The development of Ecotourism in Cambodia.PDF

CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background Cambodia is located in the heart of Southeast Asia and is laid on a rich tropical region It captivates images of a glorious and mysterious past with an abundance of cultural, historical, natural heritages and patrimonies dating back thousands of years In abundance with those resources, this country has been classified as a highlypotential country with competitive advantages for tourism development The country actually has full political stability and safety, and it has been recognized as a tourist destination since 1990‟s Since then, tourism development has been on the upsurge, gradually growing throughout major priority regions, particularly in the country‟s four priority regions1 Beside the legendary Angkor Wat, Cambodia has a wealth of tourist attractions to offer the visitors including the Phnom Penh Capital City on the banks of the Mekong River with its cultural assets, the coastal region with its beaches „‟Cambodia Bay is the member of the most beautiful bays in the world club‟‟, forests and mangroves, and the northeastern part of the country Actually, tourism destinations are being diversified away from cultural tourism sites (Angkor Wat and its surroundings) into the southern coastal zone and the northeastern forest region, with a focus on ecotourism, where environmental protection of the natural resource bases become increasingly important Talking about Ecotourism, some definitions identify ecotourism solely as a form of tourism that has a natural or exotic area as the destination Other definitions are more elaborate, and include conservation and the support of local communities in the planning or implementation of projects Since a consistently used definition does not exist, a unique working definition is adopted by drawing upon recommendation by the Cambodian experiences, and incorporating fundamental elements occurring within ecotourism definitions worldwide These elements require that ecotourism: involve the natural and environmental; allow for ecological and cultural sustainability; provide for education and interpretation; and generate local and regional benefits Based on the Québec declaration on Ecotourism in 2002 and the Oslo Statement on Ecotourism in 2007, a working definition of ecotourism can be proposed to use in our dissertation: Ecotourism (known as ecological + tourism) “involves responsible travel to ecological destinations that contributes to the environment conservation and the well-being of local people improvement.” (Ref Author) Ecotourism development in natural areas is rationally seen and considered as a part of community-based natural resource management and conservation; and longterm development programs in such areas Thus, the introduction of ecotourism is seen as the efficient way to alleviate environmental problems, to foster democratic society, to improve natural resource management and conservation, and to reduce poverty in rural communities Siem Reap, Phnom Penh and surrounding areas, the coastal zone (Kampot, Kep, Sihanouk Ville, Koh Kong), and the northeastern part of the country (The Ministry of Tourism of Cambodia) For the RGC, under the brilliant leadership of Samdach Akka Moha Sena Padei Techo Hun Sen, economic growth is a priority, while conservation is its commitment The commitment of the RGC shows a positive indicator which stimulates an interest of relevant stakeholders: the civil society, international communities and development partners to use ecotourism as one of the integrated development tools in park areas and biosphere reserves and other fragile rural destinations of strong human-nature relationship Specifically, in Cambodia, one of the richest regions in terms of biodiversity and natural resources is the Peam Krosaop mangrove forest, which is adjoined by Koh Kong Province; and the area serves as a base to visit the Cardamom-Protecting Forest which is a hotspot supporting a wide variety of flora and fauna species, classified as 10 ten biodiversity hotspots of the world including the Asian elephant, the Indochinese tiger and the Siamese crocodile It‟s also important to be noted that Samdach Akka Moha Sena Padei Techo Hun Sen, Prime Minister of the Kingdom of Cambodia said, in his Speech in 2003, Kompong Cham Province, “When tourists want to go to visit temples, they should go to Angkor and when they want to visit tropical forests they should go to the Cardamoms” Actually Wildlife Alliance Organization begins working in Chi Phat Commune in the heart of the Southern Cardamoms to implement Community-Based Ecotourism (CBET) as a way of conserving and developing a region of exceptional natural and cultural significance Within this framework, ecotourism has become a promising tool for promoting natural resource‟s objectives for providing incentives to maintain ecosystem integrity, biodiversity2, and for improving the livelihoods of local communities dependent upon natural resources However, like other developing countries, the challenges occurring in ecotourism or CBET projects in Cambodia are noticeably: communication among stakeholders; access to development resources; local support and participation; local capabilities to maintain ecotourism management and development; and power and control over natural resources Though the researcher doubts how ecotourism can work on a local development process in Cambodia‟s protected areas, where social system and conservation course play a crucial role in development policies, resource access and consumption Therefore, it is necessary to understand how ecotourism is useful for conservation and development in Cambodia These important issues make it necessary to research on the development of ecotourism in Cambodia, and this is a reason why this topic is chosen for my Ph D dissertation 1.2 Research Objectives and Questions: The main objectives of the study is to evaluate the real situation of ecotourism development mostly „„based on community‟‟, at present, which was integrated in Biodiversity refers to various organisms in the same or different species and living organisms of all levels and sources, including land, marine and fresh water ecosystem, and the ecological relationship in which these ecosystems exist (RGC, Protected Area Law et al., 2006, p 16) Development, Conservation, and Poverty Alleviation Strategies in Cambodia Our study is based on the interrelation between Local Community - Tourism- Nature resource or Protected Area (PA) Therefore, our research aims to analyze the development of ecotourism in Peam Krasop and Chi Phat by exploring guiding principles for stakeholders concerned as well as proper mechanisms to use ecotourism in an effective and sustainable manner A number of questions could be raised and resolved in our study as below: - What is the current ecotourism development process in Cambodia? - What mechanism should be used to better achieve ecotourism goals in a sustainable and responsible manner in Cambodia? And how to implement it? The analysis of these questions will produce recommendations which will serve as a foundation for the management, development and planning of ecotourism projects in Cambodia 1.3 Methodology and Data Sources: To answer all the above questions, it requires a participatory ecotourism development approach for ecotourism developers and researchers to investigate the potentials, challenges and effectiveness in using ecotourism as a tool for conservation and community development in the complex rural context Theoretically and methodologically, this approach is explicit for ecotourism development which previous studies failed to throw a light on factors causing for success or failures of ecotourism