupaten Gunungkidul.

Dinas Kebudayaan Provinsi Daerah Istimewa Yogyakarta. (2012). Desa Budaya (Tourism Village). Microsoft PowerPoint Document. Yogyakarta: Dinas Kebudayaan Provinsi Daerah Istimewa Yogyakarta.

Ezenagu, Ngozi. (2020). Heritage resources as a driver for cultural tourism in Nigeria. Cogent Arts & Humanities.       7:       1734331.

https://doi.org/10.1080/23311983.202

0.1734331.

Franklin, Adrian. (2008). The tourism ordering. Civilisations [En ligne], 57 | 2008,                        DOI:

10.4000/civilisations.1288.

Ho P.S.Y. and McKercher, Bob. (2004). Managing Heritage Resources as Tourism Products. Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research. Vol. 9, No.            3.            DOI:

10.1080/1094166042000290655.

Jóhannesson, Gunnar Thór. (2005). Tourism translations Actor–Network: Theory and tourism research. Tourist Studies, vol 5(2)  133–150. DOI:

10.1177/ 1468797605066924.

Kementerian Pariwisata dan Ekonomi Kreatif. 2019. Laporan Kinerja Kementerian Pariwisata 2019 (Ministry of Tourism Performance Report 2019). Jakarta: Kementerian Pariwisata dan Ekonomi Kreatif Republik Indonesia.

Pemerintah Kalurahan Bejiharjo. 2020. Monografi Desa (Microsoft Word Document). Pemerintah Kalurahan Bejiharjo

Pemerintah Provinsi Daerah Istimewa Yogyakarta. (2011). Peraturan Daerah Provinsi Daerah Istimewa Yogyakarta Nomor 4 tahun 2011 tentang Tata Nilai Budaya Yogyakarta (Regional Regulation of the Province of the Special Region of Yogyakarta Number 4 of 2011 concerning Yogyakarta    Cultural    Values).

Yogyakarta:    Gubernur Daerah

Istimewa Yogyakarta.

____. (2012). Peraturan Daerah Provinsi Daerah Istimewa Yogyakarta Nomor 6 Tahun 2012 tentang Pelestarian Warisan Budaya dan Cagar Budaya (Regional Regulation of the Special Region of Yogyakarta Number 6 of 2012 concerning Preservation of

Cultural Heritage and Cultural Conservation). Yogyakarta: Gubernur Daerah Istimewa Yogyakarta.

Gubernur Daerah Istimewa Yogyakarta. (2014). Peraturan Gubernur Nomor 36    Tahun    2014    tentang

Desa/Kelurahan Budaya (Governor Regulation Number 36 of 2014 concerning                  Cultural

Villages/Kelurahan). Yogyakarta: Gubernur     Daerah     Istimewa

Yogyakarta.

Ren, Carina. 2011. Non-Human Agency, Radical  Ontology  and  Tourism

Realities. Annals of   Tourism

Research, Vol. 38, No. 3, pp. 858-881. DOI: 10.1016/j.annals.2010.12.007.

Rudwiarti, L.A., Pudianti, A., Vitasurya, V.R. (2017). A Comparison Study of Tangible and Intagible Culture as Commercialisation Process of Tourism Village in Yogyakarta. EJournal of Tourism. Vol. 4. No. 2. (2017):         71-77.         DOI:

https://doi.org/10.24922/eot.v4i2.363 98

Syah, M.S. and Hajarrahmah, Dini. (2019). Approaches to Indonesia Cultural Tourism Policy:    Stakeholders’

Perspectives on The Cultural Tourism Governances in Bayan. E-Journal of Tourism. Vol. 6. No. 2. (2019): 178195.                           DOI:

https://doi.org/10.24922/eot.v6i2.458 07

Tim Pengendali PNPM Mandiri. (2007). Pedoman Umum Program Nasional Pemberdayaan Masyarakat (PNPM) Mandiri (General Guidelines for the National Community Empowerment Program (PNPM) Mandiri). Jakarta: Deputi Menko Kesra Bidang Koordinasi         Penanggulangan

Kemiskinan.

Timothy, D.J. and Gyan Nyaupane. (2009). “Cultural Heritage and Tourism in the Developing World”. Contemporary http://ojs.unud.ac.id/index.php/eot            110

Geographies of Leisure, Tourism and Mobility. London and New York: Routledge.

Timothy, Dallen J. (2014). Contemporary Cultural Heritage and Tourism: Development Issues and Emerging Trends. Public Achaeology. Vol. 13 Nos 1–3,  2014,  30–47. DOI:

10.1179/1465518714Z.00000000052.

UNWTO. (2005). Cultural Tourism and Poverty Alleviation: The Asia-Pacific Perspective. Madrid: World Tourism Organization.

____. (2020). Framework Convention on Tourism Ethics. Madrid:  World

Tourism Organization.

Valle, P.O., Manuela Guerreiro, Ju´lio Mendes and Joa˜o Albino Silva. (2011). The cultural offer as a tourist product in coastal destinations: The Case of Algarve, Portugal. Tourism and Hospitality Research. 11(4) 233– 247.                         DOI:

10.1177/1467358411420623.

