ON BACALAR'S DEFENSE. COLLOQUIAL VERSION

make the necessary expenses in health and education, even dedicating the total income of households only for these purposes, as condescended in its study.

More alarming is that there was, in the period of success reports of Tourism and CONANP, 74.2 to 84.7% of wealth poverty in Felipe Carrillo Puerto, Morelos and Lázaro Cárdenas, again; and 53.2 to 63.7% for Othón P. Blanco (later included Bacalar) and Solidaridad (later included Tulum). What do these figures mean?). It means that practically 8 out of 10 inhabitants of these municipalities suffered from insufficient disposable income to acquire the food basket, as well as to make the necessary expenses in health, clothing, housing, transport and education, although the entire household income was used exclusively for the acquisition of these goods and services, CONEVAL said.

Where is all the wealth that tourism is supposedly bringing to the local populations that ceded – or lost treacherously – their territories in the name of the Protected Natural Areas and that are now treasures for tourism?

When the indicators of tourism, tourist load capacity and Limit of Change acceptable to PNA focused on tourism revolve around visitor satisfaction, and the initiatives of productive projects at hand of the NGOs, financed by international agencies, are limited to training guides, artisans or to be folkloric attractions of the local populations (for the enjoyment of the tourist), when an environmental conservation show is made and neither environmental protection is met, nor with the economic and social justice benefits that supposedly motivate the imposition of a reserve in a natural area of tourist potential, it turns out that the whole discourse of tourism and tourism in PNA driven by the triad, it's just that, a speech.

Explained by Palafox-Muñoz & Vilchis-Onofre (2019) “…The role of the State is to establish the conditions for the commodification of nature, for which it is based on two strategies: tourism for the economic valuation of the landscape; and Natural Protected Areas to guarantee ownership of the territory; both elements always under the discourse of sustainability...”

In the end, the discourse of sustainability and opportunities for local populations, owners of the territories, who lose their biocultural heritage to the triad, for the benefit of big capital, in this model of neoliberal environmentalism, turns out to be only an advertising, marketing ruse, a 203