projects In fact, ecotourism and natural environment conservation success in national areas are closely linked to the quality of relationships maintained between tourists, local communities and natural areas (protected areas) The approach used in this case study research is based on an analytical framework developed by Ross and Wall (1999) This framework allows us to evaluate the sustainability status of tourism development projects by analyzing the interrelation between Local Community- Tourism-Natural Resources or Protected Area (PA) 1.4Dissertation organization This dissertation is organized into different chapters as follows It begins in Chapter with the development of concepts of sustainable tourism or alternative tourism, which is being used to promote community development and conservation in natural areas Chapter starts with an explanation of the overview of the Cambodian economy, tourism and ecotourism in Cambodia Interestingly, we make an SWOT analysis for ecotourism development in Cambodia based on the current situation Chapter focuses on the case study of Ecotourism in Peam Krasop and Chi Phat CBET development Chapter Based on our analysis of case study, chapter (Conclusion and Recommendation) suggests what can be done at the policy and operational levels to move ecotourism development in Cambodia in the direction of sustainable and responsible approaches and showcase the research limitations for further studies CHAPTER II: LITERATURE REVIEW: THEORETICAL AND PRACTICAL FRAMEWORK 2.1 Theoretical framework The rise of term “ecotourism” has been relatively rapid In 1980 the term did not exist and now, 30 years on, this Encyclopedia represents the thinking of many different authors from around the world on the topic For example, Orams (1995) and Hvenegaars (1994) write that the term can traced back only to the late 1980s, while others (Higgins 1996) suggest that it can be traced to the late 1970s through the work of Miller on eco-development (1989) A body of literature dealing with tourism typologies gives grater attention to particular variations in term of tourism classifications, often with a particular tourism from being placed in or more categories MieckzKowski (1995) does identify “alternative tourism (AT)” as one of two broad categories along a spectrum of tourism types So, we propose a classification of tourism development in two categories: mass tourism (MT) and alternative tourism (AT) Figure 1: Tourism classification TOURISM Unsustainable practice Sustainable practice ALTERNATIVE TOURISM MASS TOURISM Nature based tourism NBT Socio-cultural tourism Cultural tourism Agro-tourism Non Consumptive Consumptive NBT NBT Ecotourism (Passive) Source : - Trevor S (2005) - Fennell D A (1999), “Ecotourism: an Introduction” Adventure tourism (Active) (MT) may be said to be predominantly unsustainable On the other hand, most forms of AT are sustainable in nature (AT) can be broadly defined as forms of tourism that set out to be consistent with natural, social and community values and which allow both hosts and guests to enjoy positive and worthwhile interaction and shared experiences (AT) comprises of socio-cultural tourism and nature-based tourism Principles of Ecotourism For our research, upon the various principles of ecotourism cited by TIES and the Québec Declaration and on our working definition, we group the principles of ecotourism into six criteria for ecotourism: 1) Primary focus on Natural Environment as the attraction 2) Minimizes negative Impact 3) Builds environmental and cultural awareness 4) Promotes conservation 5) Provides financial benefits for local people 6/ Encourage community empowerment through participations The Politics of Ecotourism In this context, the need to have specific legal frameworks and policies to ecotourism seem to be important to regulate the ecotourism activity to ensure its positive impacts For that, each government should develop his own ecotourism strategy According to UNWTO, the sustainable ecotourism development is based on the integrated elements of ecological, economic and socio-cultural sustainability (UNWTO, 2001, 2003) For Weaver (2001) and Diamantis (2004), Ecotourism is largely based on the conservation of biodiversity, mainly in protected areas, together with environmental education and minimizing the impacts of tourism in natural areas Thus, Ecotourism directly benefits the economic development and political empowerment of local communities, and foster respect for different culture and for human rights, (Honey, 1999) The ecotourism development strategy must be based on conservation of resources and empowerment of local people through direct benefits and control over ecotourism activities (local empowerment which need technical support, ecotourism training and capacity building) Therefore, there is an agreement in the fact that governmental commitment to conservation and ecotourism development is one of the most important factors for operational success Since the natural environment is the primary attraction in many ecotourism destinations, it is imperative that public, private, people and partnership cooperate in regulating and developing the destination For example, a wider recognition of standards for responsible ecotourism must be adopted by governments and such standards should govern the development of ecotourism 2.2 Trends in Global Ecotourism: Some Insightful Examples of Ecotourism: The following section will describe with examples a few ecotourism projects from various parts of the world, especially in Asia Although all of them are well known, all of them are not necessarily perfect examples of ecotourism So, to support the ecotourism development, the key management issues to be addressed include government supports, sustainable use of local resources, participation of stakeholders in benefit sharing, strengthening of local institutions, linkages with regional and national levels, education and training 2.2.1 Government support: A characteristic of community-based tourism is that it requires a multiinstitutional support structures in order to success and sustains Since community based ecotourism is people oriented approach, working towards a fair benefit sharing and uplifting poverty will encourage the government and the community to conserve their natural and cultural resources As a result it always has positive response from the government Government agencies usually act as facilitator, coordinator or advisory agency to the local community by establishing local institutions and ecotourism developer and helping the institutions in term of human resources development, capacity building and legal framework 2.2.2 Participation of tourism development stakeholders: Even though ecotourism businesses are located in natural areas, they still require much of the same infrastructure as other businesses to deliver quality experiences for their clients Indeed, the successful implementation of ecotourism depends on the development of stable infrastructure This increases the scope for wider participation, including the participation of the informal sector Due to its direct and indirect relationship with other sectors, tourism contributes to „„internally generated development‟‟ by stimulating the establishment of other economic activities such as industries, services and so on Through contacts with the tourists, members learn new knowledge and experiences, which are quite impossible without tourism activities Community members with entrepreneurship ability may establish business contacts through tour operators, agents or the tourist themselves in order to start a new business While, having visitors at their front doors, tourism offer opportunities to the community member especially housewives to