Van   der Duim, René. 2007.

Tourismscapes: An Actor-Network Perspective. Annals of Tourism Research, Vol. 34, No. 4, pp. 961–976, DOI: 10.1016/j.annals.2007.05.008.

Online media source

Agung PW. (2018, July). Di Balik Nama Besar Goa Pindul (Behind the great name     of     Goa     Pindul).

https://desawisatabejiharjo.net/sejarah / . Accessed on October, 10th 2021

Balai Pelestarian Cagar Budaya Provinsi Daerah Istimewa Yogyakarta. (2021, February).  Situs Sokoliman dan

Kehidupan  Purbakala (Sokoliman

Sites     and Ancient Life.).

http://kebudayaan.kemdikbud.go.id/b pcbyogyakarta/situs-sokoliman-dan-kehidupan-purbakala/ . April, 19th

2021 (09:17).

Ewi. (2019, December). 14.100 Wisatawan Kunjungi Goa Pindul (14,100 Tourists Visit          Goa          Pindul).

https://www.krjogja.com/berita-lokal/diy/gunungkidul/14-100-wisatawan-kunjungi-goa-pindul/ . April, 19th 2021 (10:00).

Humas Pemerintah Daerah Daerah Istimewa Yogyakarta. (2019, August). 56 Desa Budaya di DIY Gelar Potensi Seloso Wagenan Malioboro (56 Tourism Villages in DIY perform at Seloso Wagenan Malioboro). https://jogjaprov.go.id/berita/detail/80 57-lima-puluh-enam-desa-budaya-di-diy-isi-gelar-potensi-seloso-wagenan-malioboro. April, 15th 2021 (05.11).

Omarif GK Channel. (2019a, February). Beginilah Cerita Pilu Rintisan Goa Pindul Gunungkidul (This is the sad story of the pioneering of Goa Pindul in                   Gunungkidul).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x U7xu5f_eUE&t=37s . Desember, 12th 2020 (08:15).

_____.   (2019b, February). Mistis!!! Beginilah Kisah Bayi yang Dibuang, Hingga Penamaan Goa Pindul (Mistic!!! This is the abandoned baby’s story and the name of Goa Pindul).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x kmqH6uf47A&t=4s . Desember, 12th 2020 (08:26).

Pangaribowo, Wisang Seto. (2019, March). Kominfo GK Lakukan Koordinasi dengan Disbud Fasilitasi Internet di Situs Sokoliman (Kominfo GK Coordinates with Disbud for Internet Facilitation on the Sokoliman Sites).

https://jogja.tribunnews.com/2019/03/ 15/kominfo-gk-lakukan-koordinasi-dengan-disbud-fasilitasi-internet-di-situs-sokoliman . April, 18th 2021 (07:08).

Pemerintah Daerah Istimewa Yogyakarta. (2019).      Sejarah      (History).

https://jogjaprov.go.id/profil/3-sejarah. March, 3th 2021 (15:20).

Pemerintah Kalurahan Bejiharjo. (2017, July). Pengelolaan Desa Budaya Bejiharjo (Management of Bejiharjo Cultural                     Village).

https://www.bejiharjo-karangmojo.desa.id/first/artikel/284-Pengelolaan-Desa-Budaya-Bejiharjo . October, 10th 2019 (10:13).

_____. (2019, October). Gelar Potensi Desa Budaya Bejiharjo Memperoleh Juara 3 Tingkat DIY (Participating in cultural performances, Bejiharjo Cultural Village Wins 3rd Place at DIY Level). https://www.bejiharjo-karangmojo.desa.id/first/artikel/538-Gelar-Potensi-Desa--Budaya--Bejiharjo-Memperoleh-Juara-3-Tingkat-DIY-. October, 10th 2019 (10:00).

Sutarmi. (2016, March). Gunung Kidul Kesulitan Batasi Pengunjung Gua Pindul (Gunung Kidul is difficult to limit            visitors            to).

https://jogja.antaranews.com/berita/33 8545/gunung-kidul-kesulitan-batasi-pengunjung-gua-pindul. April, 19th 2019 (10:45).

_____. (2019, April). Gunung Kidul akan Memugar Situs Sokoliman (Gunung Kidul Restoring Sokoliman Sites). https://www.antaranews.com/berita/8 19598/gunung-kidul-akan-memugar-situs-sokoliman. March, 3th 2021 (11:50).

Yuwono, Markus. (2020, March). Dampak Corona, Sejumlah Obyek Wisata di Gunungkidul Memilih Tutup (Impact of Corona, a number of tourist attractions in Gunungkidul choose to close).

https://travel.kompas.com/read/2020/ 03/23/155526327/dampak-corona-sejumlah-obyek-wisata-di-

gunungkidul-memilih-tutup.

November, 30th 2020 (08:16).

http://ojs.unud.ac.id/index.php/eot

112

e-ISSN 2407-392X. p-ISSN 2541-0857