Diyah Ayu Amalia Avina, Dicky Wahyudi, Darsono Wisadirana
Background and Objectives: Women's participation in village tourism governance is part of the United Nations' Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), specifically SDG 5 (Gender Equality), but remains unequally distributed across rural tourism institutions. This study examines how women's participation and division of labor are structured, how their symbolic capital is formed, and the extent to which this symbolic capital can be converted into leadership within Ladesta (the Indonesian term for Village Tourism Institutions) in Poncokusumo and Gubugklakah, Malang Regency, Indonesia. Methodology: This research applied a constructivist paradigm with a qualitative case study design. Data were generated through in-depth interviews with eight informants from Poncokusumo and Gubugklakah. To validate interpretations and map convergences and tensions between cases, focus group discussions (FGDs) were conducted with the same eight informants. Documentation was used to trace Ladesta's organizational structure and records of activities related to women's participation. Data were analyzed using interactive field analysis (data condensation, data display, and drawing/verifying conclusions) and interpreted through Bourdieu's modalities. Main Results: The findings indicate that women are formally included in Ladesta, but their roles vary across villages and across organizational arenas. Women's involvement in core management depends on their structural position and whether they have regular access to meetings, agenda-setting, and decision-making forums. Sources of symbolic capital also vary. In Gubugklakah, legitimacy is generally associated with family status and proximity to village elites; in Poncokusumo, it is more often based on education and organizational experience. In both cases, symbolic capital helps women acquire normative roles, but it does not necessarily translate into leadership. Conversion to leadership is constrained by unequal communication and gendered expectations that treat leadership and public decision-making as male domains, preventing women from asserting competence and authority. Discussions: Symbolic capital mainly opens the door to organisational membership, but it does not automatically produce women’s leadership. According to Bourdieu and Wacquant (2013), it only matters when it can be converted into authority within the Ladesta Organization, where recognition is still shaped by patriarchal norms. In Poncokusumo, women’s education and organisational experience provide cultural and social capital that is more easily read as competence, so women gain a stronger voice in meetings and decision-making. In Gubugklakah, legitimacy based on family status often leads to formal roles without real influence. Strengthening leadership requires both confidence building and more inclusive rules for decision-making and supportive organisational communication. Conclusions: Symbolic capital can open access to organisational roles, but leadership requires supportive social networks, an inclusive organisational culture, and women’s confidence to mobilise capital. Strengthening women’s leadership therefore needs leadership training, expanded access to education, and organisational reforms that support SDG 5 on equal opportunities for leadership and decision-making. © 2026, Suranaree University of Technology. All rights reserved.
Department of Communication Science, Universitas Brawijaya, Indonesia; Department of Sociology, Universitas Brawijaya, Indonesia