participate in the economic activities It can be pursued through various means such as bed and breakfast, cultural show, souvenir selling, restaurants, general merchant etc et their own home Moreover, various United Nations agencies such as World Bank, IFC, UNESCO, UNDP and UNEP have also been involved in sustainable tourism and ecotourism for a long time The 1992 Earth Summit‟s action plan for the environment, Agenda 21, reinforced UNEP‟s mission of working with the tourism industry to promote sustainability UNEP has called on the tourism industry to be proactive through self-regulation, by adopting codes of conduct and best practices UNEP has assisted the tourism industry by conducting training sessions for hospitality and tourism business leaders and tourism business leaders on developing environmental standards, using low-impact technologies, and use of ecolabels to certify sound ecotourism practices 2.2.3 Fair benefit sharing: The indirect beneficiaries of ecotourism would be the wider community as recipients of community development projects funded by the tourism revenues In Zambia for example, a Wildlife Conservation Revolving Fund was established to grant local chiefs 40% of the revenue earned from the sale of hunting licenses This revenue can be used for community projects and has encouraged tribal leaders to become active in anti-poaching activities In the case of Bromo-Tengger-Semeru, the Ngadisari village committee funded three young villagers annually to attend a tourism-training course The Conservation Development Committee of GhalekharkaSikles Area, Nepal, spend 15% of the tourism revenue for nature conservation, 35% for repair and maintenance of tourism facilities and 50% for community development In Karen village of Huay Hee of Mae Hong Son town in Thailand, the income from the home stay program, hosts and guides keep 80% of the money paid for their services, while 20% goes into a village fund (15% go to CBST Group Fund and 5% go to village fund) However, lack of organization and management of ecotourism activity has led to negative impacts on wildlife The majority of revenue stays in the provincial capital Three lodges concentrated in one village, all owned by reserve guards, provide the only real benefit to any of the many villages which surround the reserve Reserve guards act as guides- local villagers also act as guides if there are no guards available Some villagers receive income by renting boats to visitors Therefore, the only local people receiving any regular benefits are reserve guards The reserve retains virtually none of the profits from tourism, 2% of the total trip cost is collected by the reserve administration, which is returned to the North Sulawesi Government This funding is inadequate to control illegal hunting, which has reduced the macaque population in the reserve by 75% in the past 15 years Even through guards benefit from the extra-money they receive from ecotourists for providing guide services, this has not been a sufficient incentive to control hunting; indeed, time spent on guiding visitors is time away from protection duties 2.2.4 Sustainable use of local resource: Ecotourism is highly dependent upon natural capital (e.g wildlife, scenery) and culture These are assets that own and managed by all community members including the poor, individually or through communal properties, even if they have no financial resources It creates awareness; self esteem and proud among the community as a whole, as its resources are increasing in value, priceless and become the sole reasons for the visitors to visit their village This may trigger motivation to the community members to be more responsible and caring towards their resources 2.2.5 Ecotourism and the involvement of local community: strengthening local institutions Normally, livelihoods based on activities such as agriculture, cattle farming, hunting, fishing, wood collection, timber harvesting and mineral extraction require substantial amounts of natural resources (water, trees, mineral and, most of all, land and soil) to sustain large populations But, implementation and enforcement of use restrictions may foster confusion and resentment on the part of local people accustomed to using such lands and resources In such situations, local people may become opponents of tourism and undermine its operation Such obstacles to the success of ecotourism can often be countered by involving local people in planning and management processes, whereby they have some control over and agreed-upon access to the resources they require (local empowerment) In this case, the involvement of local people to ecotourism development relate to two levels:  Ecotourism needs to be incorporated into the social and economic life of the community This involvement should be in a direct form, such as share of the revenue generated, creation of improved social welfare, education, infrastructure, and most importantly, employment  Furthermore, the involvement of local people can partly come in the form of empowerment: the community is given the responsibility to make decisions or, at least, to be part of decision (control in development and implementation of ecotourism venture) There are fives areas where local people can help to bring about ecotourism activities, Brandon, (1993): information gathering, consultation, decision making, initiating action and Evaluation 2.2.6 Linkages with regional and national levels Linkages between local entrepreneur with regional, national and even international are the most important platform for long-term success of community based ecotourism businesses in a given destination Together with the initial capital investment, foreign (not necessarily overseas) companies bring with them the advantage of operational expertise, market contacts and the „‟image‟‟ The combinations of these factors provide the input to the tourism sector which is unlikely to be available from the local community The local community usually lack of the ability to link directly to the national and international markets which become the main reason why the benefits of ecotourism not dissipate down to the community level The middlemen whom are able to coordinate the ecotourism activities between the community and the tourist stand greatly to gain economically Therefore, a partnership between local community and the middlemen or the tour operators is a vital component for a successful community based ecotourism project 2.2.7 How to mitigate negative impact of Ecotourism? Ecotourism is frequently considered as the ideal form of tourism, allowing for economic growth and development while protecting the environment upon which it is based However, numerous examples of ecotourism activities worldwide show that this is not always the case The impacts of ecotourism on society and the environment can be positive and negative For this reason, the regulatory frameworks and systems should ensure that products that are developed and marketed as ecotourism are beneficial and not harmful to environments and communities Regulation of Ecotourism: In general, it is recognized that a variety of regulations need to be developed such as codes of conduct, ecotourism guidelines, ecotourism certification and so on, together with legal regulations that help reduce negative impacts Actually, in attempts to raise the consistency of ecotourism experiences, many destinations have chosen to adopt a set of ecotourism certification3 In continents where ecotourism is well developed, one of the main issues that are discussed is certification However, such certification program not only helps to promote the delivery of high quality and sustainable ecotourism experiences, but provides consumers and authorities with a basis for discriminating between legitimate and unscrupulous operators (Allock et al 1994) Based on voluntary initiatives, ecotourism certification involves setting criteria for measuring the quality as well as social and environmental impacts of tourism, carrying out audits, awarding ecolabels, and building consumer and industry demand for such certification programs The use of certification standards for labeling various products is not a new concept “Blue Angel4”, Germany‟s ecolabeling program established in 1977, was the first environment seal of approval for various categories of products Since then, the use of eco- labels has expanded through the world Some ecolabel schemes, such as Green Globe 21, define their accreditation criteria purely in terms of continuous improvement in major areas such as energy and water consumption, etc, and Costa Rica Certification in Sustainable Tourism program and Nature and Ecotourism Accreditation Program (NEAP) in Australia Ecotourism Guidelines There have been strong moves over the last decade, to introduce more sustainable forms of tourism and to demonstrate to visitors this sense of responsibility This has been found among countries, destination regions, cities, hospitality chains, groups of separate businesses and individual businesses Although few destinations or enterprises have developed comprehensive ecotourism policies or ecotourism certification, a number of attempts have been made to develop a more general set of ecotourism „guideline‟, codes of conduct, and or codes of ethics Guideline, manuals, and other technical assistance for enterprises wishing to improve environmental management performance are another important adjunct to schemes In general, even though, programs such as these have no teeth but allow an organization to claim greater sensitivity and responsibility (Stoesser 2004), but to ensure the sustainability and effectiveness, it is imperative that certification programs (ecolabel) must be developed in conjunction with ecotourism guideline Certification is the process by which third-party assessment is undertaken, written assurance is given that the product, process, service or management system conforms to the standard Blue Angel program is a cooperative effort among several independent organizations, governmental bodies and the public The entities develop a set of criteria that promote environmental soundness in various products An applicant may pay a fee and have his product tested to determine whether it meets these criteria If the applicant meets the criteria, it may display the seal of approval CHAPTER III: AN OVERVIEW OF CAMBODIAN ECONOMY, TOURISM AND ECOTOURISM IN CAMBODIA 3.1 Overview on Cambodian Economy History shows us that Cambodia has come through prosperity and difficult periods along with its up-and-down national economy In this sense, there is a particular manner to understand Cambodia properly Normally the country is known for its great Angkor history and the so-called Pol Pot regime Nevertheless, during the last decade (after the liberation day of January of 1979), under the brilliant leadership of Samdach Hun Sen, Prime Minister, we are up to a new bright future of the country with significant development in all areas Talking about growth, Cambodia‟s economy is among the fastest growing in the world recently hitting the magic 10%-a-year target during the last few years Cambodia has achieved a decade of sustainable strong economic growth and sound macroeconomic management These remarkable achievements in economic development and poverty reduction were accomplished through responsible macroeconomic management and a steady program of reforms by government, together with the dynamism of the private sector and the productivity and effort of Cambodian people Most of this is attributed to the substantial growth in industry and then services Industrial growth was driven by the considerable growth of garments and construction Services sector growth is due to tourism Recently, in his address at the closing of tourism stocktaking conference in 2008 and 1st semester of 2009; and the direction setting for 2nd semester of 2009 and 2010, Samdech Akka Moha Sena Padei Techo HUN SEN, the Prime Minister of the Royal Government of Cambodia, mentioned that Tourism has been a major growth pillar for Cambodia for years It‟s clear that tourism is a major part in service platform of the country‟s economy Both industry and services have made considerable contributions to GDP growth We can say that the four main pillars of the country‟s economic growth driving forces are agriculture, garment, tourism and construction 3.2 Tourism sector in Cambodia: “the new destination” The tourism sector has been an important and very dynamic engine of growth and generator of foreign exchange revenues since mid-1990s International arrivals have increased from a very low number in the mid-1990s In 1994 when tourism data was first recorded, Cambodia received 176 617 international tourists In 2010, Cambodia received 508 289 international visitors - an increase of 16.4 percent It is worthwhile to note that in the past decade Cambodia witnessed two digit growth rates, making it one of the country‟s strongest growth sectors Nowadays, Cambodia is still doing better than the Asia and the Pacific region in general where the growth in international arrivals was around only 13% in 2010 10 Ecotourism Market Demand Today's marketplace is becoming "greener" and more environmentally sensitive than ever, with 85 percent of the industrialized world's citizens believing that the environment is the number one public issue (Wight, 1993) This attitude has evidently had an effect on the rise in popularity of ecotourism, which has been called the fastest growing tourism market in the world (Jesitus, 1992), and its growth is expected to continue Statistically, since the 1980‟s interest in nature-based tourism has increased dramatically With a growing concern for the environment, coupled with a strong desire to escape from the traditional vacation, many travelers are beginning to discover the benefits and advantages of ecotourism, which has become the fastest growing tourism market in the world Ecotourism is a part of a growing niche market of the tourism industry According to UNWTO calculations show that, in 2004, the expenditures for ecotourism grow annually with 20%, which is times more than the average expenditure for the tourism industry and it was growing globally with 20%, which is times faster than the growth of cultural tourism For Cambodia, ecotourism demand is expected to increase around 10% annually We have conducted an Ecotourism Visitor Survey, about demand on ecotourism in Cambodia, interviewed around 200 tourists, of which 43% were from Asia (including ASEAN), 38% from Europe, 18% from Americas and 1% from other regions Ecotourism Market Supply Based on the survey conducted by SNV among CATA members in 2008, approximately 55% are aware of ecotourism and its principles More than 90% of the respondents are interested in ecotourism due to: improving the well-being of local communities; providing local host-guest experiences; Diversifying their product Even though the interest in Ecotourism and CBT is high among the tour operators, only 46% of the respondents include CBT site in their product offerings These sites are mostly located in Tonlé Sap Region (30%) and Northeast Cambodia (27%) Majority of the respondents (54%) have not included CBT sites in their tours due to the lack of demand (52%) or lack of information on the CBT sites (37%) - Community-based ecotourism in Cambodia : The ecotourism development in Cambodia is mostly based on community, which is helping to protect this wildlife as well as the natural environment and local cultures while offering opportunities for much needed employment and sustainable development to poor, often remote, local communities Below is a map showing the current community based tourism and ecotourism sites in Cambodia Community Based Ecotourism Sites in Cambodia Actually, most of the current CB(E)T sites assisted by CCBEN5 members are Cambodia community-based ecotourism network (CCBEN), a network of international and local NGOs, educational institutions and tour operators, which are working on ecotourism related and conservation projects, is working to promote community-based tourism and ecotourism awareness among public and local community The organization has conducted a number of CBT trainings of trainers to its members and CBT awareness programs to local community and several study tours within the country and the regions to CBT sites Moreover, CCBEN also produced some materials for CBT training for its members and partners 14 located in the northern part of the country Sites located close to the major tourist gateways- Siem Reap and Phnom Penh- are more easily accessible due to better infrastructure and public transportation than sites in the remote areas Roughly 60 percent of the CBET sites offer home stays (MoT, 2009) However, there are no minimum standard requirements for the home stays and therefore the level of comfort and services are very basic at present time Source: CCBEN, 2009 In 2007, CBET at eight sites generated roughly 75 377 USD of which 55% was allocated to the villagers providing the service, 23% to environmental conservation, 7% community development funds and 15% to other purpose such as supporting the poorest families and the projects in general It is estimated that around 2000 families are directly or indirectly involved in CBET activities in the eight sites (SNV, 2009) Yet, the economic sustainability of CBET sites depends a lot on the number of visitors to the sites Only a fraction of international tourists to Cambodia visit CBET sites It is estimated that roughly 46 400 tourists, of which 17 percent international, visited the eight CBET sites in 2007 Therefore a lot more work needs to be done in improving the quality of the sites, engaging private sector in CB(E)T, and in marketing and promotion 15 CHAPTER IV: CASE STUDIES OF PEAM KRASOAP AND CHI PHAT COMMUNITY BASED ECOTOURISM 4.1 The case study of Peam Krasop Community based Ecotourism 4.1.1 Strategic diagnosis for development of Peam Krasop CBET The location of Peam Krasop Wildlife Reserve Peam Krasop wildlife reserve is located in Peam Krasop commune in the province of Koh Kong, a few kilometers in south of the main town of the province called Koh Kong Peam Krasop wildlife Reserve measures 25 987 hectares and is part of mangrove forest of 63 thousand hectares It is divided into several spaces, 466 hectares are devoted to the development of ecotourism It was established by the Royal Government of Cambodia in 1993 in order to preserve the natural heritage threatened by the production of charcoal, building materials and intensive shrimp farming Actually, Peam Krasop Commune devoted to ecotourism is comprised of villages grouped into community: Boeng kayak (village just created) and Peam Krasop village 4.1.2 Tourism products in Peam Krasop Community Ecotourism Tourism services at Boeng kayak and at Peam Krasop wildlife sanctuary: In 2004, local authorities have developed Peam Krasop to be a tourist site with the help of SEILA project, DANIDA (the Danish International Development Agency), DFID (The Department for International Development of UK Government), of the NGO IUCN, CZM Project and the Governor of Koh Kong Peam Krasop tourism site is organized as follows: At the end of the trail through the village of Boeng Kayak is parking for cars with the surrounding of the sellers of water, food & beverage At the reception point, tourists can buy tickets to visit the mangrove Flyers both in English and Khmer, described the history of the biosphere-reserve with some recommendations, are also available for tourists Their indications are also given on the type of activities they can do: visit the forest in the bridges of wood and concrete, boat tours to visit the village Peam Krasop, to visit a beach or go around an island for a tour of bird nests and watching fireflies after dark, fishing in the estuary Peam Krasop The entree fee is 000 riels for local tourists and 000 riels for international tourists Since 2007, tourists are guided by the local guides, who were trained by the Koh Kong tourism department6 Bins and toilets are available throughout the The first training course group 21 peoples and the second and third course to 11 peoples respectively 16 pathways Moreover, tourists can be served meals by the restaurant, or by picnic along the trail Tourists can enjoy their trip by accessing directly into mangrove by suspension bridges across the estuary Or they are able to rent a boat for multiple trips, which its price is ranged from 20 000 to 70 000 Riels (5 to 17.5 $) according to the chosen route of trips In 2008, 24 129 local and 374 foreign tourists (including Thai tourists) came to visit Peam Krasop Ecotourism Community For the first three months of 2009, community has already received 15 077 local and 711 international tourists 4.2 The case study of Chi Phat Community based Ecotourism 4.2.1 General Situation of Chi Phat Community based Ecotourism site (CPCES) History of Creation of CPCES and Location The Chi Phat Community based Ecotourism is gathering four small villages: Chi Phat village, Dam Sla village, Kam lot and Teuk la ork village, Thmor Bang village, totaling roughly 2328 (555 families) people It is located in the Southern Cardamoms Protected Forest, in an area that was severely affected by guerrilla warfare during civil war‟s time Noticeably, covering 6% of Cambodia, the Cardamom Mountains are a biodiversity hotspot They are one of the last remaining elephant corridors and large predator ranges in the region They host more than half of Cambodia‟s 2,300 plant species and are home to over200 bird and 14 globally endangered mammal species like Asian Elephants, Indochinese tigers, Malayan sun bears, Siamese crocodiles, Irrawaddy dolphins, etc The Cardamoms includes a vast ecosystem with sixteen vegetation types, from dense evergreen rainforest to coastal mangroves Since villagers have comprehensively understood the environmental protection, people who live in Chi Phat community have their willing to eliminate or reduce cutting down trees, catching wild animals, and other activities in diverting the old practices to the new livelihood such as animals raising, crops and rice growing, and guiding the tourists to visit the beauty of nature in ecotourism site “Chi Phat” Noticeably, CPCET has just been created in mid-2007, gathering around 23% (125 families) of total four villages to be its member Statically, in 2008, CPCET received 256 domestic tourists and 170 foreign tourists, generating $ 5,892.06 for local people and $ 1,271.47 for community‟ fund Otherwise in 2009, the community receives 312 domestic tourists and 517 foreign tourists (equal to $ 16,443.78 for local people income and $ 5,709.80 for community‟s fund) The ecotourism‟s package tour to CPCET is around 90-100 $ per trip Optimistically this destination becomes a beneficial source for local people who can economically or financially earn more profits in order to support their livelihood Coincidently, it is also an important part for eliminating or reducing the unexpected activities It‟s noted that nearly 90% of hunters are actually involved CPCET activities 17 4.2.2 Tourism Products at Chi Phat Community Ecotourism Site Tourism infrastructures CPCET has provided many facilities and services like home-stay, guest house, and foods are in orders The restaurant is available in community But, it‟s more impressive that the guide is able to prepare food for tourists during their visit in the forest, called wild cooker In addition, the community has just set up an information centre Tourism information is available to provide to tourists More impressively, the Internet is available to tourists and local people to use in the area The activities in Chi Phat‟s information centre at day time Normally, whenever a group of tourist arrive at Chi Phat, they must past by information centre at the first entrance where there are a group of community member who will host them and explain them about their activities in Chi Phat 4.3 The sustainability status of a CBET at Peam Krasop and Chi Phat This case study research, based on an explanatory approach, aims at assessing qualitatively the current sustainability status of a community-based ecotourism project at Peam Krasop and at Chi Phat The main focus will be put upon the role played by ecotourism, or what is being promoted as ecotourism, in a broader natural environment protection context As identified by Ross and Wall (1999), local communities, tourists and resources/parks are central contributors of regional tourism implementation and development Figure 1: Ecotourism evaluative framework Source: adapted from Ross and Wall, 1999 18 The evaluation of indicators describing the relationships between these three major elements of essential to evaluate ecotourism benefits in terms of a sustainable regional development mechanism Our case studies are intending to draw an overall portrait of ecotourism‟s current capacity to reach its primary objectives in the southwestern province of Koh Kong It will subsequently lead to recommendations on possible ecotourism planning improvements in Cambodia, in order to improve future biodiversity conservation and revenue generating capacity of the ecotourism project In this sense, ecotourism success depends on the quality of the relationships developed between three major elements: local communities-tourism-protected area The relationships will be summarized and discussed more thoroughly in this subsequent section Relationship between Local Communities and Protected Area: Ecotourism, as an attempt to increase economic value of parks, has become part of many development and park-people integration strategies (Lindberg et al., 1996; Place, 1991) This has been demonstrated in the case of Peam Krasop mangrove and Chi Phat, the degree of dependence on natural resource being high on most of local communities, suggesting that ecotourism could act as a compensation mechanism for land and resource use restrictions This can be highly important as funds directed toward conservation are sometimes limited in Cambodia, especially when most of the threats natural resources, especially the mangrove, are facing come from subsistence activities This dependence toward natural resources partially comes from the fact, that many illegal extractive activities are still being perpetrated in and around Peam Krasop mangrove area and Chi Phat They contribute to degrading future communities‟ livelihood, as many local villages have already observed a decrease in several useful flora and fauna species Local populations give a good indication on their knowledge and use of forest products The eroding livelihood is an alarming fact when, on average, 55% of local family total income, sometimes an even greater portion for poorer families, is considered to be derived from mangrove forest At Chi Phat, before ecotourism development project took place, the majority of local people are hunters and fishers As interviews revealed, local communities were explained the reasons for the creation of Peam Krasop mangrove In a harmonious relationship, stewardship of local people toward the natural environment is vital, since they can take advantage of the benefits triggered by their contribution (Ross and Wall, 1999b) In the case of Peam Krasop, local communities living around and near mangrove boundaries are responsible for a conservation zone around their respective village Nevertheless, the lack of enforcement capacity from mangrove sometimes led to inter-villages conflicts, arising from illegal activities (fishing) Thus, even if local communities are not reluctant toward conservation initiatives, the absence of benefits from conservation and limited park staff, linked to its lack of ability to strongly implement regulations leads to the continuation of mangrove management and limited park staff, linked to its lack of ability to strongly implement regulations leads to the continuation of park resources depletion This failure to get local people to support protected area 19 integrity and benefit from a sustainable usage of mangrove resources leads to say that the ideal PA-people relationship is not a reality In Chi Phat, with the aid of an NGO Wildlife Alliance, an Ecotourism Community has been created Local people were explained and trained, and conservation attitude has been gradually improved since then Table : Summary of the relationship between local communities and protected area Indicators Peam Krasop Chi Phat Degree of dependence on resources Very High Very High Resources used from PA Flora, fauna, mangrove Flora and fauna Some sustainable Some sustainable Fishing, woody carbons conduction Hunting wildlife, cutting the trees for purpose of construction, sale, nomad agriculture Very limited (harvesting of some species of plants and wildlife) Very limited Staff from Environment office : 4-5 There are 13 member staffs of Chi Phat community and seasonal staffs such as cookers, guides, home stay or guest house staffs, other service staffs like boating, biking etc Sustainability of livelihoods? Activities of the greatest threat to PA‟s ecosystems Evidence of local benefits from protection? staff/local relations Staff from Forest Administration office : 4-5 Staff from local people : (not permanent-only one time per month) Enforcement capacity Attitudes towards conservation Weak Weak Enforcement but questionable Enforcement Relationship between Local Communities and Tourism The success of the relationship between host communities and tourism can be linked to the possible economic and social benefits that can contribute to host‟s development The Peam Krasop is still at an early stage of existence, but economic and social benefits already seem interesting for some local communities Many have received revenues representing important shares of their annual income These new 20 income are mostly used to buy medicine, household provisions, blankets and food in periods of shortage (Lyttleton and Allock, 2002) Furthermore, a village development fund, financed with ecotourism revenues (8% of total ecotourism revenues), has been crated during the implementation of the pilot project in order to improve local communities infrastructures Even through it has been mentioned to have been poorly managed in the past; this development mechanism was also integrated by new private tour operators, which is important because positive attitudes towards tourism largely depend on perceived costs and benefits (Lindberg et al., 1996) Although economic benefits are respectable at this stage of the project, it is important that economic supplements to local communities, through secondary spending (i.e sale of handicrafts), also represent an element of focus The cost of a handicraft item could be included within the tour price and given as a gift to tourist once the activity completed Ecotourism development project in Chi Phat justifies clearly the importance of tourism‟s contribution to poverty alleviation by providing economic and social benefits to local people The income generated from ecotourism is distributed between community and villagers Moreover, as impressive as the benefits can be, an effective economic benefitsharing scheme is important in order to avoid jealousy and disappointment among villages and villagers, while ensuring equitability Indeed, huge economic disparities have been observed between ecotourism participating villages The villages are dependent on the beauty of nature, which creates a considerable difference between villages involved into the ecotourism project The greater interest of tourists for specific activities is trekking However, several questions remain about the current revenue distribution scheme It is difficult, based only on the existing data, to assess if the money is fairly distributed among families and to compare at the family level the percentage of their total revenues provided by ecotourism and their daily activities Ecotourism generated revenues have contributed to reduce the amount of families classified as “poor” and that more than 50% of the annual budget of some villagers is provided by ecotourism activities On a local scale, the distribution scheme seems good, as all families interested in ecotourism is given the opportunity to benefit economically from ecotourism by performing activities (food, rent boat, guides ), based on a rotational villagers mechanism However, as the regional level important revenue differences have been observed among villages participating in the same ecotourism activity This phenomenon could be explained in part because greater revenues are provided to the villages who welcome tourists for meals, compared to those who only perform isolated demonstrative activities The community can have indirect negative impacts on long term ecotourism success by degrading the surrounding local natural environment The absence or the lack of national park protection budget could be partially overcome by a future increase in ecotourism revenues 21 In the case of Peam Krasop, the interaction opportunities between local communities and tourists are well developed Yet, direct interaction with local people is very limited due to language barriers The majority of local villagers not speak international language Thus, in an ecotourism growing context, where an increasing amount of tourists visiting the site, language formations, for many people, and not only to guides as it is already the case, but to local communities could be implemented For Chi Phat, the interaction opportunities between local community and tourists are significant Guides are trained; the language barrier is not the problem Tourists are warmly welcomed by community and villagers Tourist safety and comfort are priority Even the services offered are not quite perfect, but they are at least acceptable Although the quality of the cultural experience offered to tourists is essential for tour selling, local communities‟ participation in ecotourism planning is significant to keep a positive attitude toward ecotourism and conservation Participation in planning of local communities in Peam Krasop and in Chi Phat is well integrated Villagers are openly invited to share their worries, complaints and recommendations during monthly meetings, in order to provide necessary future adjustments So far, villagers surveyed have no any complaints regarding tourism impacts on local environment Table : Summary of the relationship between tourism and local communities Indicator Interaction opportunities Relationships between tourists and hosts Host attitudes to tourism impact on local environment Tourism income for local community Tourism employment Revenue distribution Participation in ecotourism planning Quality of village infrastructure Peam Krasop High Positive (tourists can stay overnight, have supper with villagers, witness cultural particularities, but interaction is limited by language) Positive Chi Phat High Positive Good (but disparities among villages) Limited Fair but questionable Fair Good Limited Good Fair Good Good 22 Positive Relationship between Tourism and Protected Area Ecotourism has been embraced to improve ecological conservation This can be achieved by a well managed ecotourism, who redistributes considerable revenues to local communities in order to encourage changes in local practices, improve stewardship (Bookbinder et al., 1998), support environmental education and provide revenues for park protection If some economic contributions provided to the government for conservation purposes, through a 10% sale tax (VAT), 5% tourism fund and a permit fee (1.25$ per person/day), are substantial, this has yet to reflect on local conservation and environmental education activities Funding shortage or limitations and lack of expertise are often the reasons for poor environmental education infrastructures This has been the case in Peam Krasop, although NPA management unit and tourism entities have conducted some environmental education activities in local villages, the quality, extent and frequency of these activities have been limited In this sense, even if Peam Krasop is considered as an important biodiversity reservoir and waterfalls, the chances for tourists to observe mangrove, fauna, species, etc are very narrow The opportunity to observe exotic wildlife in their natural habitat is highly valued by visitors Thus, tourist‟s acceptability regarding future fee increase might be enhanced if they have the impression that it is generating concrete benefits towards conservation and that it augments the overall natural experience offered Chi Phat case is nearly the same as Peam Krasop Training courses and/or seminar for local population about environment and wildlife protection are needed, while creating booklets and posting other educational signs are also a good idea The quality of experience in nature is quite good in Chi Phat, and visitors are normally willing to view and observe exotic wildlife in the real setting environment The quality of environmental education infrastructure provided to tourists is also a determinant key towards park conservation, while contributing to reduce tourism impacts on the surrounding environment Moreover, tourists are required to pay for the service of a guide to have access to the NPA Local Guides are encouraged to tourists But, external Guides are also hired when tourist groups are larger Therefore, ecotourists, which are most of the time interested and curious about the environmental context their visiting, may expect information and answers to their questions Yet, as mentioned above, the guides‟ speaking abilities in Peam Krasop are often questionable, which diminishes the possibilities of natural interpretation and education toward tourists The focus on environmental and ecotourism education might be a good strategy for the enforcement of park regulations In Chi Phat, a guide is mandatory for the visit Ecotourists need to have guides accompanied them during their trip due to the difficult situation of the site It is important to note that there is a contract about responsibilities to be signed by visitors before they leave to visit the site The guide could also be the one who cooks foods for tourists, known as wild cooker (Chong Phov Prey in Khmer) They are equipped with first aid kit, radio communication, maps and interpretive materials All are prepared so as to ensure tourist‟s safety This is a very good example of “Healthy Tourism” in Chi Phat 23 Table : Summary of the relationship between tourism and protected area Indicator Permit/Entrance Fee Quality of experience in nature Economic contributions to park protection and NPA Contributions to environmental education Quality of environmental education • Potential for improvements Peam Krasop Yes Fair Fair (amount fixed) Chi Phat Yes Good Fair (Variable) Fair Fair Fair Good One information center is available There is Chi Phat community information center Fair Passive interpretation • In the form of Visitor behaviour guidelines? Active interpretation • In the form of Quality Fair Conclusion: This research has outlined several positive aspects linked to the utilization of ecotourism as a development tool in Peam Krasop However, strictly on a definitional standpoint, ecotourism in Peam Krasop cannot completely be considered a success since the local communities-tourism-protected area relationships are not optimal The incapacity to improve biodiversity conservation effectiveness, by strengthening park management, diminishing local environmental damaging practices and implementing strong environmental education for local communities, arises from this case study In contrast, the success of Chi Phat case is more significant with a rapid development growth of ecotourism project during the first year after launching date (2007) The changes are remarkable either in terms of economic and socioeconomic development or in terms of conservation However, the three principal relationships are not at optimal point yet Improvements are still needed, especially cooperation between local communities-relevant authorities-NGOs/development partners need to be further strengthened in order to ensure a sustainable ecotourism development and so as to guarantee a much more effective conservation program Table 5: Achievement of ecotourism goals Ecotourism goals Environmental education - For locals - For tourists $ Generation - For locals - For conservation Conservation Local participating ecotourism planning in Peam Krasop Fair Chi Phat Good Fair Good Good Fair Good Fair Fair Fair Good Fair 24 CHAPTER V: CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS Conclusion: A mixed model for ecotourism development in Cambodia- An integrated approach Being developed on a regular basis at the two different fronts, the so-called small scale and large scale, ecotourism in Cambodia has either beneficiated conservation or local communities It creates economic opportunities for the local communities while in turn helping to conserve the ecosystem and biological diversity Instead of going just to see a country, an ecotourist who are ecologically conscious goes to help the country by promoting and contributing to conservation Actually, conservation can be combined with measures to meet short term economic needs In long term perspective, development must be sustainable and conservation will be the determining factor Regarding small scale ecotourism development in Cambodia, Community based Ecotourism-CBET shows significant local benefit through ownership opportunities and employment in higher level, managerial positions, and a potentially higher multiplier effect due to greater linkages between tourism and other sectors in community (Ref Chi Phat and Peam Krasop CBET cases) Considering the situation and the real setting of the site where there is firm presence of local communities living strongly dependent on local natural resources, CBET model-the small scale ecotourism development- is suitable and practically beneficial for all relevant stakeholders It involves goods and services to be purchased locally and support for home businesses Interestingly, local empowerment is well taken into account in this case in order to make sure that local people feel the ownership of their own areas and then their best to manage and develop it in sustainable and responsible manner By profiting from serving ecotourism activities, they will actively protect and preserve natural resources and environment in the areas However, in its development as an ecotourism destination, Cambodia continues to face many challenges, including the desire to increase the number of visits A lack of financial resources to invest effectively in ecotourism region, a lack of training facilities, and the need for better planning and organization of its primary sectors to better supply its growing ecotourism industry are necessarily to be solved attentively That is why in some cases an alternative model-large scale ecotourism development- needs to be taken into consideration to foster the development in all fronts It does not mean that we are pushing hard the development by all means at any cost, but we are trying to use all available means and resources to develop in the right and better way so as to take maximum benefits without causing any damage in overall perspectives That is to say we need to make the right and wise choice of development model to be used in any specific area regarding its geographical, social and economic characteristics In many natural sites where there is normally less or no presence of local communities, like islands and other large natural/biodiversity hot spots, large scale development model based on private investment projects has been seen as 25 perfectly suitable and conformingly fit to the situation of the areas However, such investment project must be consistent with the ecotourism principles and uses high-end technology, conforming to National Ecotourism Guideline, to ensure that their activities are entirely environmentally friendly With the amount of capital logically much bigger than the availability at community level, private investment projects could aim for a higher level of standard for ecotourism development that will serve as another option for alternative ecotourism products in the country We encourage the diversification of tourism destinations as well as the supplies that could match with different expectations and aspirations of tourists Thus, a systematic mechanism that encompasses involvements and contributions from a wider range of stakeholders is recommended to guarantee a broader development and comprehensive, sustainable and responsible growth Policy Recommendation: the ecotourism development in Cambodia should be based on participatory approaches by promoting and strengthening the PublicPrivate-People Partnership (4P) Thus, all ecotourism activity should be controlled and managed by a National Ecotourism Committee that is comprised of local community representatives as well as representatives of Ministry of tourism, Ministry of Environment, Ministry of Agriculture, Fishes and Forestry, Ministry of Rural Development, Council for the development of Cambodia (CDC) and/or NGOs, Tourism Private Sector and financial institutions In this sense, every relevant parties and/or institutions need to cooperate and coordinate well in more responsible way, with clearly defined roles and responsibilities in advance, in order to achieve success together In conclusion, ecotourism development requires active and informed participation of all relevant stakeholders, as well as strong political leadership to ensure wide participation and consensus building A thriving ecotourism sector will be promoted through coordinated support for the provision of infrastructure and capacity building initiatives that are conducive to the supply of quality ecotourism products and services that meet market demands and expectations At the same time, to avoid adverse and negative impacts, all stakeholders should be aware of the parallel need for a cautious and considered approach in promoting the sector 26 PUBLICATIONS Thong Khon, (2010) “Ecotourism and Climate Change”, the Pracheachun Magazine, April Thong Khon, (2011) “The development of Tourism and Ecotourism in Cambodia”, Journal of Economics and Development, Volume 42, August 2011 Thong Khon, (2011) “Sustainable and Responsible Tourism Development in Cambodia”, presentation at Global Ecotourism Conference, Noosa, Brisbane 2527th October, 2010 27 28